Support NeoGAF

[Trojita]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/richard-dawkins-atheist-academic-calls-for-religion-to-be-offended-at-every-opportunity-a7043226.html

Richard Dawkins has said he is in favour of offending people's religion and it should be offended at every opportunity.

The controversial atheist academic, 75, argued the public was too worried about being viewed as racist and claimed it is absurd to be accused of racism for criticising Islam.

Dawkins said this was the result of an “absurd double standard” in the Western world which means people are more anxious about attacking Islam than Christianity.

“People are terrified of being thought racist,” he told The Times. “There’s an awful confusion in many people’s minds. They think Islam is a race, which of course it isn’t”.
“If you’re seen to criticise Islam you are often accused of racism, which is absurd.

“I’m all for offending people’s religion. I think it should be offended at every opportunity”.



Dawkins also said migrants from Syria and Iraq who have stopped believing in Islam should be prioritised in the immigration system.

“In the case of immigrants from Syria and Iraq I would like to see special preference given to apostates, people who have given up Islam,” he said. “They are in particular danger.”

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Yep, that sounds like something Dawkins would say.

 

[JimmyRustler]

He's kinda right, as always.

 

[Dennis]

Dawkins said this was the result of an “absurd double standard” in the Western world which means people are more anxious about attacking Islam than Christianity.

“People are terrified of being thought racist,” he told The Times. “There’s an awful confusion in many people’s minds. They think Islam is a race, which of course it isn’t”.
“If you’re seen to criticise Islam you are often accused of racism, which is absurd.

No lies detected here.

 

[DeviantBoi]

All religions need to be criticized.

 

[Booser]

“In the case of immigrants from Syria and Iraq I would like to see special preference given to apostates, people who have given up Islam,” he said. “They are in particular danger.”

You'd run the danger of people lying about renouncing their faith just to get in, or feeling pressured to because they're desperate. It doesn't seem like a fair thing to do.

I'm not religious but I can't understand the man's obsession with other people's beliefs.

 

[haxamin]

He's not entirely wrong, but this is the part where we drag in Sam Harris, Maajid Nawaz and anyone else we can misquote to fuel a pointless argument.

 

[DrGonzo615]

hes not wrong.

 

[| Praxis |]

Can't say I disagree to be honest.

Maybe not the fast tracking of none religious refugees, but the offending, hell yes.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

What are windows 98 interpretations?

 

[JimmyRustler]

You'd run the danger of people lying about renouncing their faith just to get in, or feeling pressured to because they're desperate. It doesn't seem like a fair thing to do.

I'm not religious but I can't understand the man's obsession with other people's beliefs.

He explains it pretty well in his book, The God Delusion. Worth a read.

 

[Trojita]

The apostates should be given protection, but "preference" is a really dumb thing to suggest.

 

[Aureon]

I don't agree with preference to apostates, but of course any reasonable liberal should have a long list of beefs with Islam, starting with their treatment of women, apostates, LGBT, etc.
Criticizing a culture and\or religion for heinous deeds isn't racism, it has never been.

 

[Laevateinn]

.

While Windows has always been garbage, I could definitely see a world where Star Wars reaches that level.

 

[Aiii]

Offense is taken, not given.

 

[Smellycat]

He is nothing more than a hate monger

Dawkins also said migrants from Syria and Iraq who have stopped believing in Islam should be prioritised in the immigration system.

Pathetic

 

[ldcommando]

Agreed.

 

[The Technomancer]

Some gems from Dawkins

Of course you can have an opinion about Islam without having read Qur'an. You don't have to read Mein Kampf to have an opinion about Nazism.

All the world's Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge. They did great things in the Middle Ages, though.

Suggest always put Islamic “scholar” in quotes, to avoid insulting true scholars. True scholars have read more than one book.

For me, the horror of Hitler is matched by bafflement at the ovine stupidity of his followers. Increasingly feel the same about Islamism.

Religious faiths such as Stalinism, Nazism & Islam are dangerous because they teach that pie-in-the-sky Ends justify horrific Means.

I'm fine ignoring everything this guy says from now on

 

[MistakenMobius]

What are windows 98 interpretations?

It's the unbeliever schism of OS2/warp, the true heir to PC kingdom..

