Richard Dawkins' "Out Campaign"

[Greg27]

I ultimately think the best solution is having a duty of disclosure. Many ethical codes these days in the professions require professionals to disclose to the client or customer before they enter into a contract or agreement of one kind or another, anything which might result in a conflict of interest and render them unable to properly fulfil their professional obligations and duties to a client or customer. A pharmacy which is associated with any Catholic or religious charity should have a clear sign or ethical code at a place readily available which gives grounds on which they can’t dispense certain medicines because of reasons of ethics or conflict of interest. They must and should fully disclose their religious affliations to the customer, so the customer clearly knows what they can and cannot get, and why they cannot get it. Otherwise, there is a moral wrong and injustice done in my view, to the customer, to the law as a whole (which is not supposed to legislate in favour of any religion) and to society.

 

[Nepenthe]

Yes, as AI said, I do understand the position. We could have pharmacies with huge neon lettering out front saying "CATHOLIC PHARMACY!!! NO POTENTIALLY PREGNANCY–INHIBITING MEDICATIONS DISPENSED HERE (erectile dysfunctional men, step right up!) GOOD LUCK ELSEWHERE MENOPAUSAL WOMEN!!! etc. But then, what of those pharmacists who object to the use of, oh say, opioid analgesics? If your doctor prescribes them, would you want the only pharmacist in town to tell you ‘nope, for the sake of my opinion about your morals and your soul, you’re just going to have to risk shock, trauma and death!’ ?

That violates the code of the pharmacist’s profession. Should a pharmacist have access to why a patient is prescribed something? In medicine as in law, there are certain matters that are private and inviolable, yes? There are doctors who do tell their patients that they do not perform certain treatments nor prescribe certain drugs, for various reasons, and that’s already getting into very messy territory, and fortunately, the medical community has done their very best to keep quackery in check. Law and medicine, medicine and law…it is a matter of trust,sigh, particularly in medicine, and that’s not even a fraction of it.

But of course, all this is entirely off-topic.

For an example of why nontheists really do need legal and social support, observe : forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=183911

And that is just in this last few hours on this very forum, and very mild compared to some cruel aspersions I have seen here. I know edwest2 to be a very nice person at times. But he appears to have a fearsome and unreasoning hatred of unbelievers, which hurts me personally, and particularly socially since that appears to be the aim of such posts. How can I, unbefriended and without advocates, be safe and unafraid, with the loathing of all Theist-dom against me, though I have tried to do no harm all my life? Another post by another longstanding member got deleted in another thread about the same time (fortunately deleted too…it did not reflect well upon Catholics or theists or the poster) earlier that simply left me aghast. Vicious, ad hominem, insinuating and hateful words, and more than words-- that is what unbelievers face every day of the week, every day of our lives, no matter how meek and kind we are.

And we do not even know why, save that we are somehow ‘infidels’ though some of us cannot even understand such a term in this context. To me, ‘infidel’ simply means violating one’s oath, and I have never, ever, so far as I know, wilfully violated an oath, or moreto the point - my given word- in my life. Please don’t become those things you profess to abhor, dear theists!

 

[john_doran]

For an example of why nontheists really do need legal and social support, observe : forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=183911

And that is just in this last few hours on this very forum, and very mild compared to some cruel aspersions I have seen here. I know edwest2 to be a very nice person at times. But he appears to have a fearsome and unreasoning hatred of unbelievers, which hurts me personally, and particularly socially since that appears to be the aim of such posts.

i’m not sure what other posts that guy has made in the ‘fearsome and unreasoning’ vein, but the one in your link seems fairly innocuous: he merely points to an article and observes that atheism is the cause of the widespread abdication of judaeo-christian morality in the media. whether or not that claim is true, it’s certainly plausible, and was made without vitriol or invective, as far as i can tell.

