jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (36 posts)

Did Richard Dawkins direct Atheists to deride ?

  1. 68
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    Did Richard Dawkins direct Atheists to deride and ridicule religion?

  2. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    Religion needs no help to derive ridicule. Religion present an imaginative ideology based on wrongly using faith, so as to turn people against themselves, while others usurp power and wealth.

    So please...religion needs no help.

    1. hanging out profile image61
      hanging outposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I thought the monetary system was what provided people with power and wealth? Gee i didn't know my pastor was so powerful and rich.
      Seems to me the bankers initializing WW2 to crush the jewish banking system  and create the federal reserve bank, would be more upon the route of obtaining power and wealth. Religion is not the wealthy business it seems to be, sure maybe for joel osteen. I don't see any churches in my town buying property and becoming wealthy.
      So please...

  3. 68
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    I think it started with  Richard Dawkins . He started to organize the Atheists to make them a "meme". He taught them to ridicule others. Am I right? Is it a good ethics or moral?

    1. pisean282311 profile image58
      pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      well atheism is as old as religion itself...both are product of human brain..and ridiculing each other goes on since human came into being..atheism doesnot need single person to start it...

      1. 68
        paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Quran/Islam/Muhammad forbade people to ridicule others just for fun:

        [49:12] O ye who believe! let not one people deride another people, who may be better than they, nor let women deride other women, who may be better than they. And defame not your own people, nor call one another by nicknames. Bad indeed is evil reputation after the profession of belief; and those who repent not are the wrongdoers.

        [49:13] O ye who believe! avoid most of suspicions; for suspicion in some cases is a sin. And spy not, nor back-bite one another. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his brother who is dead? Certainly you would loathe it. And fear Allah, surely, Allah is Oft-Returning with compassion and is Merciful.

        http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … p;verse=11

        Why should Richard Dawkins put the Atheists on the wrong track of derision and ridicule?

        Why could he not introduce good ethics and morals for the Atheists?

        1. pisean282311 profile image58
          pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          well it doesnot matter what muhammad or quran states...you would find many muslims all across the world who ridicule others and that applies to all faith..so books matter quiet less when it comes to practical life...

          1. 68
            paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            But we have to see the roots for the correct teachings. Richard Dawkins being in the modern age; and the atheists asserting that they can bring things ethical and moral better than Quran; they have just failed. Have they not failed?

            1. pisean282311 profile image58
              pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              so has quran and other religious book...we can't be selective man..we need to understand core of human being...humans are humans no matter how we tag them and religion if was answer..we have had enough time with it...why world is not better place by now?...it cannot be..religion is not the answer and ofcourse just rejecting religion is not the answer too...answer lies beyond capacity of both...we need to address that..yes buddha's words can be starting premise...but i am not talking about buddhism is only way sort of thing..because it too is not...

              you think religious people have more morals..well they can be bought , they can threaten people , they can even kill people to prove that they are right..history is filled with that..why?..because upper clothing doesnot change inner self...we are jungle beings..we were hunters to start with..yes religion did induce things which people adhere till they are not pushed to the wall...

              ideally we can built more moral thing by making humans understand that how they are inter connected as species and what they would get (tangible) by abiding to good way of life..

            2. skyfire profile image71
              skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              No.

              1. 68
                paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I don't agree with you.

                1. pisean282311 profile image58
                  pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  quite expected...you can't agree to anything which is not in lines of quran...it is understandable...

                2. skyfire profile image71
                  skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Sure.

                  Atleast i have no objections if you disagree with me unlike quran which says disagreement with it or believers should lead to hell, isn't it ?

                  1. pisean282311 profile image58
                    pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    lol

        2. skyfire profile image71
          skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Height of contradiction. Same quran has verses against non-believers and punishment for them. I think some people really need to peek into their books. Or else alla YAMAHA will be angry.

          Just for the records-

          Zakir naik ridicules christianity, hinduism, budhism and teaches other muslims not to celebrate their festivals or have tolerance for their religion and respect.

          Saudi king paid huge amount to a biologist to relate embryo with quranic verses.

          Islamic people teach their community about evils of america and white people.

          If this shite is not supposed to be ridiculed then i wonder what is supposed to do with it. Crap needs to be addressed as crap.

          1. 68
            paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Zakir Naik or Saudi Arabia do not rerresent Quran; Quran itself explains which I had quoted.

            1. pisean282311 profile image58
              pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              well does that matter?..zakir naik is hailed as Islamic scholar..he has massive following ..Saudi=Islam as per general perception..what they do or say has influence...

