When Atheists Attack: A noted provocateur rips Sarah Palin—and defends elitism (Barf Alert)

Newsweek ^ | September 20, 2008 | Sam Harris

[2ndDivisionVet]

Let me confess that I was genuinely unnerved by Sarah Palin's performance at the Republican convention. Given her audience and the needs of the moment, I believe Governor Palin's speech was the most effective political communication I have ever witnessed. Here, finally, was a performer who—being maternal, wounded, righteous and sexy—could stride past the frontal cortex of every American and plant a three-inch heel directly on that limbic circuit that ceaselessly intones "God and country." If anyone could make Christian theocracy smell like apple pie, Sarah Palin could.

Then came Palin's first television interview with Charles Gibson. I was relieved to discover, as many were, that Palin's luster can be much diminished by the absence of a teleprompter. Still, the problem she poses to our political process is now much bigger than she is. Her fans seem inclined to forgive her any indiscretion short of cannibalism. However badly she may stumble during the remaining weeks of this campaign, her supporters will focus their outrage upon the journalist who caused her to break stride, upon the camera operator who happened to capture her fall, upon the television network that broadcast the good lady's misfortune—and, above all, upon the "liberal elites" with their highfalutin assumption that, in the 21st century, only a reasonably well-educated person should be given command of our nuclear arsenal.

The point to be lamented is not that Sarah Palin comes from outside Washington, or that she has glimpsed so little of the earth's surface (she didn't have a passport until last year), or that she's never met a foreign head of state.

[2ndDivisionVet]

And they wonder why they lose nearly every presidential election. They haven't won with a majority of the popular vote since 1976, in the wake of Watergate!

[A_Former_Democrat]

Or subscribers. They give a voice to every pervert out there to attack basic American & Christian values, but then try to deny free speech to anyone who disagrees with them.

Which are plenty.

[230FMJ]

If the “Intelligentsia” keep it up, Sarah’s skirt tails will put Dirty Harry and the Pelosi back in the minority.

[FlingWingFlyer]

This pinhead blasts Governor Palin for not having a passport. I think it's a good thing when a governor doesn't have a passport. It keeps them at home and doing the job they were elected to do. Bill Richardson has a passport and he's always gone!

I expect this moron to come out next week blasting the Republicans for asking voters to present a simple I.D. before they are allowed to vote. Liberalism is a sickness and this bonehead suffers from it.

[popdonnelly]

What, in God’s name, is this man talking about? These liberals think that their fantasies are reality.

[rwa265]

When Sam Harris is unnerved, I am relieved. When he is relieved, I am unnerved.

[grey_whiskers]

If they are so in love with the Ivy League, why don't they defend Bush, who has an advanced degree from Harvard?

Incidentally, someone ought to remind this ass-hat that the operative phrase in the Constitution is "endowed by their CREATOR with certain inalienable rights", and not "..having come to possess, through the process of natural selection, certain survival advantages."

Corollary: if he does want to press that issue, I'm betting on Sarah. She packs heat.

Cheers!

[freespirited]

Ask yourself: how has "elitism" become a bad word in American politics? There is simply no other walk of life in which extraordinary talent and rigorous training are denigrated. We want elite pilots to fly our planes, elite troops to undertake our most critical missions, elite athletes to represent us in competition and elite scientists to devote the most productive years of their lives to curing our diseases. And yet, when it comes time to vest people with even greater responsibilities, we consider it a virtue to shun any and all standards of excellence.

Sam, I think the answer is obvious. The elite pilots, troops, athletes, and scientists have proved themselves the best at what they do. And we do recognize that intellectual elites are highly successful at being intellectuals. What we don't recognize is any particular superiority of intellectual elites at decision-making. The record is clear that they have no particular insight in this department. For starters, they tend to lack common sense. We have several generations of the welfare state as Exhibit A.

William F. Buckley articulated it best when he said he would rather be governed by the first 200 people in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. How right he was.

[Minn]

Funny, I bet we could scan the archives and find nothing from Simple Sam about John Edwards’ complete lack of foreign policy knowledge or experience. But learning to sue people and channel dead children was all the experience his crowd needed then.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Governor Sarah Palin is the second most exciting person to come onto the national political scene in living memory (President Reagan being the first).