Nepenthe:

How can I, unbefriended and without advocates, be safe and unafraid, with the loathing of all Theist-dom against me, though I have tried to do no harm all my life? Another post by another longstanding member got deleted in another thread about the same time (fortunately deleted too…it did not reflect well upon Catholics or theists or the poster) earlier that simply left me aghast. Vicious, ad hominem, insinuating and hateful words, and more than words-- that is what unbelievers face every day of the week, every day of our lives, no matter how meek and kind we are.

from the stories you’ve shared in this thread, it seems as though you’ve had a pretty rough ride having the courage of your convictions, and that really, really chews. really. i feel for you, i really do - people make the world such a hard place sometimes…

the philosophico-religious atmosphere up here in canada is generally pretty good, at least in a major metropolitan center like toronto, which is incredibly multicultural (i have sikh, hindu, muslim, and agnostic/atheist friends; i know only one practising catholic), and when religious people are met with negative reactions, i think it’s typically just a sense of being regarded as weird, but not for being a theist, but for believing in religion, you know?

of course, i’ve been lifting weights for 23 years, and have a shaved head and a tattoo that covers my arm and back, so maybe my interlocutors are just keeping their objections to themselves …

and, for what it’s worth, if you were up here, i’d be your advocate - i was bullied a lot as a kid, and seeing it in any of its forms drives me absolutely nuts.

 

[Nepenthe]

Aw, like I said, i think edwest2’s a nice guy. But I also think he’s pointing the finger in the wrong direction about some things. Nontheists are not the enemy! Stupidity and irresponsibility and poor education are enemies to us all, and those know no bounds of any kind.

It does warm my heart to know that, just across the Lake, there is a big, muscular, tattooed brother who might want a word with the uncharitable bullies of the world! Thank you!

 

[nichjake]

Those of us who are mature and well-formed in our particular belief systems, theist or otherwise, shouldn’t be offended when people merely insult us. Now, if you’re suddenly denied admission to public institutions, barred from seeking employment, or blocked from purchasing a home, then you have a reason to complain of discrimination. Yes, it may be painful to be shunned by family and close friends, but that happens to folks who convert from non-Catholic religions to Catholicism all the time. It isn’t like atheists are particularly singled out for this sort of inhumane treatment.

Oh I’m not offended by the wells hall preacher…mostly just annoyed but my point in bringing him up was that religion, especially christianity, is shoved in my face on a daily basis without me doing anything to bring it on. I don’t understand why people feel the need to stand on street corners and sidewalks and preach about their religion…and then get very upset when atheists even mention offhandedly that they don’t believe.

As with my family, its completely unacceptable what they’ve done to me. If I had converted to any religion (except maybe Islam) they wouldn’t have cared. I could have become Catholic and they wouldn’t have been overly happy but they wouldn’t have practically disowned me like they have since I told them I didn’t believe in god. Its like I’m a lepper or something . That seems to be the conception of a lot of familys as well. My room mate came out to her family a couple weeks ago and since then they’ve completely removed all the support they’d been giving and even went so far as to turn off her cell phone service. I was chatting with my best friend’s dad last summer shortly after my friend had come out the closet about his homosexuality. My friends dad made the comment “Well, at least he’s not an Atheist…I couldn’t deal with that” . I have another friend as well who is deathly afraid of his family finding out hes just agnostic…he wasn’t afraid of them finding out he’s gay but he knows there would be major problems if they found out about his agnosticism.

Like many atheists I’ve been discriminated against because of my religion by people other than family. I’ve lost “friends” because of it and those were all messy partings. Last year I was denied a spot in the student government at MSU because my interviewer was part of the Jewish student union and I had listed “Freethinker’s Alliance” on my activities list on my application. Of course that wasn’t the official reason but when my best buddy, who was in the student government, talked him about it he said “I don’t want any atheists or agnostics in this organization”. Yeah, atheists aren’t targeted…right

 

[rlg94086]

I never received any such treatment when I was an atheist or an agnostic. The victimhood you have expressed is laughable. I’m sorry if I don’t sound sympathetic, but everyone has to deal with people questioning their beliefs in a negative manner somewhere in their life - religious affiliation, political affiliation, etc.

Get over it. As the only Catholic and only conservative Republican in my family, I have plenty of heated exchanges with my family (the political ones are far worse). Big deal.

Oh I’m not offended by the wells hall preacher…mostly just annoyed but my point in bringing him up was that religion, especially christianity, is shoved in my face on a daily basis without me doing anything to bring it on. I don’t understand why people feel the need to stand on street corners and sidewalks and preach about their religion…and then get very upset when atheists even mention offhandedly that they don’t believe.

