| There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with |
Stalkers and Crazy Church Lady (with cats!)
Not sure exactly what i did to garner such loving attention, but it's good to know I'm just trying to convert you all to my religion. ;-) (I think it was my attacks on Dawkins, the God of some Atheists. or not... maybe it is just my uber sexy ness! )
I wish "God of some Atheists" was a joke, but it seems true. Watching the Stephen Fry / Christopher Hitchens thing live, in a room full of atheists... and they applaud when Dawkins walks on stage. Not the people in the audience who happily applaud everyone who comes on stage (it's what a live audience is for) but the ones watching it on a screen? I got pretty creeped out there.
I know. I criticize him a lot on places like facebook, since i find his rendering of religion to be a serious straw man, and find that for a man comfortable with his atheism, he is very "hate"ish against religion. That position really bugs me. I get that religious groups (especially in the US, and middle east) are way out of hand, but that doesn't mean "religion" is, and it surely doesn't mean religion has nothing to offer. I want to tell these atheists, "you have found something that works for you -- what is the advantage in attacking what works for them *when it's not harming other people or their rights*."
These are the people who i feel really do see atheism as "religion lite". They have found their "truth" and must proselytize it, often in less than "nice" ways.
it's a very strange position, i think, for someone who claims he dislikes all the harm done in religion's name. though not major harm, he does do harm when he instigates hatred against muslims, tells kids their parents are abusers, or just calls people stupid, because *he sees nothing truthful or valuable in their beliefs*. sighs.
PS. do you think i should annoy my stalker by telling her that (truthfully) my favorite music probably of all time, are some christian hymns and gospel songs? ;-)
I sneak into my local generic protestant church on christmas eve, for the midnight service, cause I love the candles and the hymns. I have to tune out the sermon, but it's ususally got cute kids recreating some birth scene so it's tollerable.
Oh holy night, the stars are brithtly......... ahhhh..........
Hell, I got married in a church, with hymms and a bit of Parry too. I'm practically a fundie compared to some strange people.
Dawkins is not averse to torching some straw men when it comes to biology either, e.g. his protracted war with Gould. Although Gould bowled over his fair share as well. Many of our best straw soldiers were lost in that conflict!
Really? I'm surprized. I know little about actual real modern (well, gould is 80s, but still) biology, but thought both men were fairly respected in their fields.
is no one above lying for their cause? sobs....
I wouldn't call it lying, exactly. Check out Sterelny's Dawkins vs. Gould. I like how someone wrote up a Cliffs' Notes version of it for that article.