By Manila Ryce
Published Friday, May 4th, 2007, 3:37 am
Filed under: Videos: Political, World: Europe, Society/Culture: Religion, World Issues, Videos, Society/Culture, US Politics

19 Responses to “The Colbert Report – The Dogma of Anti-Vangelicalism”

1. I’m European and I’m one of the people who wish that religion goes where it belongs: to the dung heap of history. But don’t feel threatened: we’re not going to “fight” religious people, we just wait until they reap their Darwin Awards.

   Fina
   05/4/07 at 2:13 pm
   
2. 

   I don’t think anyone’s threatened; just amused at the hypocrisy of intolerance. If, as a Christian, I were to say Islam belonged in the “dung heap of history” I’d be considered a bigot. It’s much better to learn to respect each other than to wait for the day when you don’t have to.

   Manila Ryce
   05/4/07 at 4:58 pm
   

3. A moderate is a person who listens to all sides all is willing to adopt the good points that each makes.

   An atheist listens to the reasons Christians give for why the Muslims are wrong and concludes that they make good points with which they can agree. The atheist then listens to the reasons Muslims give for why the Christians are wrong and concludes that they make good points as well with which they can also agree. And so on with the other religions. That is to say, the atheist is willing to listen to all sides and accept the valid points that each makes, and so is by definition a moderate.

   And I doubt many atheists would support the whole “final battle” notion. I, for one, see religion as something that humanity will just naturally outgrow as time passes. If you check the polls on secularism over the last 100 years, you’d be hard pressed to disagree.

   Miko
   05/4/07 at 8:28 pm
   
4. 

   @Miko
   I’m all for secularism, as it asserts a separation between church and state while giving everyone the freedom of religion. I’ve had conversations with so-called liberals who strongly believe that religion ought to be outlawed entirely. These people are in the minority of atheists of course, but are hardly moderates. The generalization that atheists are moderates while people of faith are not is a rather misinformed point of view. Many moderates now and throughout history have been people of faith. Colbert himself is one example. Atheists do not have a monopoly on that.

   As far as humankind “outgrowing” religion, I do respectfully disagree. While atheism is certainly gaining ground in the West, the West is also declining in population. Western countries are becoming repopulated with immigrants who most often belong to one faith or another. In Europe it’s Islam. In the US it’s Catholicism.

   Manila Ryce
   05/4/07 at 9:01 pm
   

5. religion is for morons.

   Lou
   05/4/07 at 9:33 pm
   

6. Faith: the intentional disregard of truth, logic and reason for the financial benefit of those who preach it.

   Being tolerant of religion is like being tolerant of Harvey the giant rabbit.

   congressive
   05/4/07 at 9:42 pm
   
7. 

   @Lou and congressive
   I’d like to thank you both for further proving my point. We can debate and respectfully disagree, but name-calling and outright dismissal is not constructive.

   Manila Ryce
   05/4/07 at 9:52 pm
   
8. 

   That is so fucking stupid. Organizing into a giant belief system NOT what atheism is about? I mean, it is completely against the point!
   “Us vs Them,” yeah, because historically that shit has always led humanity down the right path, you fuckers.

   Welcome to the Idiocracy, people. Break out the beer.

   PapaFigue
   05/5/07 at 9:49 am
   

9. People need to watch out for the sneaky frame that religious extremists are pushing.
   Secularism is NOT Atheism, Agnosticism, or anything similar. Secular is all things that are not Religion, and do not and should not have anything to do with religion, while Atheism is clearly a theological statement.

   A chess game is not religious (despite the bishops). One can be a fanatic, or moderate, in any religion, or no religion, it is irrelevant to the exercise. The same can be said of most human enterprises. It may educate personal preference, like the orientation of a house, or what rooms to build, but for almost everyone housebuilding has no part in Religion, and is therefore Secular.

   Religious extremists do not see any activity as secular, and see any secular activity as the work of their particular Evil or Devil or whatever, and therefore any act the does not include their Religion as actively excluding it. When those not Religious Fanatics conflate Secular with Atheism, they play into this frame and assist the Fanatic.

   This distinction becomes most critical when talking about Government, and what it says and does. Religious extremists most want a Theocracy, and in the Image of their Religion. Most people ( in the US anyway) are in fact secular in that religion has little part of their lives, but for better or worse, they are not Atheist. If the subject comes up they align with the name, if not the policies, promoted by the extremist, and can be manipulated because they think the extremist is just better at their religion than they are, and thus if the extremist can paint Secular as Atheist, he can make most secular people support the arrival of his Theocracy, at least until they cannot oppose it.

