Richard Dawkins' Speech at Protest the Pope March

[Gift_from_God]

I find it hilarious he wants to arrest the Pope for crimes against humanity because sex abuse in schools are most likely worse and a lot of principals (not all of them, obviously) cover it up and sweep it under the rug. Why doesn’t Dawkins focus on that instead? Why doesn’t he call for the arrest for these school officials

 

[JackVk]

I find it hilarious he wants to arrest the Pope for crimes against humanity because sex abuse in schools are most likely worse and a lot of principals (not all of them, obviously) cover it up and sweep it under the rug. Why doesn’t Dawkins focus on that instead? Why doesn’t he call for the arrest for these school officials

He’s anti-religion and anti-love. He worships himself, like every other atheist. He is right in his own eyes. Read my earlier post. He claims that all morals are relative, then he claims moral superiority over the Pope. He contradicts himself.

Since he’s a professor, I assume he teaches college classes. If you were to cheat on a test in his class, then he would suddenly chew you out and start talking like a Christian. The atheist-naturalist worldview doesn’t fly when you add the human experience to it.

 

[Santi2]

There is an ongoing discussion about the speach in the Guardian just now - pop over and add your tuppence worth. Richard Dawkins has had to jump in and try and defend himself a couple of times and each time has dug himself into more of a hole:

guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/22/ratzinger-enemy-humanity?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

One of those who commented provided a link to a parody of Dawkins when he discovered he cannot arrest the Holy Father.

youtube.com/watch?v=5spUtCNpLbQ

 

[SunnaB16]

Good show.

Dawkins desperately needs a more trustworthy spiritual advisor!

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

He’s anti-religion and anti-love. He worships himself, like every other atheist. He is right in his own eyes. Read my earlier post. He claims that all morals are relative, then he claims moral superiority over the Pope. He contradicts himself.

Since he’s a professor, I assume he teaches college classes. If you were to cheat on a test in his class, then he would suddenly chew you out and start talking like a Christian. The atheist-naturalist worldview doesn’t fly when you add the human experience to it.

He also just wants a constant, heaping dose of publicity for himself and his cause.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Dawkins desperately needs a more trustworthy spiritual advisor!

Maybe Corapi?:yup:

Fr. Benedict Groeschel?

Fr. Mitch Pacqua?

 

[ukchristian28]

Has Catholic Answers given a response to his speech?

 

[JackVk]

Has Catholic Answers given a response to his speech?

I don’t know about that specific speech, but Patrick Madrid and Kenneth Hensley wrote a book called The Godless Delusion. Dawkins has found out about it, since it was mentioned on his website. He was not happy

 

[Mike5575]

Fundamentalist Atheism. I truly am suprised this man is even a scientist. He needs our prayers.

 

[StrawberryJam]

No one here is addressing this as an apologist would.

I have not seen a single post here that actually is fair or unbiased. No one is addressing his concerns with the school system as it is, and why he wishes to rectify a wrong that has been going on for too long.
Personal attacks against him are not convincing.

 

[StevenFrancis]

Hi Steve,

Even people who have been Catholics from a young age get curious about the other ideas that are out there. Like, why is Richard Dawkins so motivated to be against God and the Catholic Church? He has a following but I don’t know how big it is. He’s written books and appeared on TV so he is a bit of a point man for the cause.

You mentioned your own struggles and thoughts about others. Here’s Father Corapi’s conversion story. I hope you find it inspiring.

4marks.com/videos/details.html?video_id=876

God bless,
Ed

I know what you’re saying. We all go in many directions and have many curiosities. I’ve even followed many of them in my life. I’m 53, and have only been Catholic for about 4 years. But it was a consuming fire. My old self simply died and fell away. My need to search anywhere else, etc., all gone. You want so badly to save others the struggle of getting here. But, I think the struggle may be nearly as important as the eventual discovery.

I like Fr. Corapi a great deal and watch him every week. I’ve picked out little pieces of his conversion story from his homilies, but this is great!

Thanks,

and God bless,

Steven

 

[strangevictory]

No one here is addressing this as an apologist would.

I have not seen a single post here that actually is fair or unbiased.

Hi StrawberryJam,

I agree with you to a point, but having spent far longer than is healthy on forums like the Guardian’s and Richard Dawkins’ own website, there’s no comparison. I think you’ll find people there are much, much less interested in being fair and unbiased. As a historian this is clear to me in the sources people choose to harvest from Google searches to back up their opinions. I’d include RD’s speech in this as his concept of history is opportunistic: if it damages Christianity, learn it and tell others about it.

There doesn’t seem to be much point having discussions in an air of hatred when people are so committed to their position they’re clear they won’t change their mind.

 

[Windfish]

I would watch the video and seriously attempt to dismantle his points, but just the sight of Dawkins makes me cringe. I am not kidding.

 

[SunnaB16]

I would watch the video and seriously attempt to dismantle his points, but just the sight of Dawkins makes me cringe. I am not kidding.

Most of it is a pack of lies, cheered on by a mob of dopey bigots. Mark Antony would have been ashamed of Dawkin`s performance.

You`re doing your blood pressure a favour by not watching it.

 

[markomalley]

No one here is addressing this as an apologist would.

