More Threatiness at Dawkins.net
by MikeGene
Dawkins' Official web site links to an article that continues to sound the decades-old alarm cry of the Coming Theocracy:
Many people have decried the political power that has come with that growth, saying it gives conservative Christians a disproportionate influence on public life. But my next guest says there's a bigger problem. He says a significant number of Christian conservatives are out for nothing short of theocratic rule and aren't shy about using tactics with fascist overtones in order to get it.
As one pro-Reason proponent frets, "More of a threat than global warming."
That Theocracy. It keeps coming….and coming….coming…
Update: If you want to read a great example of paranoia, check out the diatribe from Carolyn Baker, Ph.D.
February 10th, 2007 at 12:31 am
Woot! Richard Dawkins leads Front-loading by 10 posts, 67 to 57.
May the obsession continue!
Comment by keiths — February 10, 2007 @ 12:31 am
February 10th, 2007 at 12:33 am
The "obsession" makes for great traffic. And the behavior of the "pro-reason/pro-science" crowd makes for great entertainment.
Comment by MikeGene — February 10, 2007 @ 12:33 am
February 10th, 2007 at 12:45 am
Richard Dawkins remains, if not a strictly logical, nevertheless a powerful rhetorical argument against physicalism ('methinksitislikeaweasel', anyone?). I'm not at all surprised that he would feature heavily on a teleology blog, at least until the 'evangelical atheist' movement disassociates itself with him.
As it is, Dawkins is one of the most respected and most vociferous proponents of ateleology. Wouldn't you expect teleologists to dwell on the poverty of his case, logical and rhetorical?
Comment by BenK — February 10, 2007 @ 12:45 am
February 10th, 2007 at 12:47 am
Well said, BenK. In the post-wedge world, it has become clear there is an Anti-Religion Movement and many ID critics are part of the ARM. I'm not sure why Keiths thinks we should ignore this.
Comment by MikeGene — February 10, 2007 @ 12:47 am
February 10th, 2007 at 12:58 am
BTW, if you go over to Scienceblogs.com, you'll not only see a prominent add that reads, "GOD: THE FAILED HYPOTHESIS. How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist," but notice the top five most active "science" blogs:
Scientists contributing to the moral decline of the universe, again- PZ Myers
The Blasphemy Challenge - Ed Brayton
Powerline really shouldn't ever mention science - PZ Myers
CNN has PRIORITIES! - PZ Myers
Oops. That complaint backfired. - PZ Myers
Comment by MikeGene — February 10, 2007 @ 12:58 am
February 10th, 2007 at 1:18 am
This is an ironic complaint from the man who signed a petition to outlaw taking children to church and who keeps company with people that think that christians belong in a zoo.
The real irony is that hardcore christian reconstructionists (what he is referring too) are an incredibly tiny minority while his vicious anti-religion cohorts make up a significant proportion of the most vocal and noted figures.
But hey, I don't expect critical thinking or consistency from Dawkins anymore.
Comment by thesciphishow — February 10, 2007 @ 1:18 am
February 10th, 2007 at 1:27 am
Actually, Dawkins did not say this - it was another intellectual elite. But nevetheless, it's still a good catch! The crowd that complains about fascist overtones did not complain when Dawkins signed that petition. On the contrary, some of them signed with him.
Comment by MikeGene — February 10, 2007 @ 1:27 am
February 10th, 2007 at 2:31 am
BenK asks:
Perhaps they would, if his case were impoverished. Since it isn't, they seem to spend most of their time dwelling on him personally (or in this case, his website) without offering any arguments against his position.
Comment by keiths — February 10, 2007 @ 2:31 am
February 10th, 2007 at 5:27 am
Here are some arguments against his positions:
http://telicthoughts.com/dawki...
http://telicthoughts.com/consc...
http://telicthoughts.com/the-c...
http://telicthoughts.com/scien...
http://telicthoughts.com/dawki...
http://telicthoughts.com/dawki...
http://telicthoughts.com/dawki...
http://telicthoughts.com/love-...
Comment by MikeGene — February 10, 2007 @ 5:27 am
February 10th, 2007 at 6:23 am
If Dawkins' case is really so rich it can hardly do any harm for us to keep talking about it. I suppose if telicthoughts has so failed to answer his argument it will become increasingly clear to the reader and we'll only be doing the world a favor in providing the comparison, yes?
Comment by BenK — February 10, 2007 @ 6:23 am
February 10th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
Readers are invited to head over to Dawkins' site and see how many posts are dedicated to Dawkins' own selfish gene hypothesis. Then we can talk about the ratio of "Dawkins" to "Front-loading" posts here at TT.
Comment by Krauze — February 10, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
February 11th, 2007 at 4:28 am
Krauze is right. Instead of sensibly focusing on a book he wrote 30 years ago, Dawkins instead peppers his site with articles on religion. It's as if he had written a best-selling book(*) on the subject or something.
* Still at #8 after 20 weeks on the NYT best-seller list.
Comment by keiths — February 11, 2007 @ 4:28 am