Richard Dawkins suffers stroke.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Scoobysnack, I hoped things would be different with you, because you seemed so open minded when you first joined, but your posts lately have just been stupid as fuck, devoid of reason, and utterly reprehensible.

You're on an atheist forum, yet you don't allow for the possibility of legitimate unbelief in your God.  Instead, you just label us Satanists, plug your ears, and go on with your propaganda.  I get that it's hard to acknowledge that your pseudo reality is not only unapparent, but not even coherent to others.  Still, you have the option to at least approach the discussion with honesty instead of some obvious lame ass attempt to frame it in such a way that misrepresents pretty much everyone you're trying to engage.  What even is the point of trying if you're not going to be honest?  Are you here to prove something to us or to yourself?

The thing is it's too easy to be an atheist. In the end it's whatever you want to believe since there is no unity. Even I could claim to be an atheist. It doesn't require researching much. Even I have listened to Dawkins, but I've also researched so much more. The more I realize, atheism is an empty vessel. It's void of purpose, and in the end, a useful tool to those who are against God, and the ultimate reality. It's a way to replace God, by putting yourself in it's place. Almost trans humanism without the technology.

I'm not against your god because I cannot be against something which I don't believe exists. I am quite seriously against fuckheads like you who think you know anything which far more thoughtful people don't, and I promise you will never see peace while both of us are around here. You are below dogshit in your arrogance!

[J a c k]

The thing is it's too easy to be an atheist. In the end it's whatever you want to believe since there is no unity. Even I could claim to be an atheist. It doesn't require researching much. Even I have listened to Dawkins, but I've also researched so much more. The more I realize, atheism is an empty vessel. It's void of purpose, and in the end, a useful tool to those who are against God, and the ultimate reality. It's a way to replace God, by putting yourself in it's place. Almost trans humanism without the technology.

What in the actual fuck? I don't even know what to do with this. 

Props to all of you with patience. I realize I lost it a long time ago. Back to off topic...

[God of Mr. Hanky]

It's almost like you've never read history or even scripture.  For the life of me I can't think of any other reason why you would conclude that belief in a god equates to less tyranny and oppression.

I do a lot of research, into history, but not as much as the bible for the last few years. Just a personal question, when was the last time you talked to God? Forget that you don't believe in God, but was there a time you did, and if so, when did you ask for help?

Oh, cut the crap already! You really aren't fooling anybody here, and if you had ever fooled yourself by trumpeting such bullshit, then you wouldn't have to keep coming back for more. You aren't going to win with this!

[Joods]

I don't agree with his pushing of atheism on people...

He hasn't. Unlike bible thumpers, I don't see where he's shoving his books in people's faces or damming them to eternal hell when they walk down the street.

Look who's number 1

http://superscholar.org/features/influential-atheists/

I've seen a lot of people pushing his books on this forum, but that's just my personal experience.

Lookie here... two can play at this game:

Here are your top ten richest pastors in the world.

Not sure I really get it.  You saying he's pushing his atheism on people because he wrote books?  Basically, because he's not in the closet with it?

You don't become known publicly as influential without being a voice of authority.

bold mine.

Pot meet Kettle. See my link above.

The difference between Dawkins and those pastors is huge. For starters Dawkins doesn't go around guilt-tripping the poor into tithing 10% (or more) of their income to the "church". Those pastors didn't make that money by working a real job. They did it by being publicly influential  and a voice of authority for gawd.

Funny how I don't hear you bitching about Joel Osteen, who also is extremely influential as well. He's a senior pastor at Lakewood Church. He's an author too. So why aren't you whining that Osteen is pushing his beliefs on people?

Oh wait.... he must not have to be held to your high standards because he's "christian", so in your little world, that must be okay.

In case you haven't noticed, you're on an Atheist forum. It's only natural that we discuss books related to atheism. That said, I've never seen anyone push those books on anyone. If someone asks for recommendations on books about atheism and Dawkins books happen to be on that list, it in no way implies that anyone is pushing his books or atheism on anyone.

If you want to talk about people pushing books on others then consider this: The bible is talked about on these forums more than any other book, including books on atheism. Ironically enough, some (not all) of the religious believers on this forum take every opportunity to preach and push the bible here whenever they see fit.

[Old Baby]

It's almost like you've never read history or even scripture.  For the life of me I can't think of any other reason why you would conclude that belief in a god equates to less tyranny and oppression.

I do a lot of research, into history, but not as much as the bible for the last few years. Just a personal question, when was the last time you talked to God? Forget that you don't believe in God, but was there a time you did, and if so, when did you ask for help?

I was a Christian for my entire life until 3 months ago, so 30+ years of ironclad faith.  Yes, I prayed.  Yes, I asked God for help.  Most recently was right after I realized I didn't believe anymore, I asked God to reveal himself if he was true so that I could believe in the truth.

If you've done a lot of research, you should see the correlation between theism and tyranny and human oppression.  Are you going to tell me that you have not seen it?

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Not sure I really get it.  You saying he's pushing his atheism on people because he wrote books?  Basically, because he's not in the closet with it?

You don't become known publicly as influential without being a voice of authority. The fact that many recognize him as being influential, means he must influence someone. He can be considered the high priest of the anti-God establishment. Of course I mean the previous sentence as semi sarcastic, but seriously he is someone that atheists push as a voice that speaks for them.

