He knows very well what happens when you attack religion. He's spent years attacking Islam for its intolerance. He's spent years attacking Christianity for its intolerance. He's going to carry on doing it, in the full knowledge that all the religions he attacks aren't going to like being attacked. He's never been an anti-Christian crusader, he's been against organized religion of all sorts since forever. The people at Berkeley had no business not knowing that. He's not going to stop speaking out about the dangers of organized religion, nor should he.Here is a good left wing News source you lefties can attack https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/us/richard-dawkins-speech-canceled-berkeley.html?mcubz=0
Now how about commenting on the subject rather then attacking the source ... It happened, its real and he attacked Muslims. Now he's mad there is a double standard. He freely attacks Christians and he doesn't see why he can't attack Muslims. I got a good reason for him. Muslims blow people up for having an opinion like his. Seems like I have heard we have free speech as long as it doesn't hurt others. Time to stop Dawkins.
Well. I don't really see it as "good news" for "fundies. After all, it demonstrates that, unlike many alleged Christians, Hawkins is not a hypocrite. He has no respect for organised religion, and he is not going to temper his opinion just because one religion happens to be under the protection of the far left fanatics. Yes, I said far left fanatics. See, I'm a progressive. I am also an atheist. Organised religion is stupid. I don't care if that organised religion is Christianity, Judaism, or Islam. Now, I, admittedly, tend to say less about Judaism. However, that is not because I find their religion any more rational, than any other. Rather, it is because, unlike the other two desert religions that grew out of the same Sun Worship practice, Jews tend to be less aggressive than the other two. They're more, "We believe what we believe. You believe what you believe. Leave us alone, and we'll leave you alone,"I know. It was a knock of the Tumpanzees.
But having a show on a piddling little radio station being cancelled isn't going to have his psyche greatly mangled. Nor is it a great message to the masses.
But the fundie menace needs every little bit of good news they can make up.
For that matter, I consider organized Atheism dangerous, when their goal is to shut down religious freedomsHe knows very well what happens when you attack religion. He's spent years attacking Islam for its intolerance. He's spent years attacking Christianity for its intolerance. He's going to carry on doing it, in the full knowledge that all the religions he attacks aren't going to like being attacked. He's never been an anti-Christian crusader, he's been against organized religion of all sorts since forever. The people at Berkeley had no business not knowing that. He's not going to stop speaking out about the dangers of organized religion, nor should he.
Is it your contention that Richard Dawkins, whoever that is, mocked Christianity and wasn't criticized for it?BERKELEY, California, July 26, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — When professional atheist Richard Dawkins was disinvited from a radio show in California, he was astonished by the reason given: his alleged “abusive speech against Islam.”
“Why is it fine to criticize Christianity but not Islam?” he asked.
Dawkins was scheduled to discuss his newest book, Science in the Soul: Selected Writings of a Passionate Rationalist, with Berkeley’s KPFA Radio on August 9. When the radio station received complaints that Dawkins had insulted Islam, staff emailed the following letter to ticket-buyers:We regret to inform you that KPFA has canceled our event with Richard Dawkins. We had booked this event based entirely on his excellent new book on science, when we didn’t know he had offended and hurt – in his tweets and other comments on Islam, so many people.
The Richard Dawkins Foundation posted the letter to its blog, and Dawkins denied that his critical remarks about Islam have been abusive. He also hinted that there was a double standard at play.
“I am known as a frequent critic of Christianity and have never been de-platformed for that,” he wrote in an open letter to KPFA. “Why do you give Islam a free pass? Why is it fine to criticize Christianity but not Islam?”
De-platforming is a technique by which controversial thinkers’ freedom of speech is curtailed. They are suddenly denied the promised “platform” to which they had been invited to air their views.
Dawkins is frequently cited by the media as a leader of the “New Atheism” movement. He has described himself as a “secular Christian in the same sense as secular Jews have a feeling for nostalgia and ceremonies.” Dawkins had an Anglican upbringing but lost his Christian faith in his early teens after reading about Darwin and accepting the theory of evolution. Although prominent in his native United Kingdom as a public intellectual since the 1980s, Dawkins became world famous for his 2006 book The God Delusion. By September 2014, it had sold more than 3 million copies.
He also drew a distinction between one religion and another.
“It’s tempting to say all religions are bad, and I do say all religions are bad, but it’s a worse temptation to say all religions are equally bad because they’re not,” he said.
“If you look at the actual impact that different religions have on the world, it’s quite apparent that at present the most evil religion in the world has to be Islam.
“It’s terribly important to modify that because of course that doesn’t mean all Muslims are evil, very far from it. Individual Muslims suffer more from Islam than anyone else. … I am against Islam not least because of the unpleasant effects it has on the lives of Muslims.”
Dawkins tweeted in 2013 that “Islam is the greatest force for evil in the world today.”
Looks like Dawkins thought he could criticize Islam like he does Christianity and get away with it. You never get blow back from Christians, But Muslims will let no one disrespect their religion, not even Dawkins. Funny to see Dawkins get some of his own medicine for a change. Do you think blocking him from this radio show was to severe or hypocritical to do this?