Atheist Islamophobia... Again

Atheist Islamophobia... Again

There are 3765 comments on the Religion Dispatched story from Apr 9, 2013, titled Atheist Islamophobia... Again. In it, Religion Dispatched reports that:

Sparked by a Richard Dawkins tweet , in which he drew a parallel between Islamists and Nazis, Nathan Lean recently suggested on Salon.com that the most famous representatives of the new atheism "flirt with" Islamophobia [echoing Chris Stedman's prescient warning to fellow atheists on RD this past August]. As the article explains, Dawkins, Hitchens ... (more)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Religion Dispatched.

huntcoyotes

“gun control takes two hands”

Since: Mar 13

outdoors

#2972 Jul 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Your ugly god requires MURDER before he will or can forgive.
That's in your ugly BIBLE you idiot.
<quoted text>
Prove it-- quote me DIRECT with links, and PROVE IT.
You cannot-- because I'm not lying.
<quoted text>
Bible: it clearly states your ugly god MUST HAVE A MURDER before he can muster up enough MoJo to forgive.
<quoted text>
So? You admitted to being one of those Genuine Christians™, so you are guilty.
<quoted text>
Bible says your ugly god DOES. Bible clearly states NO forgiveness unless SOMETHING DIES.
Else why did your god murder himself in his Jewsus incarnation?
And this murder unlocked... MAGICAL FORGIVENESS FOR ALL.
See?
Your bible agrees with ME.
So who's lying? Oh! That would be YOU.
Again.
You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. Etc.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#2973 Jul 24, 2013
huntcoyotes wrote:
<quoted text>You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. Etc.
Dishonest creationist scum bucket.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#2974 Jul 24, 2013
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, but the whistles were awesome. They were pitched at the exact frequency the phone company used to signal a line was clear. Dial an 800 number to get a connection to a trunk line, blow the whistle into the receiver, and phun ensued.
I was unaware of that. I'm glad you found a interesting use for it! Me... I just used them to piss off my sisters when they were trying to sleep in on a Saturday morning!

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#2975 Jul 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep.
It's really quite sad.
I think that deep down they know that actually reading the book they put so much faith in would force them to actually think about what they have been claiming to believe for so long.

Religion... it only makes sense if you don't think about it.
LCN Llin

United States

#2976 Jul 24, 2013
The presentation of the prince wasn't much like the way Prince Charles, then 33, and Princess Diana, then 20, showed off their first baby, Prince William, to the world the day after he was born. In fact, what a difference 31 years makes. But the ritual blended tradition and modernity, one of the reasons William and Duchess Kate are so popular with the British and worldwide.

Especially now. Kate, 31, gave birth on Monday to an 8-pound, 6-ounce boy, still unnamed, in the same hospital, St. Mary's, where William was born. She and William, also 31, presented their Baby Prince Cambridge to a wildly excited throng outside the hospital on Tuesday.

Those watching could not help thinking of the day in June 1982 when Charles and Diana performed the same dance for the media. Here's a look at what's changed and what's stayed the same.
LCN Llin

United States

#2977 Jul 24, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Dishonest creationist scum bucket.
Cheer up as
You pay Your taxes to the
Church of England you have a new Prince
-
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge leave St Mary's hospital with their new arrival. ITV won the ratings battle with more than 7 million viewers. Photograph: Tim Rooke/Rex Features

ITV enjoyed a royal baby-related ratings boost on Tuesday night, with an extended early evening news bulletin providing live coverage of the nipper's first photo call and delivering a peak audience of more than 7 million.

The 6.30pm ITV News, extended from 30 to 60 minutes to catch the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge leaving St Mary's hospital with their new arrival, averaged 5.4 million viewers and a 28.6% audience share.

Viewing hit a five-minute peak of 7.5 million just after 7pm. In the half hour from 7pm, ITV averaged 6.95 million viewers and a 35.3% share – the biggest audience on any channel on Tuesday.

