Enjoyable show of an atheist fag making the best publicity to Christianity and to heterosexuality.
“If you become a fag, you will be like him”, I picture passing-by mothers telling to their terrified sons.
Look at the coolness of the guy with the sign, how he makes the idiot (probably on drugs; perhaps he sold his shoes to buy them) get madder and madder.
Police managed to calm him down, though.
Alas, I hate to say this, but this is a suicide or a massacre waiting to happen.
He amuses the passers-by, though.
I hope Satan gives us more like him. The man is a walking testimonial for… us.
You really must pity Richard Dawkins. He is one of those heroes ready to ferociously attack the pious, but a shrinking violet towards those potentially violent.
We have now discovered that whilst said Dawkins considers the God of the Torah a very bad “fictional” character, he “doesn’t know so much” about the god of the Muslims, so he’d rather keep schtum, thank you very much.
Now, firstly it is astonishing how a man with so much time at his disposal like Dawkins never thought he might employ some of it to examine the, erm, second biggest religion on earth. Secondly, it cannot have escaped him that Islam is a parody of the Bible, it is based on it, and it claims to be its authentic expression. Thirdly, it might have come to his attention that as far as violence is concerned, Islam isn’t really built on retiring wallflowers.
At the very least, our hero could have said: “I do not know much of the god of the Muslims, but it must be clear it is a fictional character too, and he has pretty much the same traits as the fictional character of the Christians”.
Alas, nothing of the sort. It is as if he would say “can we stay on Christianity, please. I like my atheist propaganda comfortable, and safe”.
Ah, these fearless paladins of truth against the prejudices of countless ages….
Oh, the irony!
You want to put a billboard condemning the “year of the Bible” (nice initiative, though it smells a bit of sola scriptura) and you fall into the pit of political correctness!
You silly atheists, didn’t you know whenever you touch the issue of slavery without being Black you expose yourselves to the accusation of racism? You might, in fact, being attacked even if you are Black yourselves, if you find Whites eager enough to show how zealous they are!
And yes, I tried to understand the message. And no, there wasn’t any! Only a colossal ignorance of history, coupled with an arrogance of the same dimensions, can make someone believe he can have some “atheist” impact with this kind of exercise.
La mamma del cretino e’ sempre incinta. The mother of the cretin is always pregnant.
As a reparation, I will delve in my “kindle” Bible this morning. You never know, I might find some useful hints as to how deal with the minus habens.
In an embarrassing (for the Atheists) and rare show of common sense, Richard Dawkins admitted to be only sure to 6.9 sevenths (which, to you and I who do not have a book to promote, means around 98.6%) God does not exist. This leaves only space for the conclusion (as in such things tertium non datur) Dawkins considers the existence of God a 1.4% probability.
In my book, this means Dawkins not only maintains he is not an atheists, but maintains Atheists are wrong. Always in my book, a 1.4% probability of being wrong in your supposition qualifies you as an agnostic, albeit of a rather obdurate sort.
The moderator of this debate seems to have reached the same conclusion, and to his surprise Dawkins said he is called an atheists by other people, but “not by himself”.
Now, before someone starts the soppy song of the “pleasant surprise” Dawkins might have after he kicks the bucket, let me tell you that however your percentage estimations you can’t write a book called “The God Delusion” and think – bar an always welcome repentance, of course – you’ll get an entry card. What the exchange tells me is that Dawkins has, in fact, admitted the bankruptcy of the atheist argument. If you admit you can’t reach 100% certainty you’re right, you can’t say to believers they are wrong. And, by the way, you should still be very afraid.
Contrast this with, say, myself:
I am absolutely certain God exists. Not to 6.9 sevenths, not even to 6.99 sevenths. I am 100% certain, period.
Therefore, the following is demonstrated:
1) I can criticise atheists as “wrong” and be deemed coherent, he can’t criticise believers as “wrong” and make the same claim. Not as atheist, not as agnostic.
2) The real delusion here is – says Dawkins, though not in so many words – the one of the atheists. You can’t call a belief “false” which you know has a 1.4% probability of being true, and you must call atheism a delusion if you believe atheism has a 1.4% probability of being wrong; because in this case it can never qualify as a belief and must be called, coherently, a delusion.