As with my family, its completely unacceptable what they’ve done to me. If I had converted to any religion (except maybe Islam) they wouldn’t have cared. I could have become Catholic and they wouldn’t have been overly happy but they wouldn’t have practically disowned me like they have since I told them I didn’t believe in god. Its like I’m a lepper or something . That seems to be the conception of a lot of familys as well. My room mate came out to her family a couple weeks ago and since then they’ve completely removed all the support they’d been giving and even went so far as to turn off her cell phone service. I was chatting with my best friend’s dad last summer shortly after my friend had come out the closet about his homosexuality. My friends dad made the comment “Well, at least he’s not an Atheist…I couldn’t deal with that” . I have another friend as well who is deathly afraid of his family finding out hes just agnostic…he wasn’t afraid of them finding out he’s gay but he knows there would be major problems if they found out about his agnosticism.

Like many atheists I’ve been discriminated against because of my religion by people other than family. I’ve lost “friends” because of it and those were all messy partings. Last year I was denied a spot in the student government at MSU because my interviewer was part of the Jewish student union and I had listed “Freethinker’s Alliance” on my activities list on my application. Of course that wasn’t the official reason but when my best buddy, who was in the student government, talked him about it he said “I don’t want any atheists or agnostics in this organization”. Yeah, atheists aren’t targeted…right

 

[fnr]

The victimhood you have expressed is laughable. I’m sorry if I don’t sound sympathetic, but everyone has to deal with people questioning their beliefs in a negative manner somewhere in their life - religious affiliation, political affiliation, etc.

BANG! Right there! That’s it… the core of the attitude expressed by Catholic, Protestant, Atheist, Muslim, Hindu, and every other type of ideologue unwilling to see the world through others’ eyes. I don’t agree with atheist reasoning, but I can’t deny that what they felt isn’t real.

There’s nothing wrong with attacking someone’s opinion or position, but it’s entirely different from attacking someone because they hold that belief. I relish debating deeply contentious topics with people of all sorts, but I don’t undercut those who disagree with me. Such behavior is that to which our atheist co-discussant is referring.

As much as we disagree with them, atheists are our neighbors. Hurt done to them (not simple “offense”) is real if it affects their well-being, and we need to acknowledge that.

I started this thread out of concern about the stereotyping of theists by Richard Dawkins. I didn’t expect it to turn into a complaint about the way that fellow Catholics treat atheists.

Get over it. As the only Catholic and only conservative Republican in my family, I have plenty of heated exchanges with my family (the political ones are far worse). Big deal.

You can’t know what this person has experienced. Your experiences are not generalizable.

 

[rlg94086]

Calm down fnr. He described what he has gone through…taunting, ostracized by family members. I was never taunted when I was an atheist, but I have been taunted as a “theist.” It happens to many, many people. I have been prosletized both when I was an atheist and as a Catholic. If he wants to be a victim, that’s up to him. For me, I think any of us - Catholic, Protestant, etc. - that complain that we are being victimized by someone prosletizing or calling us names are overstating the seriousness of our experience, especially in the USA. We have freedom of religion here, that many in the world do not have. In those countries, they experience* real* victimization.

Unless, as Nepenthe experienced, you have been kept from having or fired from a job (should be taken to court IMO), then you haven’t experienced anything different than most of us have gone through with family situations for a variety of reasons - weight, politics, religion, looks, etc.

And, yes it’s a core attitude to tell someone to buck up. I am a sympathetic person, but giving sympathy in every situation is not necessarily the best thing. Feeding victimhood encourages that persons feelings that they are being picked on and mistreated, when they may be better served to have a stronger attitude.

Pax,
Robert

BANG! Right there! That’s it… the core of the attitude expressed by Catholic, Protestant, Atheist, Muslim, Hindu, and every other type of ideologue unwilling to see the world through others’ eyes. I don’t agree with atheist reasoning, but I can’t deny that what they felt isn’t real.

There’s nothing wrong with attacking someone’s opinion or position, but it’s entirely different from attacking someone because they hold that belief. I relish debating deeply contentious topics with people of all sorts, but I don’t undercut those who disagree with me. Such behavior is that to which our atheist co-discussant is referring.

