The following comment by Daniel Dennett appeared in the Washington Post on January 12th, 2010. I think it not only says it all but is an indicator that godless evangelism is making headway.
Q: Is there widespread media bias against Christianity? Against evangelicals such as Brit Hume and Sarah Palin? Against public figures who speak openly and directly about their faith? Against people who believe as you do?
There is no media bias against Christianity. If it appears to some people that there is, it is probably because after decades of hyper-diplomacy and a generally accepted mutual understanding that religion was not to be criticized, we have finally begun breaking through that taboo and are beginning to see candid discussions of the varieties of religious folly in American life. Activities that would be condemned by all if they were not cloaked in the protective mantle of religion are beginning to be subjected to proper scrutiny.
There is still a lot to accomplish however. We need to change the prevailing assumptions in the same way that public opinion has been reversed on drunk driving. When I was young, drunk drivers tended to be excused because, after all, they were drunk! Today, happily, we hold them doubly culpable for any misdeeds they commit while under the influence.
I look forward to the day when violence done under the influence of religious passion is considered more dishonorable, more shameful, than crimes of avarice, and is punished accordingly, and religious leaders who incite such acts are regarded with the same contempt that we reserve for bartenders who send dangerously disabled people out onto the highways.
I also look forward to the day when pastors who abuse the authority of their pulpits by misinforming their congregations about science, about public health, about global warming, about evolution must answer to the charge of dishonesty. Telling pious lies to trusting children is a form of abuse, plain and simple. If quacks and bunko artists can be convicted of fraud for selling worthless cures, why not clergy for making their living off unsupported claims of miracle cures and the efficacy of prayer? The double standard that exempts religious activities from almost all standards of accountability should be dismantled once and for all. I don't see bankers or stockbrokers wringing their hands because the media is biased against them; they know that their recent activities have earned them an unwanted place in the spotlight of public attention and criticism, and they get no free pass, especially given their power. Religious leaders and apologists should accept that since their institutions are so influential in American life, we have the right to hold their every move up to the light. If they detect that the media are giving them a harder time today than in the past, that is because the bias that protected religion from scrutiny is beginning to dissolve. High time.
Q: Is there widespread media bias against Christianity? Against evangelicals such as Brit Hume and Sarah Palin? Against public figures who speak openly and directly about their faith? Against people who believe as you do?
There is no media bias against Christianity. If it appears to some people that there is, it is probably because after decades of hyper-diplomacy and a generally accepted mutual understanding that religion was not to be criticized, we have finally begun breaking through that taboo and are beginning to see candid discussions of the varieties of religious folly in American life. Activities that would be condemned by all if they were not cloaked in the protective mantle of religion are beginning to be subjected to proper scrutiny.
There is still a lot to accomplish however. We need to change the prevailing assumptions in the same way that public opinion has been reversed on drunk driving. When I was young, drunk drivers tended to be excused because, after all, they were drunk! Today, happily, we hold them doubly culpable for any misdeeds they commit while under the influence.
I look forward to the day when violence done under the influence of religious passion is considered more dishonorable, more shameful, than crimes of avarice, and is punished accordingly, and religious leaders who incite such acts are regarded with the same contempt that we reserve for bartenders who send dangerously disabled people out onto the highways.
I also look forward to the day when pastors who abuse the authority of their pulpits by misinforming their congregations about science, about public health, about global warming, about evolution must answer to the charge of dishonesty. Telling pious lies to trusting children is a form of abuse, plain and simple. If quacks and bunko artists can be convicted of fraud for selling worthless cures, why not clergy for making their living off unsupported claims of miracle cures and the efficacy of prayer? The double standard that exempts religious activities from almost all standards of accountability should be dismantled once and for all. I don't see bankers or stockbrokers wringing their hands because the media is biased against them; they know that their recent activities have earned them an unwanted place in the spotlight of public attention and criticism, and they get no free pass, especially given their power. Religious leaders and apologists should accept that since their institutions are so influential in American life, we have the right to hold their every move up to the light. If they detect that the media are giving them a harder time today than in the past, that is because the bias that protected religion from scrutiny is beginning to dissolve. High time.
I love it when atheists show their true colors, which is to squelch freedom of speech. This drivel presented here is nothing short of Communism. Why doesn't that surprise me when Communism is the government of the atheists that has killed millions of people for not complying with their harsh rigid dogmatism?
ReplyDeleteThe atheist can evangelize all day long, but God forbid that anyone else do it. The atheistic movement is the most narrow minded of all the religious sects with harsh consequences for anyone who disagrees. They have proven this in the public schools.
Now that they can tear down Christianity through science vs. young earth creationism, they think that they are making headway. Well be assured that this is not the case. Many Christians have been seeking God on these things for several years. Let's face it, most of us are not well acquainted with dating techniques and because the atheist movement was the loudest voice behind these things, many Christians simply stood on faith on the Word of God. They accepted the YEC model because to be frankly honest, it was the only model available for a long time.
Now we have solid answers. Folks like Dr. William Lane Craig and Dr. Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe with Dr. Fazale Rana are blowing a major hole in atheism. Thankfully, many young people are realizing how harsh atheism really is at its core and seeing that a Biblical model better fits what we know than the atheistic naturalistic one that suggests that all the complexities of life happened per chance. As scientists continue to research these issues, they have seen that a great deal of intelligence is required to generate living matter, which is further evidence for a Creator who is clearly seen in the things that are made.
The quoted diatribe given to us by the godless evangelist is the very reason that our founding fathers wanted the state to stay out of religious affairs. It is because of people like you.
Vera