Alaskans noticed this before the rest of the country, giving Governor Palin some of the highest ratings in the history of any state. Want someone “outside of Washington?” It doesn’t get any more outside Washington than Alaska, both geographically and in can-do frontier mindset.

Want “change?” How about the first woman vice president from a humble background who truly understands the everyday concerns of the average American, a great mom and, did I mention, a crusading ethics reformer? Charisma and competence are a rare combination in our politics. Sen. John McCain has it in abundance. But with the addition of Palin to the ticket, I have never been more energized for a presidential race.

[Soothesayer]

This guy actually thinks that being an atheist makes a person more intelligent than ALL religious persons. His illogical rant is proof to the contrary.

[februus]

Sam Harris; a dim, neutered cypher from a passing age.

[Soothesayer]

There is no historical doubt that the founders of this country were mostly deists (believers in a God) and not a single one of them was an a delusional numbskull.

When was the last time Sam Harris wrote anything original enough to count as impressive for an internet blogger, let alone anything comparable to the blueprint for the most powerful, most free country on Earth?

[Aria]

I can’t figure out what the rats think there is in Obama’s so called experience makes him so much more qualified than Governor Palin - is it that he visited Pakistan for 3 weeks or that when he was a kid he lived in Indonesia for a couple of years? I’ve been to way more countries than Obama has - and all of them US friendly more or less - so maybe I should tell BO to move over and I’ll run the country.

[jazusamo]

Governor Sarah Palin is the second most exciting person to come onto the national political scene in living memory (President Reagan being the first).

Amen to that and the rest of your post!

[yazoo]

I guess the bottom line is, if one is a Christian, one automatically wants a theocracy.

[pillut48]

Talk about ‘elitist’, LOL! :-)

I LOVELOVELOVE how Gov. Palin has shaken up the liberals so much!!! Wooohoooooo!!!!! :-)

[Mad Dawg]

Thanks for this post. They truly are perverted, immoral, oligarchic, elitist scum.

It started quite a while back. It was the enlightened and cultured Southerners who used science to find a justification for slavery. The sophisticated and edumicated Woodrow Wilson thought the Constitution was obsolete. The eugenicists sought first to sterilize and abort their way to the master race, and then, when that took too long and moved too slowly they tried a speedier process: brutality, statism, and murder in the name of sophistication, culture, and science.

And now it is, in their minds, a kind of atavism to believe that there is a God who cares about us and about what we do, a kind of regression to love freedom and responsibility. After the "Best and the Brightest" gave us the Viet Nam debacle and the "Great Society" the "amiable dunce" Reagan restored, for a while, our freedom, might, and prosperity. Rhodes Scholar Clintoon as Commander in Cheat stands idly by while our enemies plot and prepare to kills us. The allegedly gravitas-free Dubya does whatever scrambling is necessary to prevent follow-ups to the 9-11, while the highly educated world citizen nObama thinks that the success of the surge doesn't justify supporting it and the failure of an abortion doesn't mean we need to refrain from killing babies.

I'll stick with Palin, thanks.

[bukkdems]

“Sarah Palin’s ignorance is guaranteed because of how she has spent the past 44 years on earth.”

He then goes on to explain that she’s ignorant because she is a Christian and thus could not possibly understand important issues. This gutted his argument as surely as Palin gutted her moose.

[Silly]

“Her fans seem inclined to forgive her any indiscretion short of cannibalism.”

I might actually forgive her of that, too!

[kcvl]

Sam Harris (born 1967) is an American non-fiction writer and philosopher. He is the author of The End of Faith (2004),

After coming under intense criticism in response to his attacks on dogmatic religious belief, Harris is cautious about revealing details of his personal life and history. He has said that he was raised by a Jewish mother and a Quaker father, and he told Newsweek that as a child, he "declined to be bar mitzvahed." He attended Stanford University as an English major, but dropped out of school following a life-altering experience with the drug ecstasy. During this period he studied Buddhism and meditation, and claims to have read hundreds of books on religion.

He sees religion as an impediment to progress toward more enlightened approaches to spirituality and ethics.

While an atheist by definition, Harris asserts that the term is not necessary. His position is that "atheism" is not a worldview or a philosophy, but the "destruction of bad ideas." He states that religion is especially rife with bad ideas, calling it "one of the most perverse misuses of intelligence we have ever devised."

