Richard Dawkins: The Arrogance of Religious Persons

Richard Dawkins with Sally Quinn.

THIS VIDEO IS "FAIR USE" COMMENTARY OF NEWSWORTHY RESEARCH VALUE. IT'S USE FALLS UNDER THE CATEGORY OF NON-COMMERCIAL FREE SPEECH.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

• Category

  Education

[Welbelese]

so what you are implying is that an atheist will follow any leader simply by virtue of being an atheist, even if that leader is a communist tyrant. that sounds like something religious people do

[TakashiMinamori]

If God himself came down just for me, I'd spit in the face of that psychopath.

[BlackHood76]

oh the sweet irony....

[Erik Gjertsen]

The problem is that absolutely any criticism of any religion or god(s) will be taken as arrogance - after all, you dare claim that you know better than their deity. No matter how carefully you pick your words you will always be perceived as a threat unless you get on your knees and worship the same invisible friend that they do.

[braf zachland]

this is the least arrogant i've ever seen dawkins. by his own statements he is agnostic but chooses to call himself an athiest. probably because he's not willing to lose those hardcore athiest fanboys who follow him with the same fevor of a religious zealot. athiests are the polar opposite of religious zealots and are equall in arrogance. they are one in the same with opposing beleifs an agnostic doesn't rule out the possibility of god. as for me i'm the opposite of agnostic.

[braf zachland]

i think he needs to vist america if he thinks children believe what their parents tell them.

[Anna133199]

Euhm... You don't know me, do you? If someone came with REAL evidence and not the "the evidence is all around you" bull crap, I would be open for that. Just like I would be open for the idea that fairies existed, if someone came with real evidence for the existence of fairies. Oh, and how can you think Atheists are the enemy. I don't harm people. I don't hate anyone. Aren't you as a Christian supposed to not be judgmental and all that?

[crazy8sdrums]

...after all, you are just a meat sack patiently waiting for the day the worms and bacteria consume you. Nothing more.

By all means keep preaching to us how we should join your uselessness and inability to contribute to the future! We are ready to join you in your desolation and emptiness!

Nobody will give you respect until you can respect yourself. How much respect should a soulless meatsack command?

Do you understand where I am going with this? If so, there just may be a God! ;)

[crazy8sdrums]

You confuse 'religion' with theism. Theism is not a religion. Theism is the recognition of a purpose within the many physical constants and programming functions that exist within the observed Natural Universe.

Atheism, on the other hand, is the denial of a creator.

If you unable to create anything within this Universe, because you deny such things as a creator by saying you are atheist, then maybe you should just end it now. You are useless and we don't trust you.

[stuboy261]

Isn't that an argument from ignorance?

Simply coming to a conclusion based on the idea that we don't (Presently) know and as such you are reverse engineering baseless conclusions from that assumption.

[stuboy261]

In the structure you have put forward and indeed even without it, it is well known that we can never know anything to a 100% certainty and as such this would make everyone agnostic about everything at all times.

However, gnosticism and agnosticism go to what you know where as theism and atheism go to what you believe and as such are different questions.

This makes it ok to be an

agnostic atheist

a

gnostic atheist

a

agnostic theist

or a

gnostic theist.