Dear Mr Richard Dawkins...
Dec. 18th, 2006 11:44 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I know we have Christian fundementalists.
I know we have Islamic fundamentalists- hell, I think little green things on Alpha Centuri know we have Islamic fundementalists!
But why, why Mr Dawkin, do we have to have Atheist fundementalists? I mean, I thought that was the whole point, to be rational and moderate- and yes, maybe a little smug, but to stay aloof from religious debates and let those monkeys throw shit at each other. But nooo, Mr I'm-Right-You're-Wrong has to get involved. Mr Smarter-Than-Thou has to make himself heard. Mr I-Too-Damn-Smug has to start preaching like a Jacobin and get embroiled in stupid religious debates that makes us all look bad. They're starting to blame us for the F**cking Holocaust for pity's sake! You do not take them up on a debate like that! You give them an incredulous what-are-you-on look and you stay aloof! You do not argue back because hell, let's face it everyone has blood on their hands and while I don't know what they were smoking when they thought up the Holocaust theory, atheism did have a hand in the French revolution. Both religion and atheism (and yes, Mr Dawkins, they are different things) can be used as an excuse for terrible acts, but arguing back at these people just turns it into a shit-throwing match and everyone ends up stinking.
You cannot argue with these people. Trust me, I've tried. Just go with the live and let live approach and for pity's sake don't equate their religion with a disease, it's stupid. Feel free to argue against creationism and religious wars, but start saying that science is the be-all and end-all and I may have to visit you with a sledgehammer to pound some common sense into your skull because we do not know everything! Don't try and say we know more than the religious people because we don't. All we do is not hide behind an almighty God to make us feel better. We look at the world with untainted glasses and try and reason what we see as best we can without resorting to at catch-all deity.
I left religion in disgust after seeing the ridiculous hypocrisy and senseless belief there, but I think I should just call myself a non-believer rather than an atheist, because that lable is starting to have some rather nasty connetations. Rather like being an animal activist really, execpt we don't burn down churches.
Yet. With this guy as our figurehead I haven't the foggiest where we'll end up.
And yes, Mr Dawkins, I returned your book. It was shite and I wanted a careful deconstruction of modern religions, not the atheist bible. I exchanged it for The Road, and think I learnt a whole lot more from that.
I know we have Islamic fundamentalists- hell, I think little green things on Alpha Centuri know we have Islamic fundementalists!
But why, why Mr Dawkin, do we have to have Atheist fundementalists? I mean, I thought that was the whole point, to be rational and moderate- and yes, maybe a little smug, but to stay aloof from religious debates and let those monkeys throw shit at each other. But nooo, Mr I'm-Right-You're-Wrong has to get involved. Mr Smarter-Than-Thou has to make himself heard. Mr I-Too-Damn-Smug has to start preaching like a Jacobin and get embroiled in stupid religious debates that makes us all look bad. They're starting to blame us for the F**cking Holocaust for pity's sake! You do not take them up on a debate like that! You give them an incredulous what-are-you-on look and you stay aloof! You do not argue back because hell, let's face it everyone has blood on their hands and while I don't know what they were smoking when they thought up the Holocaust theory, atheism did have a hand in the French revolution. Both religion and atheism (and yes, Mr Dawkins, they are different things) can be used as an excuse for terrible acts, but arguing back at these people just turns it into a shit-throwing match and everyone ends up stinking.
You cannot argue with these people. Trust me, I've tried. Just go with the live and let live approach and for pity's sake don't equate their religion with a disease, it's stupid. Feel free to argue against creationism and religious wars, but start saying that science is the be-all and end-all and I may have to visit you with a sledgehammer to pound some common sense into your skull because we do not know everything! Don't try and say we know more than the religious people because we don't. All we do is not hide behind an almighty God to make us feel better. We look at the world with untainted glasses and try and reason what we see as best we can without resorting to at catch-all deity.
I left religion in disgust after seeing the ridiculous hypocrisy and senseless belief there, but I think I should just call myself a non-believer rather than an atheist, because that lable is starting to have some rather nasty connetations. Rather like being an animal activist really, execpt we don't burn down churches.
Yet. With this guy as our figurehead I haven't the foggiest where we'll end up.
And yes, Mr Dawkins, I returned your book. It was shite and I wanted a careful deconstruction of modern religions, not the atheist bible. I exchanged it for The Road, and think I learnt a whole lot more from that.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 09:18 am (UTC)I prefer the term 'agnostic' rather than 'atheist'. It gives more of a 'just don't know' impression. But then again, who needs labels ^_^
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 03:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 09:55 am (UTC)So now the atheists start as well. *headdesks* To much of anything is poison, but I didn't think there even could be too much of a negative, like non-belief. Confusing. I've never heard of the guy, but I don't think I'd like him, from what you said. And if atheism is a good deal about being against religion in any form, why is he setting up a sort of parallel to organized religion?
And you're right. I don't think science explains everything, either.
I know the question is illusional, but: Why can the world never let everybody have their own opinions???
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 03:04 pm (UTC)I did a rant about Richard Dawkins a while back, when I'd just heard of him and thought he was just a prominent atheist who wasn't taking any shit from the religious reich, imagine my surprise when I discover he's just like them.
I have no idea, or rather, I have some inklings, but they don't sound very nice :( *sigh* why do I have to be part of such a crazy species? And not a nice crazy either.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 04:29 pm (UTC)Yes, I keep wondering as well. As a child, I always wanted aliens to abduct me, so I could go home. I though my being on earth must be some awful mistake (like one of god's crueler jokes, only you don't believe in him and I'm not sure I do, so we have to blame it on something else).
It would be funny, if it weren't so sad.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 05:46 pm (UTC)I don't want to believe in god, because if he does exist, he's such a bastard I'd want to smack him upside the head.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 06:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 02:01 pm (UTC)I agree with shadowvalkyrie: why can't everyone just have their own opinions? *shrugs.* Like how many licks it takes to get to the center of a Tootsie pop, the world may never know. :^P *LOL!* (I still say it's about 52 . . . )
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 03:09 pm (UTC)Heh, nice example, but I think it's 42. Everything can be answered with 42. ;)
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 04:31 pm (UTC)I got bad grades in match.
It strongly depends on the question. ":-P
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 05:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 06:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 11:25 pm (UTC)He responded, 'Are you having a trial day?'
I answered , 'No, I'm staying."
He asked "So you'll be staying here forever?"
To which I answered "Well, I'll be going home at the end of the day." (Come on, he left himself open for that one)
The bloody twat then landed me with a detention and a trip to my head of year for 'insulting behaviour'. Arsehat.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-20 03:27 pm (UTC)I mean, of course teaching's rather a frustrating job, but is it necessary to make it worse for all involved?
At least there's the opposite as well: In our last year, we got a new teacher to our school and at our grade's leave-taking ball, he said thank you to us all (and we were definitely not a nice bunch of pupils!), for not making his life hell (by slitting his car-tyres or anything he was used to on his old school). Well, there seems quite something wrong with student-teacher relations.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 09:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-19 11:28 pm (UTC)