Klan meetings? what does this have to do with atheism?
Mermaids and DNA? I was responding to a claim, I believe by MRDawn, that work by crick was done to disprove god.
I agree with Harris on this point.
I have a lot of common cause with liberal Christians I know; in fact there’s a cartoon in circulation where there’s a tug-of-war going on. One one side, two figures labeled “The teachings of Jesus” and “Atheists” … on the other, “Christian nationalism” and “Oligarchs”. The “teachings of Jesus” guy realizes who’s helping him and goes, “Huh?!” It’s ironic but true – Atheists often have a better grip on the alleged teachings of Jesus (or, if you prefer, the great virtues) than do fundamentalists.
That said, Harris is right … you don’t for the most part see liberal Christians castigating their fundamentalist brethren directly. At most, they will castigate political arch-conservatives or bigots while conveniently not connecting them with Christianity in any way. It’s like there’s an uncomfortable silence there.
I’ve seen this likened to complaining that Arab-Americans (who are mostly liberal Muslims and middle class to upper middle class) don’t do enough to “speak out against” / disavow fundamentalist Islam. Their reaction to this charge is very similar to how liberal Christians react to the same criticism – “what would you have me do? Issue a public denouncement of these people each and every day? Walk around in sackcloth and ashes? They don’t listen to me anyway”. I understand, and yet … if you’re going to be a theist, be it Muslim or Christian, then people who claim to be the same thing and do horrible, degenerate, sociopathic things on a regular basis really SHOULD be something that you can’t afford to be cosseted and blase about. You should fight it at every turn, no? Yet what they seem to do is pretend those people don’t exist, that they, the liberals, represent the whole of Christianity or something. Or that fundamentalists are maybe just lovable rascals or eccentrics.
And I’m like, no … just NO to THAT. If you’re indulgent about these sick assholes, then you are, to an extent, complicit. I’m sorry.
It was a (partly) facetious response to the specific text I quoted from your post, I never mentioned atheism? See here:
Again a response to a specific piece of text from your post, here:
1 Like
A claim you say?..
lol puhlease…
Speaking recently, Mr. Crick, 86, said: “The god hypothesis is rather discredited.” His distaste for religion, he said, was one of his prime motives in the work that led to the 1953 discovery.
“I went into science because of these religious reasons, there’s no doubt about that. I asked myself what were the two things that appear inexplicable and are used to support religious beliefs: the difference between living and nonliving things, and the phenomenon of consciousness.”
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/mar/24/20030324-090202-5705r/
1 Like
unfortunately, DNA in the religious mind supports creationism…no disprove it.
What’s with the sarcasm?
It was irony, not sarcasm.
1 Like
I just thought of Sanskrit is called 'the language of the gods". I wish I had included that as part of this topic. Actually it called Samskritam, in Sanskrit. “well done” “refined”