As much as we disagree with them, atheists are our neighbors. Hurt done to them (not simple “offense”) is real if it affects their well-being, and we need to acknowledge that.

I started this thread out of concern about the stereotyping of theists by Richard Dawkins. I didn’t expect it to turn into a complaint about the way that fellow Catholics treat atheists.

You can’t know what this person has experienced. Your experiences are not generalizable.

 

[GuanYuWarGod]

I think it’s important to characterize Dawkins’ arguments properly, lest we ourselves respond uncritically to a “straw man argument.” They are in fact not a mere characterization of a theist stereotype, but a compilation of arguments that skeptics throughout history have used in arguing against God. I should note that I’ve not read The God Delusion, but I’ve listened to numerous podcast interviews with Dawkins and have watched his Q&A/Debate with British professor of historical theology Allistor McGrath on Google Video. I also should note that aside from the content of his argument, some of his statements in interviews have seemed to steotype theists as easily cowed self-deluding simps. That’s to what I most seriously object.

As I understand it, here are his main arguments:
(1) Science, as we understand it, does not require a God to explain the observed universe.
(2) The problem of evil. Why do evils such as natural disaster exist? Why does one person survive such an event, while many die? Why are there diseases such as cancer in two-year old children?
(3) The historicity of various religions’ claims. Namely, that there is little historical evidence to back the factual claims of any one religion, including the Resurrection of Christ (in Christianity), the appearance of Gabriel to Muhammad (in Islam), and/or the appearance of Krishna to Arjuna before battle (in Hinduism).

I think each of these points is easily addressed, but not too easily. Many of the “stock” answers from theists are all too “pat.” For instance, one historical answer to the problem of evil is that it’s God’s will that one person lives while 10,000 die. Sure, it could be true, but it’s awfully cold and arbitrary. Another, a Christian response, is that death came into the world with the “Sin of Adam” (never mind Eve of course, though she was first to sin), so all such disasters are the result of this original sin. I find that also thin. There’s plenty of evidence of death among non-human animals before the emergence of Homo sapiens sapeins, and it’s not at all clear that there was an actual Adam and Eve in the “historical person” sense of the word.

However, many natural disasters take lives on account of human choice and hubris, not the actual meteorological or geological phenomena. New Orleans, for instance, was such a disaster more due to the excessive confidence in city planners in 1950s engineering, the overconfidence (i.e. pride) in evacuation and shelter plans, the failure to educate its residents on the risks of Katrina, and the unwillingness of decision makers to listen to expert recommendations who warned of such disasters years before it happened, than to the occurence of a Class 4 hurricane per se. The earthquake in northern Pakistan, which claimed so many lives, can be thought of as a failure of development, and of “donor fatigue” setting in concurrently with the Himalayan winter.

But childhood cancer? Failure to thrive among infants? Truly not easy to answer. I think epidemiologic data can tell us more about how our actions affect our childrens’ health, but some diseases are truly genetic. Hard to blame people for that one, unless you are willing to say that those with genetic illnesses shouldn’t breed. That’s a pretty monstrous line.

Hmmm… I see now where his basis lies. Yet still, he commits the mistake of underestimating his opponents. If one should win the battle against Dawkins, I say that we “feed” theists to him. Overconfidence has proven to destroy a sane man’s rational thinking. Feed him more pawns then kick him when he’s fat and can’t get up.

Yet has for the problem of evil. The problem here is that many Christians act defensively on it. Many fail to see that it itself is an indirect proof of God’s all providence. Some wise philosophers have seen the flaw in using the problem of evil as an attack against God, but fail to maximize its true potential as an indirect means to contradict emotional atheism (belief of a non existence of God due to presence of evil). I won’t criticize them here. The essence of the idea of an all provident God in the midst of evil is easy to pick up once one if one has meditated on the subject for years. Unfortunately, however wise some men are, they fail to put this essence of thought in words. Thus the problem of evil should be used as an offensive against it not be used to corner and entrap thyself. A thorough understanding of metaphysics may eliminate many problems, I hint.

Then again, no offense, but the reality is that many Christians are dullards at theology & philosophy, main sciences in tackling the faith. All the more reason why I think apologetics classes should be required (and not just that but ENFORCED) in Catholic schools.