He also rejects the claim that the Bible was inspired by an omniscient God. He states that if that were the case, the book could "make specific, falsifiable predictions about human events." Instead, the Bible "does not contain a single sentence that could not have been written by a man or woman living in the first century."

He says that religion allows views that would otherwise be a sign of "madness" to become accepted or, in some cases, revered as "holy." He gives specific attention to such teachings as transubstantiation - the Roman Catholic doctrine that, during the Mass, the bread and wine of the Eucharist changes in substance to the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Harris argues that if a lone individual developed this belief, he or she would undoubtedly be considered "mad." In the context of religion, though, such teachings need not - and cannot - be questioned. He writes that it is "merely an accident of history that it is considered normal in our society to believe that the Creator of the universe can hear your thoughts while it is demonstrative of mental illness to believe that he is communicating with you by having the rain tap in Morse code on your bedroom window."

In regard to morality, Harris considers the time long overdue to reclaim the concept for rational secular humanism. Harris describes the supposed link between religious faith and morality as a myth, unsupported by current statistical evidence.

Harris goes further and posits that, far from being the source of our moral intuition, religion can yield highly problematic ethical positions. He cites several examples, including the Catholic prohibition against condom use aggravating the global AIDS epidemic, the attempts made by the US religious lobby to impede funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and the punitive nature of the US "war on drugs." He sees in these examples the tendency of religion to decouple moral judgments from focus on real human suffering. Harris also sees the influence of religion in most of America's "vice" laws. He writes that most of the laws outlawing pornography, sodomy, and prostitution are actually intended to combat "sin" rather than "crime."

Harris has received backing from Nina Burleigh and Richard Dawkins.

In 2007/08, Sam Harris pioneered The Reason Project, a charitable foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society.

[Truthsearcher]

But doesn’t 0bama also claim to be a Christian, and Nancy Pelosi claims to be a “devout” Catholic?

How come Sam Harris doesn’t say they this disqualifies them? Or does he think their claims are as false as I think they are? In which case I give Sam Harris a little bit of credit. He’s at least a little bit more perceptive than the MSM reporters who keep asking “how come the Obama’s outreach to evangelicals doesn’t work when he’s a Christian?”

[mike-zed]

“This guy actually thinks that being an atheist makes a person more intelligent than ALL religious persons. His illogical rant is proof to the contrary.”

This tool is a leftist first and foremost.

Please do not judge ALL atheists by him or we shall have to judge you by Benny Hinn.

The level of religious intolerance on FR today is depressing.

[kcvl]

Palin: average isn’t good enough

She’s not qualified to be president, and in picking her, McCain shows that he has little respect for the presidency.

By Sam Harris
September 3, 2008

McCain not only has thrown all sensible concerns about good governance aside merely to pander to a sliver of female and masses of conservative Christian voters, he has turned this period of American history into an episode of high-stakes reality television: Don’t look now, but our cousin Sarah just became leader of the free world! Tune in next week and watch her get sassy with Pakistan!

If you want someone just like you to be president of the United States, or even vice president, you deserve whatever dysfunctional society you get. You deserve to be poor, to see the environment despoiled, to watch your children receive a fourth-rate education and to suffer as this country wages — and loses — both necessary and unnecessary wars.

McCain has so little respect for the presidency of the United States that he is willing to put the girl next door (soon, too, to be a grandma) into office beside him. He has so little respect for the average American voter that he thinks this reckless and cynical ploy will work.

http://tinyurl.com/4m8pj3

[kcvl]

Why Religion Must End: Interview with Sam Harris

A leading atheist says people must embrace rationalism, not faith—or they will never overcome their differences.

Sam Harris is not your grandfather’s atheist. The award-winning writer practices Zen meditation and believes in the value of mystical experiences. But he’s adamant in his belief that religion does more harm than good in the world, and has sparked controversy by suggesting that when it comes to faith-based violence, religious moderates are part of the problem, not the solution.

“There is no text more barbaric than the Old Testament of the Bible—books like Deuteronomy and Leviticus and Exodus. The Qur’an pales in comparison.”

http://tinyurl.com/4hnppj

[Las Vegas Ron]

What, in God’s name, is this man talking about?

That's funny. I didn't even look at the authors name and just assumed it was a bitter feminist writer.