 

[mcarlie]

I would prefer rational debate over being offended, but if you lack the ability to do the former then I guess you have to regress to the latter.

 

[Lagamorph]

I'm kind of shocked to see support for the idea that people should go out of their way to purposefully offend other people purely because of their religious beliefs.

Disagree with someone's beliefs if you want, but to purposefully set out purely to offend someone? That's just being a complete and utter cunt, plain and simple.

 

[Kinitari]

You'd run the danger of people lying about renouncing their faith just to get in, or feeling pressured to because they're desperate. It doesn't seem like a fair thing to do.

I'm not religious but I can't understand the man's obsession with other people's beliefs.

The bigger problem i think would be the political ramifications of prioritizing ex Muslims, that would feed into the feeling of persecution for Muslims, that they are only wanted when they are no longer Muslim, or some such.

 

[NumberTwo]

I mean...

 

[Aaronrules380]

I'm kind of shocked to see support for the idea that people should go out of their way to purposefully offend other people purely because of their religious beliefs.

Disagree with someone's beliefs if you want, but to purposefully set out purely to offend someone? That's just being a complete and utter cunt, plain and simple.

Seriously, it's fucking disgusting

 

[Dennis]

Some gems from Dawkins

All the world's Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge. They did great things in the Middle Ages, though.

What is the problem with this, provided the statement is factual?

He is right to criticize the state of science in muslim countries.

 

[Kinitari]

He is nothing more than a hate monger



Pathetic

What about this statement sounds like hate mongering?

 

[NoblesseOblige]

People shouldn't be concerned with causing offense when they're giving legitimate criticism, but then there are some who seem to go out of their way to cause offense when none is needed.

What is the problem with this, provided the statement is factual?

He is right to criticize the state of science in muslim countries.

What insight does that quote provide?

 

[HighResTomato]

Edgy guy man woah.

 

[BadWolf]

Can't disagree.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

All religions need to be criticized.

Ah, the great Wars of the Trilogies of the 32nd century.



Also, Dick Dorkins is an asshole. News at 11.

 

[Aiii]

I'm kind of shocked to see support for the idea that people should go out of their way to purposefully offend other people purely because of their religious beliefs.

Disagree with someone's beliefs if you want, but to purposefully set out purely to offend someone? That's just being a complete and utter cunt, plain and simple.

Is that what Dawkins said though? Because the quote in OP talks about offending Islam, which is a religion, not a person. In fact, that's the whole idea in the quote. Islam is not a race, it's a religion.

 

[JimmyRustler]

What about this statement sounds like hate mongering?

Because this statement implies that there is something wrong with Islam. Which of course, there isn't. Or at least that's what we're told.

 

[Guess Who]

It is absolutely fair to criticize Islam and there is much to criticize about it. Unfortunately we're in a political climate that is full of legitimate discrimination towards Muslims or anyone vaguely Middle Eastern-y, and there are absolutely cases of people couching their prejudice behind "I'm just criticizing Islam, I'm not prejudiced." (Dawkins is certainly guilty of it, too, though he has valid criticisms as well.)

And as much as I think religion is a dated notion that should be pretty much entirely abolished, saying you should go offend people over it constantly does nothing except make you look like an ass. Nobody's religious beliefs were ever changed by someone being a dick to them about it. Even if the other person was correct, it just makes people double down and ignore you.

Is that what Dawkins said though? Because the quote in OP talks about offending Islam, which is a religion, not a person. In fact, that's the whole idea in the quote. Islam is not a race, it's a religion.

"Offending Islam, the religion" doesn't make sense because a religion is incapable of being offended, in the same way calling a car a piece of shit does not offend the car on account of it being an inanimate object incapable of feeling.

 

[Arthr2ShdsJcksn]

I'm kind of shocked to see support for the idea that people should go out of their way to purposefully offend other people purely because of their religious beliefs.

Disagree with someone's beliefs if you want, but to purposefully set out purely to offend someone? That's just being a complete and utter cunt, plain and simple.

If those people with beliefs didn't try to alter the course of law and society with their bullshit then I'd agree with you. As it actually is, screw all people's religions. EDIT Religious beliefs are stupid as hell, and those who espouse them need to be shut up at every opportunity.

