News Richard Dawkins would have an Aneurysm

[Cyrus]

Steve Irwin was a zoologist, too.

That doesn't answer my question.

 

[bleedblue1234]

Evolution or Evolutionary Biology - the study of the origin and decent of species over time


Zoology - the study of animals, including classification, physiology, development, and behavior (See also Entomology, Ethology, Herpetology, Ichthyology, Mammology, and Ornithology)


cut from wiki

 

[Cyrus]

Evolution or Evolutionary Biology - the study of the origin and decent of species over timeZoology - the study of animals, including classification, physiology, development, and behavior (See also Entomology, Ethology, Herpetology, Ichthyology, Mammology, and Ornithology)cut from wiki

Sorry, I don't want wiki definitions. Anyways, who cares its off topic and not important. I'll look it up myself later.

 

[Proton Soup]

That doesn't answer my question.

maybe not, but I've got more questions.

anyone got a link to Dawkins' peer-reviewed research articles?

 

[Pupil]

maybe not, but I've got more questions.

anyone got a link to Dawkins' peer-reviewed research articles?

You might try Wikipedia for that sort of thing. Perhaps you can elaborate on how this relates to the discussion the OP brought up.

 

[Proton Soup]

You might try Wikipedia for that sort of thing. Perhaps you can elaborate on how this relates to the discussion the OP brought up.

yeah, i don't see anything beyond his work as a research assistant in grad school and his phd work. it relates to his credentials as a scientist, as opposed to say someone qualified to write articles for Popular Science.

 

[Pupil]

yeah, i don't see anything beyond his work as a research assistant in grad school and his phd work. it relates to his credentials as a scientist, as opposed to say someone qualified to write articles for Popular Science.

How do his credentials (or lack of) have anything to do with his opinion on teaching religion at an early age being child abuse? Is this an opinion a non-scientist can't hold?

 

[Proton Soup]

How do his credentials (or lack of) have anything to do with his opinion on teaching religion at an early age being child abuse? Is this an opinion a non-scientist can't hold?

thank you. so we agree that Dawkins is no different than a layperson.


as for the OP, and the OP's views on religion as child abuse, well, i would simply point to those societies that tried to squash religion in the previous century and killed tens of millions of people in the process. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, these are the fruits of intolerant societies that decided to destroy their local religion and culture.

in fact, attempting to undermine the social fabric of a religious group is a tool of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide" .

...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

– Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article II

 

[Cyrus]

i would simply point to those societies that tried to squash religion in the previous century and killed tens of millions of people in the process. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, these are the fruits of intolerant societies that decided to destroy their local religion and culture.

in fact, attempting to undermine the social fabric of a religious group is a tool of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide" .

This is a tired, disparate argument. I hope you have more to offer than this.

 

[Proton Soup]

This is a tired, disparate argument. I hope you have more to offer than this.

history is on my side.

 

[Pupil]

history is on my side.

If you don't see the fallacy of that argument then ignorance is the only thing on your side.

And we don't agree Dawkins is a lay person. Again, go to Wikipedia or read his biography on a website. He is a credentialed scientist. The point I was making was that there are no scientific appeals to authority on this subject of religion being child abuse, so even if he wasn't credentialed, it wouldn't matter. Apparently you didn't see that.

 

[Cyrus]

history is on my side.

One liners don't work on me, sorry. I require well thought out responses with sources.

Note, you don't even address the issue I raised with your post: how convenient.

What's worse, your link to secularism as 'genocide' is dishonest and should get you a warning. You are misquoting that out of context. Please remove it, or I'll warn your post.

 

[Proton Soup]

One liners don't work on me, sorry. I require well thought out responses with sources.

Note, you don't even address the issue I raised with your post: how convenient.

What's worse, your link to secularism as 'genocide' is dishonest and should get you a warning. You are misquoting that out of context. Please remove it, or I'll warn your post.

warn me, helper. there's nothing dishonest about it. it's an attempt to destroy religious groups.

 

[Cyrus]

warn me, helper. there's nothing dishonest about it. it's an attempt to destroy religious groups.

I have reported it and asked it be taken down. It is dishonest because no one is arguing to change conditions of life of religious people in the context that you have quoted.

Please explain why you think what you quoted in bold is fair, and relevant.

 

[Proton Soup]

I have reported it and asked it be taken down. It is dishonest because no one is arguing to change conditions of life of religious people in the context that you have quoted.

Please explain why you think what you quoted in bold is fair, and relevant.

you're kidding, right? you think accusing parents teaching their own religion to their own children of child abuse and wanting to stop it (implies government intervention) is not an assault on a religious group? do you seriously not understand how culture works? are you completely unaware of human behaviour?

 

[Cyrus]

you're kidding, right? you think accusing parents teaching their own religion to their own children of child abuse and wanting to stop it (implies government intervention) is not an assault on a religious group? do you seriously not understand how culture works? are you completely unaware of human behaviour?

I never used the word child abuse, so I don't know why you are saying I did. The OP used those words, if you have a problem with his wording, I suggest you take it up with him and not me.

I am arguing that legal adults have the right to follow whatever religion they choose. Children should not be force fed religion down their throats.

I'm pretty sure I know how culture and human behavior works, but thank's for asking.

 

[Proton Soup]

I never used the word child abuse, so I don't know why you are saying I did. The OP used those words, if you have a problem with his wording, I suggest you take it up with him and not me.

I am arguing that legal adults have the right to follow whatever religion they choose. Children should not be force fed religion down their throats.

I'm pretty sure I know how culture and human behavior works, but thank's for asking.

OK, it's fine that you believe that. But I happen to believe that attempting to interfere with parents' religious instruction of their children is a violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. I know the word "genocide" is an emotional term for most people, but if you actually look at the definition you'll see that it is much broader than the popular concept of extermination. check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Problem_from_Hell:_America_and_the_Age_of_Genocide" for a little background.

 

[Cyrus]

OK, it's fine that you believe that. But I happen to believe that attempting to interfere with parents' religious instruction of their children is a violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. I know the word "genocide" is an emotional term for most people, but if you actually look at the definition you'll see that it is much broader than the popular concept of extermination. check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Problem_from_Hell:_America_and_the_Age_of_Genocide" for a little background.

You have not provided any evidence what-so-ever that suggest any of the criteria of genocide have been met in any of your posts.

 

[Proton Soup]

You have not provided any evidence what-so-ever that suggest any of the criteria of genocide have been met in any of your posts.

that you are uneducated is not my problem. do a little reading on the subject. understand what it is and why it is.

 

[russ_watters]

This thread was pretty useless from the start and the quality of discussion hasn't risen much (if any) above the absurd and pointless. Locked pending moderation.