Posted on 10/27/2009 6:46:41 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
In America we are a century and a half away from the "Know-Nothing Party", a secret political society that fulminated against the Catholic Church and Irish immigrants. (Asked about its composition, members would say, "I know nothing;" hence, the moniker.) Formed in public as The American Party, the party's hateful, nativist politics took a long time to expunge from our shores. But we now have an Englishman, Richard Dawkins--one of society's "Brites" according to his fellow-Darwinist, Daniel Dennett--in a screed against the Catholic Church that proclaims the same frothing bigotry exemplified by the Know-Nothings. This and Dawkins' various other attacks should remind us that the hoary religious hatreds of old (including those of the angry atheist) were a European legacy. Catholics and other Christians need to realize that Dawkins and Company aim to revive them.
Rome is possibly "the greatest force for evil in the world," Dawkins announces, "a disgusting institution" that is "dragging its flowing skirts in the dirt and touting for business like a common pimp." That kind of language is like a blast of stale air from the 1850s.
You cannot expect his fellow Darwinists to repudiate Dawkins for the simple reason that a number (e.g., P.Z. Myers) share his prejudices and his paranoia. Darwinism never was mainly about science; it is about metaphysics. It is a worldview that has no space for the sacred, no regard for the exceptionality of human life. Darwinists, who operate few if any hospitals or homeless shelters, cannot recognize the humanity of those who do.
Dawkins is not an oddity. He is the world's leading Darwinian spokesman. He is hailed at universities, museums and foundations. Publications like The Washington Post and The New York Times--that simply will not run an article by scientists presenting the evidence against Darwinism--can't showcase him enough.
Other than such Know Nothings, what other modern bigots are regarded as so fashionable?
I never expected to see an article where you agreed with Dawkins.
bookmark
This is why I am no longer a science major, only two years in and I cannot deal with the arrogance, snobbery, and disdain for anything “anti-science”
I don’t agree with Dawkins. That’s why I’m posting it. But as a God-hating, evo-atheist, Temple of Darwin fanatic, you are in full agreement with him, aren’t you mnehring.
"For those of us somewhat vague on late 19th century American history, we know that the phrase "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion" meant something important to somebody somewhere. But it wasn't until we read Summers exhaustive discussion of the campaign of 1884 that we learn that one Dr. Samuel D. Burchard, addressing a gathering of the Religious Bureau of the Republican National Committee, a week before the general election, stated,
We are Republicans, and don't propose to leave our party and identify ourselves with the party whose antecedents have been rum, Romanism, and rebellion. We are loyal to our flag.
What Burchard did, by reciting this triplet, was to saddle the Democrats with being on the wrong side of three of the most sensitive issues of the times:
Prohibition --- a controversy which the Women's Christian Temperance Union and others had brought to fever pitch;
Catholicism --- a feared minority of the time (all actions were considered as coming from Rome), and
The Civil War --- which had but twenty years before, been brought to its bloody end, leaving in its wake no end of bitterness on both sides."
http://www.ralphmag.org/BH/rum-romanism.html
Not in the least. But isn’t true that you consider “Dariwinsts” Nazi, Communists, evo-athiests- all of which sound pretty evil to me. And isn’t it also true that you have condemned the Catholic church for accepting Theistic Evolution as the same “evo-atheists”, etc, etc, etc, for believing that evolution is the tool that God used in Creation?
You can’t have it both ways. You can’t damn them in one breath then say you don’t in another just because some loon author (Dawkins) also damns them.
Are these people going to do to the term ‘bright’ what the homosexual lobby has done to the word ‘gay’?
Of course, this doesn't factor in the numbers of murders carried out by atheist regimes such as those led by Mussolini, Castro, Mao, Lenin and Stalin, just to name a few.
Actually, Dawkins has trashed Islam.
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1b0QKO1rJQ where he takes on an Islamic cleric.
In this one, Dawkins calls Islam as evil!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qhp5ktBSsu8
Dawkins will never criticize Islam.
If he does, Muslims will kill him.
Just made for each other.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment
Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
Out on a limb? So are you saying you have not said almost the exact same thing about the Catholic Church as Dawkins, just from a different direction?
Dawkins (who I think is completely off his rocker) didn’t categorize his remarks here by saying those who believe X but not Y. Are you innocent of that? Are you saying you have not called Catholics ‘evo-atheists’, ‘Nazis’, ‘Temple of Darwin’ followers with out the same categorization you are now making?
Dawkins hates the light as vampires do.
Does Dawkins have any manners? He keeps trying to talk down the cleric who is speaking and behaving a calm, collected and civilized manner.
In this one, Dawkins calls Islam as evil!
In Dawkins' view, Islam is just evil. Clearly, that is not as evil as he thinks the Catholic Church is, as he says the latter is the greatest evil. Notice the cowardice and trepidation in his voice as he gingerly expresses concern over Islam. That's nothing like his screed against Christians.
In this view I say Christianity needs to learn a thing or three from Islam, and stop taking it on the chin from cretins like Dawkins.
And if some people think that is somehow "un-Christian," keep in mind it was this attitude that helped Christianity beat back Islam during the Crusades. Jesus Himself warned His disciples that they would need to use force to defend the faith.
I have never seen GodGunsGuts call the Catholic Church “greatest force for evil”. To say that the OP is in agreement of this is insulting, especially when there are some FReepers who do feel that way and make it well known.
I have read MANY of the article posted by GGG and spent time over on the Religion Forum seeing first hand those that thing the Catholic Church IS the “greatest force of evil”.
GGG is not one of them. While GGG may have some differences of opinion from the Vatican, I have always found that those disagreements have come in good taste and with tact.
No, Dawkins is an idiot. He is so bad, even some atheists think he is a 'troll' out to discredit their arguments. I see him like Michel Moore of politics, he acts outrageous and makes strong, unsubstantiated or illogical arguments and personal attacks just for the shock value. Usually when you resort to the Michael Moore type debate, as Dawkins does, it shows you either have no logical or rational argument, or your motivation is shock, not selling your side.
Someone who claims to have an argument but just jumps to subjective labels like 'the greatest force of evil' is compensating for their lack of rational evidence.
I agree.
That has to be one of the funniest thing's I've read.. Thanks for the laugh. Of course, I know you are joking because comparing, in my opinion, comparing someone to a Nazi, Communist, or Atheist, is the antithesis of 'good taste and tact'. Wouldn't you agree that throwing those charges around are far beyond good taste and tact?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.