But then again, maybe I was right after all.

[kcvl]

Sam Harris is no friend of religion. In The End of Faith, he openly mocks god-belief as primitive superstition and condemns it as a threat to human survival. Harris argues that the great modern religions belong on “the scrap heap of mythology,” and his zero-tolerance policy applies to religious fundamentalists and moderates alike.

Some reviewers were surprised, therefore, to discover that Harris — who received a philosophy degree from Stanford University and is a doctoral candidate in the field of neuroscience — embraces Eastern philosophy and Buddhism. Particularly baffling to some was the declaration, on the concluding page of his book, that “[m]ysticism is a rational enterprise.”

http://tinyurl.com/3tu6xd

[kcvl]

http://www.samharris.org/

[Harry Wurzbach]

I guess the bottom line is, if one is a Christian, one automatically wants a theocracy. That essentially seems to be where the left is these days. Well, if you are a conservative and a Christian. I think I speak for many when I say the last thing I want is the government involved in my church.

[puroresu]

What guys like Harris don't understand is that when we attack elitism, we aren't attacking smart people. We're attacking people who aren't especially smart, but who happen to hold fashionable views which allow them to posture and preen. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are elitists, but none of them are especially bright. They may not all be idiots (though the school is still out on Pelosi), but they're nothing special in the brains department. They just happen to have control of the institutions which determine what is fashionable and what isn't. Christianity isn't fashionable, so we're all supposed to be hostile, or at least skeptical, towards it. Islam is all the rage, so we're supposed to be open-minded and tolerant towards it.

Most of these "elites" are totally lacking in common sense, even the ones who are moderately intelligent otherwise. I'd trust an average dirt farmer to handle my finances before I'd trust Obama. I'd certainly trust Palin with our nation's security before I'd trust Obama, even if she didn't attend an Ivy League school, and Obama did (albeit via affirmative action).

[Jim Scott]

Sam Harris is just spouting the usual leftist drivel with an atheist twist added to the predictable sneering, condescending put-down of Sarah Palin.

We know leftists believe they are the rightful rulers of mankind and when a Christian, be it George W. Bush or Sarah Palin win an election aginst one of 'theirs' or even attract positive attention, as Palin has done, they go bonkers. In the leftists closed mind, this isn't the way it should be! They still haven't gotten over Bush's squeaker win over Al Gore in 2000 or his bigger win over John 'I served in Viet Nam' Kerry in 2004.

These left-wingers despise the American middle class and this kind of garbage from some atheist left-winger simply validates the long-held-but-rarely-spoken belief of millions of 'working Americans' (a favorite political label) that the 'intellectuals' think the 'average' American is an idiot "clinging to their guns and religion" as Barack Obama so clearly put it when he thought only like-minded elites were listening. This atheist guy puts it in print for all to see. Thanks.

This kind of arrogant, sneering attitude aimed at an accomplished Christian lady who is easily the equal of Mr. Harris on almost any front, is a major reason why Obama and his oh-so-brilliant friends are going to lose and lose big in November.

[detective]

“The next administration must immediately confront issues like nuclear proliferation, ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and covert wars elsewhere), global climate change, a convulsing economy, Russian belligerence, the rise of China, emerging epidemics, Islamism on a hundred fronts, a defunct United Nations, the deterioration of American schools, failures of energy, infrastructure and Internet security … the list is long, and Sarah Palin does not seem competent even to rank these items in order of importance, much less address any one of them.”

Most of these “issues” are problems created by liberals, by oversized, dysfunctional government and by the actions of Democrats to undermine our troops and our foreign policy. Obama has literally zero experience with any of these “issues” but no member of the MSM could ever say so. The experts and the liberal elite that Harris seems to want to run our country have failed repeatedly but continue to feel they are superior to everyone else.

[aculeus]

Bttt for Sarah.

[Harry Wurzbach]

Sam, I think the answer is obvious. The elite pilots, troops, athletes, and scientists have proved themselves the best at what they do. And we do recognize that intellectual elites are highly successful at being intellectuals. What we don't recognize is any particular superiority of intellectual elites at decision-making. The record is clear that they have no particular insight in this department. For starters, they tend to lack common sense. We have several generations of the welfare state as Exhibit A. William F. Buckley articulated it best when he said he would rather be governed by the first 200 people in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. How right he was.

