Dawkins: Religion equals 'child abuse'
Another nutcase who is more than happy to spout hate against Christians while comparing one of the worst mass murders in history to the standard rank and file Christian. Read about it below. This guy is really in for problems when Jesus comes back and proves everything he says to be wrong.
Controversial scientist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins, dubbed "Darwin's Rottweiler," calls religion a "virus" and faith-based education "child abuse" in a two-part series he wrote and appears in that begins airing on the UK's Channel 4, beginning tomorrow evening.
Entitled "Root of All Evil?," the series features the atheist Dawkins visiting Lourdes, France, Colorado Springs, Colo., the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem and a British religious school, using each of the venues to argue religion subverts reason.
In "The God Delusion," the first film in the series, Dawkins targets Catholicism at the pilgrimage site in Lourdes. "If you want to experience the medieval rituals of faith, the candle light, the incense, music, important-sounding dead languages, nobody does it better than the Catholics," he says.
Dawkins, using his visit to Colorado Springs' New Life Church, criticizes conservative U.S. evangelicals and warns his audience of the influence of "Christian fascism" and "an American Taliban."
The backdrop of the al-Aqsa mosque and an American-born Jew turned fundamentalist Muslim who tells Dawkins to prepare for the Islamic world empire – and who clashes with him after saying he hates atheists – rounds out the first program's case for the delusions of the faithful.
In part two, "The Virus of Faith," Dawkins attacks the teaching of religion to children, calling it child abuse.
"Innocent children are being saddled with demonstrable falsehoods," he says. "It's time to question the abuse of childhood innocence with superstitious ideas of hellfire and damnation. Isn't it weird the way we automatically label a tiny child with its parents' religion?"
"Sectarian religious schools," Dawkins asserts, have been "deeply damaging" to generations of children.
Dawkins, who makes no effort to disguise his atheism and contempt for religion, focuses on the Bible, too.
"The God of the Old Testament has got to be the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous, and proud of it, petty, vindictive, unjust, unforgiving, racist," he says. Dawkins then criticizes Abraham, compares Moses to Hitler and Saddam Hussein, and calls the New Testament "St Paul's nasty, sado-masochistic doctrine of atonement for original sin."
John Deighan, a spokesman for the Catholic Church, took issue with Dawkin's denunciation of religion, telling the Glasgow Sunday Herald, "Dawkins is well known for his vitriolic attacks on faith, and I think faith has withstood his attacks. He really is going beyond his abilities as a scientist when he starts to venture into the field of philosophy and theology. He is the guy with demonstrable problems."
Madeline Bunting, a columnist for the Guardian, who reviewed the series, wrote: "There's an aggrieved frustration that [atheist humanists] have been short-changed by history – we were supposed to be all atheist rationalists by now. Secularization was supposed to be an inextricable part of progress. Even more grating, what secularization there has been is accompanied by the growth of weird irrationalities from crystals to ley lines. As G.K. Chesterton pointed out, the problem when people don't believe in God is not that they believe nothing, it is that they believe anything."
'Dawkins, perhaps best know for his much-cited comment that evolution "made it possible to be an intellectually satisfied atheist," appeals to John Lennon in a commentary he authored for the Belfast Telegraph on the eve of his program's premiere: "Religion may not be the root of all evil, but it is a serious contender. Even so it could be justified, if only its claims were true. But they are undermined by science and reason. Imagine a world where nobody is intimidated against following reason, wherever it leads. "You may say I'm a dreamer. But I'm not the only one."
10 Comments:
Richard Dawkins said that religion subverts reason. I would agree. All major religions have at their head figures who have transcended conceptual, mundane thought and gained a deeper awareness, not to be understood by those full of hatred, spite, or wrong views. He speaks of the ignorance of these faithful but fails, also to see the subjective and individual nature of religious experience.