BBC1, less fleet of foot with scheduling, switched to a royal baby news special half way through The One Show: Best of Britain (2.6 million/13.6%) at 7.15pm, but this averaged just 3.3 million and 16.7% over the following quarter hour.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#2978 Jul 24, 2013
LCN Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
..BBC1, less fleet of foot with scheduling, switched to a royal baby news special half way through The One Show: Best of Britain (2.6 million/13.6%) at 7.15pm, but this averaged just 3.3 million and 16.7% over the following quarter hour.
Completely sick of the royal baby coverage. All the fawning and servitude by the media is quite sickening.
Thinking

Royston, UK

#2979 Jul 24, 2013
A small price to pay for TV and radio free of US style preacher programmes.
LCN Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
Cheer up as
You pay Your taxes to the
Church of England you have a new Prince
-
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge leave St Mary's hospital with their new arrival. ITV won the ratings battle with more than 7 million viewers. Photograph: Tim Rooke/Rex Features
ITV enjoyed a royal baby-related ratings boost on Tuesday night, with an extended early evening news bulletin providing live coverage of the nipper's first photo call and delivering a peak audience of more than 7 million.
The 6.30pm ITV News, extended from 30 to 60 minutes to catch the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge leaving St Mary's hospital with their new arrival, averaged 5.4 million viewers and a 28.6% audience share.
Viewing hit a five-minute peak of 7.5 million just after 7pm. In the half hour from 7pm, ITV averaged 6.95 million viewers and a 35.3% share – the biggest audience on any channel on Tuesday.
BBC1, less fleet of foot with scheduling, switched to a royal baby news special half way through The One Show: Best of Britain (2.6 million/13.6%) at 7.15pm, but this averaged just 3.3 million and 16.7% over the following quarter hour.
Thinking

Royston, UK

#2980 Jul 24, 2013
I wanted a brown baby [to paraphrase Waynetta]
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
Completely sick of the royal baby coverage. All the fawning and servitude by the media is quite sickening.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2981 Jul 24, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
booby you're such an ignorant bastard
Nope-- unlike YOU?

1) I attended college, and I actually **finished** high school

2) my parents were married when I was born-- still are, in fact

3) I actually still know who my parents were-- I'm so sorry about yours

4) and as always:

Is **Doctor** Francis Collins a christian or not?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2982 Jul 24, 2013
serfs up wrote:
<quoted text> Whatever the Bible states you sound pretty nasty yourself.
Projection of your own internal nastiness? You likely worship the murdering god too. That figures.
serfs up wrote:
And you are doing it without a guide.
Lie. My guide comes from many sources-- but the principle one is the US Constitution, which has lots of lovely rules to live by.

You should **try** it sometime-- clearly?

Following your ugly bible? Has allowed rape, war, genocide, racial bigotry, more rape, etc.

Your bible is FULL of such ugliness-- all approved by it's monster-god too!
serfs up wrote:
So that tells me you will kill innocents when the time comes.
Nope. That's what your ugly bible-god did, supposedly.

Remember Noah flood? Where your monster-god KILLS ALL THE BABIES IN THE WORLD?

That's EPIC, man!
serfs up wrote:
And isn't it really the uplifting of one way of thinking and the down shifting of another that is taking place?
This statement has no meaning-- utterly devoid.

Classic godbottery.
serfs up wrote:
Religion demands discipline.
Indeed-- the discipline to MARRY your RAPIST.

The discipline to MURDER your back-talking kids.

The discipline to MURDER your neighbors for working on the Sabbath.

Was that the sort of "discipline" you meant?

Oh!

Perhaps you meant the discipline to HATE EVERYONE-- including yourself?

Your bible DOES teach that everyone is SCUM-- deserving of INFINITE TORTURE.

That takes on a whole new "discipline"... one requisite with whips and chains... and latex and rubber too.
serfs up wrote:
The higher percentage who have discipline to varying degrees are those who have religion in their personal lives.
100% bullshit. Religion teaches FEAR and SLAVE-LIKE OBEDIENCE.

So much so that ATROCITY IS EITHER IGNORED--OR PERPETRATED.
serfs up wrote:
Therefore more money can be extracted from them to give rise to ones like yourself.
Bullshit again.
serfs up wrote:
Well as we become more atheist, the tyranny of totalitarian rule helped by false zionist christians and false zionist jews is rising from the ashes also.
Even MORE bullshit-- your bullshit just keeps piling up and up...
serfs up wrote:
No rebuttal needed. You have your opinion on your beliefs or non beliefs. I have mine on what you will do or many like you will do in time.
Of course! People like YOU plan on flying airplanes into buildings...

... I have WITNESSED the actions of people like YOU.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2983 Jul 24, 2013
serfs up wrote:
<quoted text> Actually, Christians will be harmed.
No group is more deserving of some justified criticism.

You, especially.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2984 Jul 24, 2013
huntcoyotes wrote:
<quoted text>You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. You haven't proven a thing, bob. You're lying, bob. You're ranting, bob. No proof= bob is lying. Etc.
I see I have so rattled your chain, that you have fallen down into a literally foaming at the mouth!