Exactly. History is replete with incredibly stupid things done by wise and learned individuals. And the author falls into the trap of assuming that the position is the Professorship of the United States. It is the Presidency of the United States, a leadership position.

[bukkdems]

“But doesn’t 0bama also claim to be a Christian, and Nancy Pelosi claims to be a “devout” Catholic?

How come Sam Harris doesn’t say they this disqualifies them?”

It is the flavor of her Christianity with all aspects being exaggerated by his feverish imagination, just as all other quivering liberals thought GWB would establish a theocracy. In ginning up all this froth, they neglect to mention she has gay friends, so apparently is not a dogmatic or intolerant.

[netmilsmom]

>>The level of religious intolerance on FR today is depressing.<<

It’s not just today, my FRiend and it’s not only atheists, try being Catholic or LDS and see how far it gets you.

Don’t feel bad. In some ways, you are in good company.

[Publius6961]

The old "Christian Theocracy" straw man?

Tell me it ain't so...

If there were a Christian theocracy, I am quite sure that the perverts would not have control of Hollywood, the entertainment media, the MSM and most legislatures.

Other than that, I suppose it's possible...

[Publius6961]

When it comes to anti-Christian kneejerking, the perverts are the engine that drives it.

I am inolerant of militant perverts. Unapologetically so.

Deal with it.

[Alouette]

Ask yourself: how has "elitism" become a bad word in American politics? There is simply no other walk of life in which extraordinary talent and rigorous training are denigrated. We want elite pilots to fly our planes, elite troops to undertake our most critical missions, elite athletes to represent us in competition and elite scientists to devote the most productive years of their lives to curing our diseases.

Here's the difference between elite (highly trained) pilots, elite (highly disciplined) troops and elite (nighly educated) scientists, Sam. We are a democracy, not a monarchy with an elite aristocracy of people, who are neither highly trained, highly disciplined nor highly educated, who just happen to think they are better than the peasants because they get stuff published in the old media.

[Publius6961]

Harris has received backing from Nina Burleigh and Richard Dawkins.

Isn't Dawkins the nut-job who believes in Intelligent Design, but by another name?

Oh my goodness!
That settles it then.

NOT!

[Publius6961]

I think I speak for many when I say the last thing I want is the government involved in my church.

Or my church in my government.
Actually, anybody's church in my government.

[grey_whiskers]

Something wrong with his eyes. Is it the drug use or is he queeer?

Cheers!

[rwa265]

I can only imagine the depth of his Jewish mother’s disappointment in him.

[grey_whiskers]

Please do not judge ALL atheists by him or we shall have to judge you by Benny Hinn.

Non sequitur bookmark.

The level of religious intolerance on FR today is depressing.

To a LOT of atheists, apparently.

Since you are implicitly defending atheism by saying he is not representative, why don't YOU critique his arguments from both a 'rationalistic' (snerk!) perspective and then from a theistic one...to demonstrate your own "open-mindedness" of which you are apparently so proud.

After that, why don't you go to Islamabad or Abu Dhabi and spread the "Good News" that there is no Allah?

Many Christians have been martyred for their faith: it is time for atheists to prove their bona fides and do something besides intellectual circle-jerks to the applause of their peers.

Then we can talk.

(Cheap shot cutoff warning: why aren't all the Christians overseas? Because we are members one of another, and use prayer to support one another. Atheists by definition have to do it in person.)

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

“There is no text more barbaric than the Old Testament of the Bible—books like Deuteronomy and Leviticus and Exodus. The Qur’an pales in comparison.”

So is he insisting "The JOOOOOOOOOOS" caused 9-11?

G_d Derangement Syndrome (spelled that way as a nod to the more reverent Jewish believers out there).

Cheers!

[mathurine]

If Sam had gotten into Jack Daniels instead of meth earlier in his life he might have amounted to something by now.

[loveliberty2]

"I care even more about the many things Palin thinks she knows but doesn't: like her conviction that the Biblical God consciously directs world events. Needless to say, she shares this belief with mil-lions of Americans—but we shouldn't be eager to give these people our nuclear codes, either. There is no question that if President McCain chokes on a spare rib and Palin becomes the first woman president, she and her supporters will believe that God, in all his majesty and wisdom, has brought it to pass."