Well, Praise the Lord for child abuse, then. I was "abused" as a child -my parents took me to a Baptist church every Sunday am, Sunday pm, and Wednesday, and sometimes even onThursdays. My mother was even the church secretary. As a result of this "terrible abuse" I was saved from my sins and can look forward to heaven now. I also "abuse" my own children and push my religous beliefs on them so that they will be in heaven one day as well. It is a vicious cycle of "abuse", but one I am truly greatful for. :-)
Ambhoja, you say that "religion subverts reason". Would that be your reason or my reason? Isn't reason, reality and fact subjective? Who is to say that your facts are my facts? Isn't it all subjective?
I say that a lack of religion subverts reason more so then a belief in religion. Think how illogical it would be if everyone could be a god. If we all had the power to form our own reality, how could anyone co-exist without causing problems to someone elses reality? Ambhoja, your universe is bound to be filled with chaos. God's universe is not. There are absolutes, no matter how much we would wish otherwise.
I have always disliked (not hated, but disliked) Dawkins, and now I think I understand why.
When I was a young girl, I was bug-ugly, unpopular, no social graces, and had to dress like my family was dirt-poor (even though we did very well). All I had in my credit was my brain, but public schools are designed for conformity--and so are teenaged minds.
In short, I clung to my amazing brain as my "superiority." I was the most arrogant person around. I was keenly aware of the "nice things" my peers had, knew that they were out of reach. I resented the happiness, prosperity, and camaraderie of the "haves." So I pretended that my brain made me better. Who needs friends when you're smart?
Dr. Dawkins is like I was. He is keenly aware of the peace, prosperity, security, and freedom that Christians have. That's why he hates us so much. He wants to tear down everything we have, precisely because his religion won't buy it for him.
Well, sorry. I'll keep my "ignorance," at which I arrived after careful thought and consideration of the evidence--and the blessings of the Holy Spirit.
To "ambhoja," may I ask you why you think Jesus "transcended" reason? He was/is the ultimate reasoner. Just read some of the New Testament and you'll see just how irritatingly (to the Pharisees) logical He could be. It was BECAUSE He could outthink them and out-reason them that they wanted Him dead. It was BECAUSE He could prove His position.
It was because He is right and they couldn't prove otherwise. So they resorted to slander instead.
Your description of the "head figures" of religion as all rejecting reason is flawed. God gave us brains for more than just skull-stuffing, ya know.
Doc, thanks for stopping by. I enjoy reading comments from both you and beth over on the Scriptorium. Please visit often.
God Bless!!
Ambhoja, I do greatly appreciate you commenting on the blog. I hope our "spirited" discourse will not discourage you from commenting again sometime. I will pray that the Lord will help you see that not all religions are created equal. Open His Word (the Bible) and read it with an open mind (if you haven't already).
God Bless You!
Yes, I have indeed read the Bible many times and had the great fortune to speak with many Bibilical scholars, as well as those of other faiths and religions. It is very sad that the political nature of the early Christian movement lost much of the essense of the meaning of the teachings. When Jesus points to something that cannot be understood in a normal, dualistic, conceptual nature, he wants us to open our minds to understand a deeper reality... in fact, the only true reality. His apostles themselves, in the Bible itself, state that they do not understand the meaning of his words.
The west "re-translated" in a sense, the ideas and teachings of Jesus, and given their weak grasp, also instituted a fear of questioning that view. There is nothing wrong with searching your own God-given soul and heart to find the true nature of what he says. The modern Christian view was created during the DARK AGES, and much of what we call Christian, does not comply with the teachings of Jesus. He is the source.
Ambhoja,
Ah, so we drop back to the old argument that the Bible is corrupted and somehow you have a better source then the actual words of Christ to draw on. If you have read and understood the Bible, then you realize that before Jesus was crucified, He explained everything needed in order to gain salvation in no uncertain terms. The Word of God is perfect and needs no help from humans. When we have questions about God, all we have to do is look to His Word for our answers.
I would also be interested to know what teachings of Jesus you are privy to that refute the Word of God (the Bible) which is what I use to direct my “Christianity”.
Post a Comment
<< Home