Wow!

That's pretty sick, bub-- even for YOU.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2985 Jul 24, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>I think that deep down they know that actually reading the book they put so much faith in would force them to actually think about what they have been claiming to believe for so long.
Religion... it only makes sense if you don't think about it.
Exactly!

Q: What do you call a True Believer™ who **does** begin to think?

A: If he survives the process*-- an atheist.

.
.
.
__________

* far from certain-- it is a death penalty under the majority of religions, to think.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2986 Jul 24, 2013
Thinking wrote:
A small price to pay for TV and radio free of US style preacher programmes.
<quoted text>
I always thought your model for TV was superior.

After all?

It has produced....

..... Doctor Who.

That pretty much trumps everything.

:D

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2987 Jul 24, 2013
Thinking wrote:
A small price to pay for TV and radio free of US style preacher programmes.
<quoted text>
.... okay, okay...

Monty Python's Flying Circus trumps Dr Who...

... mea culpa.
LCN Llin

United States

#2988 Jul 24, 2013
Thinking wrote:
A small price to pay for TV and radio free of US style preacher programmes.
<quoted text>
Valid! I agree.
The BBC produces great programs which we watch on PBS and BBC GMT on cable.
The monarchy is popular in the states, maybe more so than in Australia?
Have a good day!
Amused

Minot, MA

#2989 Jul 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
How long before they caught on?
:)
It took a few years, and, even then, the only thing that really killed it was when the system switched over to digital. No more tone signals. They did develop ways to monitor the lines and detect 2600 hz. tones being played through the receiver, as opposed to generated by the system. That just moved blue boxing out of people's houses and onto pay phones.(Devices that generated the 2600 hz. tone were all called 'blue boxes' because the first ones produced were blue.) Even if they detected the tone, the user could be long gone before Bell security got to the location.

There were lots of holes in the analog phone system. It was also almost open source, because the Bell technical manuals were available to the public, so all the details about the system were there for anyone to read and experiment with. That's how the 2600 hz. tone became known.(One of the leading magazines for hackers from the old days is actually called 2600.)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2990 Jul 24, 2013
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
It took a few years, and, even then, the only thing that really killed it was when the system switched over to digital. No more tone signals. They did develop ways to monitor the lines and detect 2600 hz. tones being played through the receiver, as opposed to generated by the system. That just moved blue boxing out of people's houses and onto pay phones.(Devices that generated the 2600 hz. tone were all called 'blue boxes' because the first ones produced were blue.) Even if they detected the tone, the user could be long gone before Bell security got to the location.

There were lots of holes in the analog phone system. It was also almost open source, because the Bell technical manuals were available to the public, so all the details about the system were there for anyone to read and experiment with. That's how the 2600 hz. tone became known.(One of the leading magazines for hackers from the old days is actually called 2600.)
Ha. Interesting.

I do well remember working with a SysAdmin, back in 1999 or so-- and he freely admitted that 90% of server "security" was dependent on ignorance of how the system worked.

Of course, hackers have changed most of that.

But later, when I worked with a group who loved to do computer pranks? They never could figure out why my desktop computer was so inaccessible.

I had simply disabled all the default "sysadmin" pathways into my box-- I had no need for any sort of remote access **back** to it, so long as I could get **out** to the local network.

So all the inbound channels were blocked by me, and I had deleted all the default hard drive shares too.

They tended not to bother me, though-- I was a programmer-- they were not. I demonstrated this, once, by writing a little DOS script that moved everything around in one of their boxes.

I didn't delete anything--just moved things around where Windows was confused as to where the files were. A piece of cake, back then.

And after much howling? I ran the "undo" script, which put everything back, and forced a reboot.

To them? It was "magic".

Kids.

:D

None of them had a clue what "DOS" even meant, let alone how to work it.

But I had started in computing 1981, so...(a time when most of them were still in diapers--or not even born)
Thinking

Royston, UK

#2991 Jul 24, 2013
The real jewel is BBC Radio 4... magical things happen there.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
.... okay, okay...
Monty Python's Flying Circus trumps Dr Who...
... mea culpa.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 39 min Samuel Patre 87,475
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 11 hr Simon 5,820
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Wed ChristineM 4,035
Christianity almost did not happen Feb 12 Quatsch22 1
News Egypt's parliament takes serious actions to com... Feb 12 dollarsbillmom 19
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Feb 10 superwilly 5,154
How To Get To Heaven When You Die (Jan '17) Feb 9 Eagle 12 - 257
More from around the web