This writer has exposed his abyssmal ignorance of the very foundations upon which his own liberty is based.

He ignores the historical fact that America's Founders encapsulated in the nation's Declaration of Independence a reliance upon "Divine Providence" and accountability to a "Supreme Judge of the world."

If he and his ilk wish to expand the boundaries of their provincial thinking, perhaps these words might help:

"In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, & they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need his assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that “except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest." -----------Benjamin Franklin, at the Constitutional Convention, 1787

Also, from that favorite of the Far Left and their minions (when they quote his "separation of church and state" phrase), Thomas Jefferson:

"I shall need the favor of the Being in whose hands we are, Who led our forefathers . . . from their native land, and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life; Who has covered our infancy with His providence, and our riper years with His wisdom and power . . . I ask you to join with me in supplication, that He will so enlighten the minds of your servants, guide their councils, and prosper their measure, that whatsoever they do shall result in your good, and shall secure to you peace, friendship, and approbation of all nations." ---Thomas Jefferson, Second Inaugural as President of the United States of America

[mike-zed]

I am sadly unable to quote with italics since the usual HTML markups seem not to work. So suffer my clumsiness.

” To a LOT of atheists, apparently.

Since you are implicitly defending atheism by saying he is not representative, why don’t YOU critique his arguments from both a ‘rationalistic’ (snerk!) perspective and then from a theistic one...to demonstrate your own “open-mindedness” of which you are apparently so proud.”

I know not how to well respond to such a high-mined snerk. So I will simply tell you what I think, if you truly care to hear.

First off, I am an atheist. Unapologetically. Deal with it.

I love the Constitution of the United States, and the free, republican government it enshrines.

I have no idea who Sam Harris is. From what I can tell of his politics he is simply a blathering socialist. He no more talks for me than the born-again Christian Jimmy Carter speaks for you.

“After that, why don’t you go to Islamabad or Abu Dhabi and spread the “Good News” that there is no Allah?”

I note that you have not gone to Islamabad or Abu Dhabi and spread the “Good News” that there is no Allah?

“Many Christians have been martyred for their faith: it is time for atheists to prove their bona fides and do something besides intellectual circle-jerks to the applause of their peers.

Then we can talk.

(Cheap shot cutoff warning: why aren’t all the Christians overseas? Because we are members one of another, and use prayer to support one another. Atheists by definition have to do it in person.)

Cheers! “

Oh, I see, as a Christian you only have to talk the talk. Convenient.

I do not begrudge you your faith. I simply expect the same from you. Or that you wear the badge of a bigot with pride. Either works for me.

[Soothesayer]

I’m actually an atheist. Look at my past posts and comments and you will probably believe me. I have never believed in God at any time in my life even when I started to think that I did believe. I have been exposed to both Islam and Christianity by people I know and by many books that I have read intently. I couldn’t find any evidence for God anywhere.

Even though I don’t believe in God at all, I am very pro-theism. Basically it is because I really really want there to be justice for the dead and dying innocents of the world who suffering indignity and are forgotten forever.

Therefore, every-time I hear people like Same Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens talking about how wonderful the world is without God, I get really f***ing pissed. I don’t have a problem with their reasoning about atheism (I agree with most of it) but I have a really big problem with their lack of compassion for victims of injustice and their contempt for the concept of simple human dignity. That really gets me pissed. Understand?

[grey_whiskers]

Mike -- if you made the cheap shot that anyone taking Harris as being representative of atheists, should then be required to be cast in the same boat as Benny Hinn.

So I didn't -- I offered you the opportunity to explain where and how you disagreed with Harris; and further, to illustrate your "open-mindedness" (being a sign of intellect, of which many atheists pride themselves) by stepping out of your ideological bunker to criticize him using an alternative set of criteria.

In other words, I'm holding you to your own allegedly high standards. Alinsky-ites and atheists have bragged about using it against Christians for years.

So, you're just getting your own artillery fire back.

Which parts of Harris's article do you agree with, and which do you disagree with, and why?

BTW, for the tags...

I can't see the internals of your prior attempts, which you *didn't* post, so this may or may not be what was wrong. But to enclose a section of my post in italics, do this:

<i>But to enclose a section of my post in italics<i>

Cheers!