Overflow crowd turns out to see Richard Dawkins at the College of Charleston

Mar 9, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Post and Courier

Crowds jammed into the Physicians Memorial Auditorium and three overflow rooms at the College of Charleston Saturday night to see Richard Dawkins, the world's most famous atheist and evolutionary biologist.

Comments
21 - 40 of 94 Comments Last updated Mar 25, 2013
Lincoln

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Mar 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

EdSed wrote:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/relig iouswars.htm
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/atheist
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/agnostic
The madness of religion,(apart from Zionism and Islamism, religous violence in Pakistan, Sharia law, ID/Creationism and many other problems)...
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/03/06/jakarta-co...
https://www.google.co.uk/search...
http://www.123rf.com/stock-photo/prayer.html
Muslims in the UK were leaving school dismissive of evolution and convinced by their "science teacher" of ID/Creationism. It's a good job people like Prof Dawkins spoke-out about what happens. All many religionists had were accusations of "aggressive atheism".And thanks to religionists, England is (so far) unable to rid itself of an "established Church" and unelected bishops in its upper house.
In his 2006 book The God Delusion, Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and that religious faith is a delusion—"a fixed false belief"

His "almost certainly does not exist" seems qualified.
Maybe a partial atheist?

Doubt if the Christian theory of Intelligent Design hurts anyone? Imagine Christian teachers work it into their lectures in the US?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Mar 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
People are who they think they are? ;-)
Each individual may have a different hold on faith or non faith. Believers often have doubts and lose faith for a while.
Country is basically Christian in culture.
"..under God" - "In God We Trust"- " so help Me God..." added to the oath of office.
I am simply going by the definitions of the words, the actual definitions, not the cultists' definitions.
Lincoln

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Mar 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I am simply going by the definitions of the words, the actual definitions, not the cultists' definitions.
....one persons cult
is another persons truth?

Cults seem "in the mind of the beholder".

Happy Katie got the daughter away from Tom and the scientologists.:-)

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Mar 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
....one persons cult
is another persons truth?
Cults seem "in the mind of the beholder".
Happy Katie got the daughter away from Tom and the scientologists.:-)
Simply because people believe something, doesn't make it true.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Mar 12, 2013
 
We run into the issue of defining atheism so often that I feel like a broken record with each "new" response, but every once in a while it is necessary to reiterate a few basic principals of lexicography in relation to the word.

While the roots of each word are interesting and informative, lexicographers compile definitions by analyzing samples of current usage. Moreover, the meanings of most words vary with context, which is why dictionaries list multiple meanings for each word. Intelligent readers are adept at seeing which meanings fit the various contexts in which words are used. It's important to remember that the goal is to facilitate understanding, i.e., for the reader or listener to understand what the writer of speaker means.

The meaning of the words "atheism" and "atheist" are probably changing faster during the current period than at in any other time in history because, for the first time, self-identified atheists are asserting a significant public voice in defining themselves. Keeping up requires subtle and supple minds that can let go of preconceptions when necessary.

This forum is a pretty good gauge for assessing the range of views on atheism by atheists themselves--it would be a good place for lexicographers to gather samples when considering future updates to the dictionaries that we depend on. In the context of discussions about atheism with atheists, the way atheists define themselves must take precedence over those of their detractors.

The same is true of most or all groups based on ideology. Would we look to Nazis to define Judaism? KKK members to define the Black experience? The Westboro Baptist Church or atheists to define Catholicism? No, fair-minded people would look to members, leaders, and writers from each of these groups for definitions of the words used to describe them. The only reason that the same has not been historically true for atheists is that the bias against us has been so universal that only that bias has figured into the definitions up until now.

Moreover, over the last few decades, that definition has been changing for atheists themselves as we reject the flawed definitions that we grew up with. It is no longer narrowly focused on the Christian God, for instance, and the passive nonbelief that was once defined as agnosticism now falls under a more inclusive atheist umbrella. Most atheists see agnosticism as being separate from atheism in that it answers a different question: "Do I believe that it is possible to know whether any deities exist?" rather than "Do I believe that deities exist?". It is thus possible to be an agnostic atheist (not believing but acknowledging that it is not possible to know for sure), a gnostic athiest (certain that no deities exist), or an atheist who has no view about whether it is possible to know for certain. I don't know whether there is a satisfactory word to describe the latter.

In view of the above, the many detractors who jump into discussions that are primarily between atheists and insist that their biased definitions take precedence over the way that atheists define themselves display a lack of both sophistication and intellectual honesty. Prejudice and antagonism tend to stultify the mind, so that is not surprising, just annoying.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Mar 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

bohart wrote:
So according to Dawkins if you don't understand something it's wrong to say God did it. But,if you don't understand something it's perfectly appropriate to say God didn't do it .
He also misquoted the bible by claiming it says that only people are "souls". I guess he's used to admirers not catching his deliberate misquotes. ;)

Too bad they don't get he's just another attention hoor who gets off on brainwashing people. A rose by any other name smells of cultism.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Mar 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

bohart wrote:
So according to Dawkins if you don't understand something it's wrong to say God did it. But,if you don't understand something it's perfectly appropriate to say God didn't do it .
He also makes a false claim about the existence of a "gay gene"....