I changed what I said because it's not all religious people who need to be shut up... just those who try to force others to believe in their brand of prescribed morality.

 

[ElRenoRaven]

I'm kind of shocked to see support for the idea that people should go out of their way to purposefully offend other people purely because of their religious beliefs.

Disagree with someone's beliefs if you want, but to purposefully set out purely to offend someone? That's just being a complete and utter cunt, plain and simple.

Yes it is. Course sadly some have no problem being utter cunts.

 

[Kinitari]

I'm kind of shocked to see support for the idea that people should go out of their way to purposefully offend other people purely because of their religious beliefs.

Disagree with someone's beliefs if you want, but to purposefully set out purely to offend someone? That's just being a complete and utter cunt, plain and simple.

Well, my read of it is basically "don't tip toe around subjects because you're afraid of offending". If you want to talk shit about the Quran, about the interpretation of God or the prophets, or about the religious practices or even the culture in Islam, you're going to offend a lot of people - but I think that's the point being made, you need to be offending a lot of people.

To be honest, not quite how I work, but it's close - no sacred cows, and just the idea of sacred cows I don't like.

 

[haxamin]

Because this statement implies that there is something wrong with Islam. Which of course, there isn't. Or at least that's what we're told.

But.. there is some things wrong with Islam..

 

[Aaronrules380]

All religions need to be criticized.

I see this type of statement as bullshit, because war will happen with or without religion. Religion is just one of many excuses the people at the top make to get there people to buy into the war. If it wasn't religion it would be nationalism, culture, their sense of morality, etc. Pretty much no religious war in history is really just about religion, or was actually started due to religion.

 

[braves01]

I don't know about going out of your way to offend religious people, but he's absolutely right about the double standard wrt being more afraid to offend Muslims due to potential accusations of racism not to mention terrorist threats. Criticizing Islam definitely shouldn't be automatically construed as racism. It's racist to suggest that's the case really.

 

[Dennis]

What insight does that quote provide?

It offers insight into the state of science in the muslim world and how far it is lacking behind.

 

[MistakenMobius]

I see this type of statement as bullshit, because war will happen with or without religion. Religion is just one of many excuses the people at the top make to get there people to buy into the war. If it wasn't religion it would be nationalism, culture, their sense of morality, etc. Pretty much no religious war in history is really just about religion, or was actually started due to religion.

Was there ever a terror attack by Trekkies at a Star Wars convention?

Did the DC fans tried to murders Marvel fans after BVsS?

Violence is not always war

 

[JimmyRustler]

I see this type of statement as bullshit, because war will happen with or without religion. Religion is just one of many excuses the people at the top make to get there people to buy into the war. If it wasn't religion it would be nationalism, culture, their sense of morality, etc. Pretty much no religious war in history is really just about religion, or was actually started due to religion.

He's not talking about war though. Wars aren't fought because of religions but millions are being killed because of it.

 

[Aiii]

Pretty much no religious war in history is really just about religion, or was actually started due to religion.

Yeah, this is simply not true.

 

[emag]

Don't feed the troll that is Dawkins.

 

[Aaronrules380]

Was there ever a terror attack by Trekkies at a Star Wars convention?

Did the DC fans tried to murders Marvel fans after BVsS?

Violence is not always war

My point is that while religion is used as a justification, that doesn't mean it's the root source of the violence. There have been nonreligious terrorists as well as religious ones

 

[darkace]

He's not wrong, but it doesn't really serve a purpose either. Dawkins sounds like one of those edgy internet atheists sometimes.

 

[HighResTomato]

Don't feed the troll that is Dawkins.

It's his income, of course he would do it at every opportunity.

 

[MistakenMobius]

My point is that while religion is used as a justification, that doesn't mean it's the root source of the violence. There have been nonreligious terrorists as well as religious ones

Of course.
But what are the biggest source of violence between people today?
The Tamil Tiger and drug cartel violence are the only 2 big one I can think outside of religion

 

[Dennis]

He's not wrong, but it doesn't really serve a purpose either.

OK so he is right but he shouldn't say it?

What a bizarre standard. How come we only ever seem to apply that standard to Dawkins?

 

[Ensirius]

He's kinda right, as always.

Yeah, he is never right, but "kinda" right.
Just the way he says things could be a tad bit less obnoxious.