            2. skyfire profile image71
              skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Richard dawkins doesn't represent atheism. wink

              Paar doesn't represent islam ever since he stopped using i'm peaceful ahamadi islamic.  tongue

              People who manipulate ideology are responsible for the dissection of that ideology by those who look at it skeptically.

              If that's not enough read previous post from pisean.

      2. 0
        Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        exactly, speaking of which, I'll have to get around to reading some atheist books at some stage. 

        I looked Richard Dawkins up, and he gets death threats - gee, I wonder who from - the monotheist religions, perhaps?

        1. hanging out profile image61
          hanging outposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          If you don't know exactly it is best not to promote your hate theories even if you add the word perhaps.
          perhaps the scientific community?

          1. 0
            Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            RD is a scientist and an atheist that speaks up about the foolishness of religion, so what sense does it make for scientists and atheists to send him hate mail?

            1. hanging out profile image61
              hanging outposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              why would they not? perhaps the queen of england or some free masonist.
              if you do not know
              you shouldn't say.

    2. skyfire profile image71
      skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Is it right to write verses on non-muslims, non-believers ? is it right to spam the forums with religion ? is it ethical ? moral ?

  4. 68
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    I think it started with Richard Dawkins as a policy

    1. 0
      Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Atheists were around long before RD - are you afraid of RD because he is bold enough to be outspoken?

      1. 68
        paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        No; not in the least; I am not afraid of him. I pity the Atheists Skeptics Agnostics; by following the advice of RD; they have been derailed from the way of reasoning and arguments; the only merit they had previously; now they are left with hardly any merit.

        He does me no harm; I had been writing on his discussion forum; he never came face with face with me.

        The Atheists Skeptics Agnostics now need no adversary RD is enough for them

        There is no compulsion in matters of faith and religion

  5. luvpassion profile image60
    luvpassionposted 6 years ago

    I thought he was the host of the Family Feud. way back in history. wink

  6. hanging out profile image61
    hanging outposted 6 years ago

    Again we have another example of a logic and mathematical, scientific mind trying to comprehend something that really requires just exactly the opposite, a little faith or belief. I can imagine a man in a wheelchair, who doesn't think his brain is from God, blaming God for his being in a wheelchair and giving no credit to God for his intelligence, although being in the wheelchair probably influenced his genius.
    There are some christians that i know, who are okay with being in a wheelchair and who don't blame God. Of course there will always be others who don't come to terms with their handicap outside of God even as there are those who will never understand why there are starving in africa while some christians get to go to disneyland.
    It is all blessings when God enters the life! and yes, otherwise it may be construed a curse. God refreshes the mind and puts everything in its proper perspective.
    There's tons of Christian miraclism in this, but no logic, logic can never understand what God is doing. Being in the wheelchair gave him time to think and learn. His learning ability alone may have come from God, perhaps God was thinking oh man if this guy ever comes to believe in me the day he walks will be so glorious! But some people think he should never be this way.. not the Garden, not the garden. we live outside the garden in a bit of a different situation.

    1. Beelzedad profile image60
      Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      ... no logic whatsoever. wink



      Or, the fact that his legs don't work has nothing to do with his brain at all. You aren't in a wheelchair, presumably?



      You're sure about that or are you fabricating stories again?



      And, you aren't one of those starving in Africa, presumably?



      Properly fed and properly starving, just for Christians to enjoy this perspective. smile

    2. 0
      Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I just read about the enthusiastic youth pastor that yanked someone out of their wheelchair because he believe god had healed them.  The person slumped to the floor

    3. 0
      Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      RD's not in a wheelchair...you're thinking of that other genius...can't think of his name right now

      1. 68
        paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You mean Stephen Hawking?

        1. 0
          Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          yeah, is that who they're thinking of?

          1. 68
            paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            No, Richard Dawkins is a Biologist and one of the leaders of the Atheists Skeptics Agnostics.

          2. hanging out profile image61
            hanging outposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            oh there's two of them
            lol
            I do not follow science.
            stephen hawking is in the wheelchair
            RD is someone i do not know of
            let me check youtube lol
            okay gotta luv youtube.. stephen hawking is in the wheelchair
            not sure which one was the other guy there was a grey haired fellah and a brown haired fellah.
            I suppose for the majority of posts it doesn't matter who i referred to.

  7. I am DB Cooper profile image67
    I am DB Cooperposted 6 years ago

    Richard Dawkins is an active atheist. I would say that most atheists are passive, in that they have their view that there is no God yet they accept that much of the world is run and will continue to be run by religious ideology. Dawkins does not accept this, and that's why he challenges religion wherever it might be creeping into and disrupting secular society.

 
working