I have not seen a single post here that actually is fair or unbiased. No one is addressing his concerns with the school system as it is, and why he wishes to rectify a wrong that has been going on for too long.
Personal attacks against him are not convincing.

This is not the “apologetics” section of Cathoic Answers Forums.

This is the Catholic News forum: where news stories relating to the Catholic Church are discussed. What you are observing here is discussion, not apologetics. It is, in fact, entirely appropriate for this forum of the board. The only thing that is wrong is that the OP did not link a hard news story in his initial post, rather only linking a YouTube video (but it appears that so far the moderator is cutting some slack for this thread).

If you would like to have somebody address any issue that Mr. Dawkins brought up, I would address that you post Dawkins’ hypothesis regarding a particular issue in the appropriate section of the apologetics forum on this board.

(BTW, since when is it an apologist’s function to be *un-*biased? Apologetics is, after all, a branch of theology devoted to the defense of the divine origin and authority of Catholicism. By its very nature, it will be biased toward Catholicism, not neutral between Catholicism and Atheism)

 

[ukchristian28]

I am planning to make a Youtube video responding to him. I am not a Roman Catholic, but he says some really silly things which I don’t think should go unchallenged. I am actually quite surprised that no one else seems to have made a proper response to him already.

I would appreciate any insights anyone can offer me on this. I particularly appreciate the if people could direct me to the following:

(i) Some information regarding Roman Catholic positions on whether Adam was a literal person. Dawkins makes the sweeping statement that Catholics admit that Adam never actually existed. I suspect that there is diversity of opinion within Roman Catholicism on this issue.

(ii) Roman Catholic position on faith and reason (although I am probably going to use Thomas Aquinas for this).

Regards,

Jason

 

[StrawberryJam]

I am planning to make a Youtube video responding to him. I am not a Roman Catholic, but he says some really silly things which I don’t think should go unchallenged. I am actually quite surprised that no one else seems to have made a proper response to him already.

I would appreciate any insights anyone can offer me on this. I particularly appreciate the if people could direct me to the following:

(i) Some information regarding Roman Catholic positions on whether Adam was a literal person. Dawkins makes the sweeping statement that Catholics admit that Adam never actually existed. I suspect that there is diversity of opinion within Roman Catholicism on this issue.

(ii) Roman Catholic position on faith and reason (although I am probably going to use Thomas Aquinas for this).

Regards,

Jason

I’m guessing you also must post in apologetics to get any kind of “answers” here.

 

[strangevictory]

I am planning to make a Youtube video responding to him. I am not a Roman Catholic, but he says some really silly things which I don’t think should go unchallenged. I am actually quite surprised that no one else seems to have made a proper response to him already.

I would appreciate any insights anyone can offer me on this.

Hi Jason,

Good luck with your youtube video. I think Prof. Dawkins gets away with spouting far too many silly things, because he’s effectively a “faith leader” these days…

I can’t help you much, but:

• RD has made a new career out of making misjudged sweeping statements about things outside his sphere of expertise (The God Delusion a case in point).
• even in RD’s former career as a popular biologist, his dogmatism has made people uncomfortable - I’d recommend Fern Elsdon-Baker’s book ‘The Selfish Genius’ to anyone interested in biology for an insight into how RD has “rewritten Darwin’s legacy”. She is an atheist so this is not religiously motivated:

fernelsdonbaker.org.uk

 

[StrawberryJam]

Hi Jason,

Good luck with your youtube video. I think Prof. Dawkins gets away with spouting far too many silly things, because he’s effectively a “faith leader” these days…

I can’t help you much, but:

• RD has made a new career out of making misjudged sweeping statements about things outside his sphere of expertise (The God Delusion a case in point).
• even in RD’s former career as a popular biologist, his dogmatism has made people uncomfortable - I’d recommend Fern Elsdon-Baker’s book ‘The Selfish Genius’ to anyone interested in biology for an insight into how RD has “rewritten Darwin’s legacy”. She is an atheist so this is not religiously motivated:

fernelsdonbaker.org.uk

Which statements did he make that were misjudged or sweeping outside of his area of expertise? What area of expertise does a layperson have?
What reasons do you have for reccomending the book you have?
Richard Dawkins is not “a popular biologist” but a biologist that has credentials one should take seriously.
Popularity has nothing to do with credentials.
Popes have had both popularity and credentials in their areas of expertise.
So, it is not a bad thing to have both. Stop trying to discedit the man without a reason to.

 

[markomalley]

Which statements did he make that were misjudged or sweeping outside of his area of expertise? What area of expertise does a layperson have?
What reasons do you have for reccomending the book you have?
Richard Dawkins is not “a popular biologist” but a biologist that has credentials one should take seriously.
Popularity has nothing to do with credentials.
Popes have had both popularity and credentials in their areas of expertise.
So, it is not a bad thing to have both. Stop trying to discedit the man without a reason to.

Are we engaging in a little argumentum ad verecundiam here?

Richard Dawkins is, as you say, a biologist. He is not a theologian. He is not an attorney (either secular or canon). He is not even a sociologist. His opinions on matters of faith and morals and his comments on the state of the Catholic Church carry as much weight as mine, an anonymous commenter on an Internet message board.