What sort of authority are you referring to? On atheism, I don't think so with Dawkins. He never said everyone should be an atheist, and his own personal atheism is his own. What he has attacked are the evil practices which religious institutions are rife with, and the fallacious cruelty of theistic teachings. The authority which he has earned is in biology, and on the theoretical workings of evolution he shows this in his ability to explain in lay persons' terms. You don't have to be an atheist just because you see the good sense in what he says on this, nor the twisted, cruel, and utterly stupid nonsense practiced by theists which he points out.

Authority in science is always relative, never absolute. If Dawkins is found among his peers to be wrong on his scientific ideas tomorrow, then he will no longer be an authority on natural selection. If Dawkins is found to have buggered children, then he will be tried, and if found guilty go to jail. If your pope is found wrong tomorrow and replaced, then just like Ratzinger, they'll allow him to make excuses and retire, never admitting to any wrongdoing. The same easy let-off, no matter how many children or other people who he's done harm to. If you are Protestant, Protestant leaders are also pretty good at not admitting wrong and never paying their debts to society.

The fact that many recognize him as being influential, means he must influence someone. He can be considered the high priest of the anti-God establishment. Of course I mean the previous sentence as semi sarcastic, but seriously he is someone that atheists push as a voice that speaks for them.

And your point is what? That anyone who has influences is religious? So then, did Derek Jeter have a religious following when he played for the Yankees? Are sports fans all cultists?

He can be considered the high priest of the anti-God establishment.

Wrong, Idiot - many atheists (probably around half or more of us) don't actually like Dawkins a whole lot, and would instead refer you to their guru Sam Harris for spiritual wisdom. Or some other entirely, or none at all - we are not all members of AA, it is not a church, there is nobody to appoint leaders. I don't even follow AA at all, therefore am not influenced in any way by David Silverman. Silverman's organization does what it does, other organizations do more of or more of the same (mostly advocacy and legal support, which is necessary on account of oppression from people such as you, who will not tolerate anyone speaking their mind when they disagree with you). I may happen to hear something said by any of the above or anyone else which makes good sense to me, but I accept nothing which anyone says as gospel - no ideas, and no wisdom is absolute!

"Anti-God" - you are always going to use that, even though you should have learned by now that we can't be against what doesn't exist, and we don't believe your god does outside of your own little heads! Therefore I'm not anti-god, I am anti-asshole, and you are a stinking, festering example of that.

People here disagree with your ideas, and we know that is the one reason why you are here. You just have to be right about something, and chances are that your religious followers have tired of you as well. Nobody in poor old Scoopofshitsnack will listen to him anymore, and so he comes to this atheist forum, where he thought it would be like shooting fish in a barrel. The less we live up to your expectations, the nastier you get, and you have since resorted to the most stupid ad hominem attacks and repeated attempts to take advantage of a child who is being abused at home. There's something seriously fucked up with your head, which your god ideas are in no way helping you with - you need professional help with that, which can only be effective when you drop the delusional thinking which has made such a twisted asshole of you while here.

[Sterben]

I don't like your tone, and I don't have to answer your questions. You've been here much too long not to have learned the difference between atheism and the sort of runaway idealism which leads to violent dictators. Kim Jong Ill isn't an atheist, he is a self-declared god, and he knows it.

The last time I checked, Sweden was a very nice place to live, and it is also more of a secular culture than Russia ever was. It has socialized medicine, and so is its education system through college. Denmark, even better these days, no thanks to your god, nor your evil and ignorant socio-economic ideologies. Now the Russian government is a puppet of the Russian Orthodox church, and it's still a miserable shithole for most people who live there.

That's exactly what I'm getting at. When atheist governments declare religion to be banned or at least try to, they want to replace belief in God with worship or belief in the state, because the state becomes god or at least the highest authority. That's why I wanted you to watch the obsolete man.

Seems to be a common theme that when a country goes more towards atheism, they symbolically cannibalize themselves, but when they start allowing more religious freedoms they become more free overall. The time has come to start exposing the absolute savagery that absolute atheism has become. It's responsible for so many deaths in the modern world, usually their own people.

          It's become hard to defend you scooby, when you say Atheism does cause millions of deaths. You also missed the very point of that episode you keep citing. The very point of the episode was not a religious concept, it rarely even mentioned. When you look at it, the state is a authoritarian system that represents the soviets under Stalin. Stalin was famous for sending people to there deaths that his party felt to be obsolete. Your are some what correct about the religious placement in that episode. Stalin did ban religion under his reign, it did not vanish though. It was just sent underground and not allowed public discourse. The librarian was a Atheist and the man from the government was a Fascist. When he was reading the bible to him it was more of a attack on the government and there own fear of death. Proving that strength is not in power but lies in the mind of great men. When he ran out the room like a coward and was declared obsolete for being a coward. The entire episode was a metaphor for a weak man vs a supposed powerful man. When the courage was put to the test the weaker one was exposed. I'd like you to ask you a question as well. What character do you relate to. Are you the strong librarian, or are you the Fascist who runs away from a stronger opponent?

[Sterben]

Human oppression under the guiding hand of religion is responsible for more deaths then Atheism. I don't understand how people can't see that countries that use
State Atheism" are just as oppressive if not more so then countries under a religious law based system. Saudi Arabia is a prime example of how religious backed laws cause harm just as North Korea's "State Atheism" does. If I had to chose a country which has a better human rights standards I take Saudi Arabia over North Korea. It's still wrong that woman have no rights, men have all the power and freedom of speech is minimum at best. Look up countries that have a majority of Atheists populations within it's boarders. There some of the best educated and healthiest populations on the planet and considered some of the nicest countries to visit and to live in. Why are they so successful? Cause they do not let a old fashion believe system hold them hostage and have evolved into humanists.