While atheists accuse us of hatred, one of their leaders posts this with his strong approval. Is this not raw, naked hatred? Will any non-believers call him on it?
Follow-up: Sorting Out My “Is This Not Also Hatred?” Reaction
Thinking Christian
"Engaging… exhilarating.… This might be the most surprising and refreshing book you’ll read this year!" — Lee Strobel
"Too Good To Be False is almost too good to be true!" — Josh McDowell
Serving with:
"Engaging… exhilarating.… This might be the most surprising and refreshing book you’ll read this year!" — Lee Strobel
"Too Good To Be False is almost too good to be true!" — Josh McDowell
Serving with:
Are you going to give any extended commentary? I ask because, really, I try not to give that guy hits. But darn, I’m curious!
It is ok because they get to claim to be dancing to their dna (as Dawkins would have us believe, while we have the burden of proof or requirement or whatever to be good as required by God.
Good ol double standard.
Raw, naked hatred? If you say so… it sort of looks like you might be seeing it everywhere whether its there or not..
No, Tom, this isn’t raw, naked hatred. I’m going to call Hanlon’s razor on this one, and say that it’s just mind-numbing stupidity.
Science and religion are very broad, diverse categories. Science includes both health research, and biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons research, among many other things. Religion is the motivation behind enormous quantities of charitable work, as well as jihads and crusades. When someone tries to paint the two things as black and white alternatives on the basis of today’s news headlines (or other forms of cherry-picking), that person is basically just being a moron.
The fact that there are so many high-profile morons who do exactly this, and so many people who admire them, does not make it one iota less moronic.
Every time I come across some “imagine a world without religion” tirade I feel like superimposing the phrase “imagine a world without science” over a recently nuked Hiroshima.
“Recently nuked Hiroshima”? How old are you Brian?
But you religious people should be outraged when science is used to slaughter people en masse, how dare they horn in on your racket!
I don’t know Brian, but I suspect he’s old enough to imagine the scene has pictured.
As for the rest of your comment, Kevin, thank you. It helped me sort out what bothered me most about this graphic. I’ll be posting on that shortly.
if the outrages and wicked religious practice incite hatred, that’s as much of a problem as the outrageous behavior of the Ted Bundys of this world fuel hatred and contempt
hatred and contempt can certainly be an appropriate response
See here for more. It’s the analysis Crude asked for, which several of the comments here helped me clarify in my thoughts. Thanks.
banev,
I’m trying to sort out what you wrote. I think you were trying to say that religion deserves hatred and contempt because it incites outrages and wickedness.
I think that’s a really sad but also morally dangerous endorsement of a cycle of hatred and violence, and so I think you are sadly and dangerously wrong.
Kevin, my age is irrelevant. I meant to say “an image of a recently nuked Hiroshima”, and I say “recently nuked”, because an image of Hiroshima as it is today would send a different message.