Jesus, please, someone pay me for this shit already. Cleaning up the garbage from religiously afflicted folks who somehow get to publish at outlets like The Punch is fast becoming a full time job ! Case in point.
A religious fool named Roy Williams starts his ill-conceived article like this :
One of the ugliest aspects of the culture wars is dogmatism, the inability of either side to respect the other’s point of view.
Seriously. This is not difficult, just google the fucking word if you’re not sure what it means. Here, a definition of dogmatism :
dogmatism
1. a statement of a point of view as if it were an established fact.
2. the use of a system of ideas based upon insufficiently examined premises. — dogmatist, n. — dogmatic, adj.
Dogmatism has fuckall nothing to do with not “respecting” other points of view. It’s about insisting on something to be real or true without supporting evidence. And it sure goes downhill from there in this ridiculous piece.
It’s fine to be passionate about your belief (or unbelief). But it’s wrong to demonise dissenters.
Define “demonise”. Or did you really mean “disagree with” ? Because I suspect you did, and that would make you a lying tone troll. Now there’s a surprise.
There’s far too much preaching to the converted nowadays. By self-righteous Christians in half-empty churches. By smug atheists at love-in writers’ festivals. These proselytisers need to mix in the wider world and expose their views to more critical scrutiny.
What makes atheists “smug” in this dimwit’s mind , I wonder ? Asking for evidence for claims of the existence of supernatural beings ? And I would love to attend a “love-in writers festival”, where are they held, pray tell ?
Bombastic atheists puzzle me. How can they be so sure of themselves? At the very least, the theistic worldview is reasonably open. Are atheists who invoke the crude straw man arguments of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens really taken in? Or is it a pose?
Bombastic, sure. Now, what are these straw man arguments of Dawkins and Hitchens again ? Remind me Roy, since you didn’t mention them in your article.
The vast majority of people throughout human history have held religious beliefs. That is still the case today, even in the West.
Surely the most pathetic non sequitur and ad populum argument ever made. (Hint: what if they were wrong all this time, should we go on believing the crap just because it was popular in some circles in the last 5000 years ?)
Christians today argue bitterly amongst themselves about myriad issues pertaining to Jesus, from the purpose of the Incarnation on down. Some go as far as challenging the physical reality of the Resurrection; others focus on narrower questions. Would Jesus have approved of capital punishment, say, or gay marriage?
Such questions are interesting, but they tend to elicit wildly divergent answers.
What all Christians can and do agree upon is that Jesus was not merely a gifted man – He was, in some amazing sense, divine.
Shorter Roy Williams :
I have a right to hang on to my delusions, rationalise them anyway I like, and publish the whole pileup at The Punch if they let me.