...without any empirical evidence as proof.

BTW, he has no proof because there isn't one. He just loves the attention he gets from morons who are impressed that he's the co-leader of an anti-religion movement, anti-Christian to be specific.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Mar 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I am simply going by the definitions of the words, the actual definitions, not the cultists' definitions.
*Your* type of atheism is just as much a cult as one based on a deity.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Mar 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>He also misquoted the bible by claiming it says that only people are "souls". I guess he's used to admirers not catching his deliberate misquotes. ;)
Too bad they don't get he's just another attention hoor who gets off on brainwashing people. A rose by any other name smells of cultism.
From the article:

"For instance, he questioned how people can believe Jesus literally turned water into wine or that people have souls but other animals do not.“At some point God stepped in with his divine hypodermic and injected a soul?” Dawkins quipped."

I don't see where he attributed that belief to the Bible.

“Handsome white and black men”

Since: Jan 10

Interracial love

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Mar 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Richard Dawkins is a truly great man.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>*Your* type of atheism is just as much a cult as one based on a deity.
Aw, you are projecting onto me again, how cute. Tell me more about what I believe.
Lincoln

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

emperorjohn wrote:
Richard Dawkins is a truly great man.
Books sell well and often on C-Span.
He seems moderate in his views.
Lincoln

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>*Your* type of atheism is just as much a cult as one based on a deity.
A bit of the stawman fallacy.
You tell her what she believes.:-)
Do you get out, away from the computer often?
Lincoln

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Mar 15, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Simply because people believe something, doesn't make it true.
If wishes were horses we would all be in the calvary :-)
Siro

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Simply because people believe something, doesn't make it true.
Like how you believe that youre a woman?
Now that certainly isnt true!

Poof
Siro

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

"Overflow crowd turns out to see Richard Dawkins at the College of Charleston"
.
So let me guess......the plumber didnt use enough mortar when he installed the toilets so when they were flushed the atheist turds tried to swim back to 'daddy'?
Lincoln

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Mar 15, 2013
 
Siro wrote:
<quoted text>
Like how you believe that youre a woman?
Now that certainly isnt true!
Poof
She posts intelligent posts
you seem a troll
CunningLinguist

Hernando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
In his 2006 book The God Delusion, Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and that religious faith is a delusion—"a fixed false belief"
His "almost certainly does not exist" seems qualified.
Maybe a partial atheist?
Doubt if the Christian theory of Intelligent Design hurts anyone? Imagine Christian teachers work it into their lectures in the US?
Not exactly...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Do...

Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.(400 F. Supp. 2d 707, Docket no. 4cv2688) was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts testing a public school district policy that required the teaching of intelligent design. In October 2004 the Dover Area School District changed its biology teaching curriculum to require that intelligent design be presented as an alternative to evolution theory, and that Of Pandas and People was to be used as a reference book.

The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism, and that the school board policy violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The judge's decision sparked considerable response from both supporters and critics.

Eleven parents of students in Dover, York County, Pennsylvania, near the city of York, sued the Dover Area School District over the school board requirement that a statement presenting intelligent design as "an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view" was to be read aloud in ninth-grade science classes when evolution was taught.

The plaintiffs were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) and Pepper Hamilton LLP. The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) acted as consultants for the plaintiffs. The defendants were represented by the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC). The Foundation for Thought and Ethics, publisher of Of Pandas and People, a textbook advocating intelligent design and whose prominence within the trial was such that it is sometimes referred to as the Dover Panda Trial, tried to join the lawsuit late as a defendant but was denied for multiple reasons.

The suit was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. Since it sought an equitable remedy, by the Seventh Amendment, right to a jury trial did not apply. It was tried in a bench trial from September 26, 2005 to November 4, 2005, before Judge John E. Jones III, a conservative Republican appointed in 2002 by George W. Bush.

On December 20, 2005, Jones issued his 139-page findings of fact and decision ruling that the Dover mandate requiring the statement to be read in class was unconstitutional. The ruling concluded that intelligent design is not science, and permanently barred the board from "maintaining the ID Policy in any school within the Dover Area School District, from requiring teachers to denigrate or disparage the scientific theory of evolution, and from requiring teachers to refer to a religious, alternative theory known as ID."

All eight of the Dover school board members who were up for re-election on November 8, 2005 were defeated by a set of challengers who opposed the teaching of intelligent design in a science class, the ninth member was not up for re-election. The school board president subsequently stated that the board did not intend to appeal the rulin

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Mar 15, 2013
 
Siro wrote:
<quoted text>
Like how you believe that youre a woman?
Now that certainly isnt true!
Poof
He's not "gender confused"; he knows exactly what he is, ergo the voice modulator he uses in his vlogs. It's the people who watch his videos that he's hoping to confuse.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Mar 15, 2013
 
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
She posts intelligent posts
you seem a troll
No, he simply parrots responses he's seen earlier in the forums.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••