"Pushing against an open door."

The only issue I have with the religious discussions on this site are the name calling and pushiness of certain unbelievers who will complain about religion vehemently.

It is not credible to contend that vehement behavior comes from a lack of belief.

I pointed this out to a couple of people more than a year ago and they stopped attacking religious posts. There are a couple of stragglers who have not.

There is a misperception about Steve Shaw. Apparently DonT and others believe that he always argues the same thing and that he always argues from a scientific perspective. This could not be further from the truth. He seems to have fallen into the same psychological trap that engulfed Mr. Dawkins.


Mr. Dawkins gained a lot of respect in the scientific community by explaining evolution in layman's terms and counterin creationism with logic.

But as he explains in his Ted Talk, that was not enough. His Scientist colleagues were not convinced by his logic. The God Delusion was the start of his crusade against the wishy washy and less "fundamental." Now he calls believers "delusional" and mocks concepts he cannot disprove (such as the existance of God) by quoting the good-natured comedian Douglas Adams in equating the belief to fairies at the end of the garden. In other words, what he cannot disprove, he mocks.

I think the defense of science against anti-science is a very good thing. If it is done scientifically and logically. But when it is combined with bullying and name calling and dubious appeals to authority. When the goal is pursued in illogical ways that only bring question to the credibility of the "defender" so when Dawkins claims to speak as a scientist and calls people names or when Shaw claims to speak as a science teacher who calls people names. I feel obliged to point out that when they step outside their fields they lose the right to speak for their fields.

I know a lot of you like Dawkins and Mr. Shaw. I like them too. I am conscience of the limits of their expertise and I am not inclined to give them credit for knowing the scientifically and logically unknowable. They have every right to assert that they do not believe. But they have no right to mock those who don't agree with them.

And this assertion by some that those who do not have a religion don't have a stance. Do even you believe that Ian? It is my belief that you were taking the piss when you said that.




vehemently

ve·he·ment
[vee-uh-muhnt]
adjective
1.
zealous; ardent; impassioned: a vehement defense; vehement enthusiasm.
2.
characterized by rancor or anger; violent: vehement hostility.
3.
strongly emotional; intense or passionate: vehement desire.
4.
marked by great energy or exertion; strenuous: vehement clapping.