   FreeDem
   05/5/07 at 10:41 am
   
10. 

    @FreeDem
    There’s nothing in your comment that I disagree with, but you initially won my heart with this brilliant line:

    “A chess game is not religious (despite the bishops)”

    Manila Ryce
    05/5/07 at 3:27 pm
    
11. 

    Atheists united to scientifically or logically disprove God is as ridiculous as Religious Fundies getting together to disprove Evolution and Geologic Time.
    Both sides are a Fish lecturing a Chicken about the proper way to eat corn.

    Listen up, religious wackjobs, there was a time in our history when Religion did rule society. It’s called the Dark Ages. You had your shot, you don’t get another.

    And you, United fucking Atheists, you’re no better. Not only do you dedicate all your time and energy to scientifically disprove something that is untestable, (and therefore not scientific at all), but you are ruled by the same idiocy as the religiosos; that religion equals God, that the bible is about literal truth, and that Faith and Belief are as identical as secularism and atheism, (thank you FreeDem). Never before have people been so wrong about so much and Not been Ann Coulter. On the other hand, you get Sundays off.

    Look, you can believe or not believe in anything you want to. But don’t think that makes you any kind of expert on that which is, by nature, outside the realm of human understanding. It really just looks bad.

    PapaFigue
    05/5/07 at 6:20 pm
    

12. Atheists are a bit of a misunderstood lot. Maybe we should have National Atheist Month. People could learn all about Athists, that they are not really bad people. You might even let your daughter marry one, or you could let her marry Osama Bin Laden. After all, he believes in the same God every Christian does.

    Mark Duwe
    05/5/07 at 11:13 pm
    

13. The central question is this: There are people who do not, and never will, agree with you. Do you have a problem with that? If so, you have a problem that will never go away.

    I’m all for a secular society because it is a condition for freedom of religion. I can see no reason to object to anyone’s beliefs. People will believe in the weirdest things. They will believe in reason, even, invalidating reason itself in the process. And fuss with people who believe in different weird things.

    Then again, some of us come to a point where they see for themselves that they might as well start making sense.

    Frank Willemsen
    05/6/07 at 2:52 am
    

14. I’m sure that religious people understand that the problem atheists have with religion is the unwanted role religion plays in atheists’ lives and in the political world. Atheists don’t much care what deity other people revere; they simply don’t want to be subject to that relationship and, unfortunately, we are.

    Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD
    05/6/07 at 7:47 am
    

15. @Dr. Knowitall:

    Brilliantly put! Here, here.

    nearing
    05/7/07 at 9:11 am
    
16. 

    Look guys, the points you are making are valid, but they’re not what the blog was about. We’re not talking about who’s right or whether or not atheism and religion are ‘ok.’
    We’re talking about the phenomenon that there are now international atheist organizations, complete with communal systemization and even weekly sermons. Atheism is essentially becoming the demon it’s fighting against; it’s becoming Hypocrisy.
    Maybe it’s just me, but I always thought this was against the point. Am I being unreasonable?

    PapaFigue
    05/7/07 at 12:30 pm
    
17. 

    I think it is about time atheism grew up, though there are many atheistic religions to choose from, there is not a need to pick one and fight about it. Perhaps instead of dividing we blur them all and advance those things that work.

    Currently all existing religions are based on other places and cultures, all with technologies and cultures quite alien to American Freedom and Democracy. Perhaps we could have a cult of intellectual pursuit, that celebrates a diversity of opinions and demagogues peace.

    Freedem
    05/23/07 at 9:36 pm
    

18. PapaFigue I beleive that there is a distinction between an atheist and someone who is irreligious. There is nothing hypocritical about the idea of an atheist church, as odd as that sounds, as long everybody in it beleives there is no god. It is the irreligious person, not the atheist, who would be a hypocrite if they started such an organization. While many atheists are irreligious and many irreligious people are atheists, one does not imply the other.

    religious atheist
    05/29/07 at 10:00 am
    

19. violent atheism will become just as dogmatic as fundamental religion, especially if atheism prevails against theists, in which case you’ll have atheists who don’t know jack squat about atheism, and simply going with the flow, something similar to the asch conformity principle…i think its needless to say that in the society we are in now there will always be people who will use isms as security blankets in terms of afterlife promises, or just to reap social benefits. the first step to getting theists to accept the atheist argument, is to raise educational norms in hope that the future generations will be able to understand. if you look at past generations, you can see that it was almost an ultimatum that God existed, and rarely anyone ever advocated atheism(and even rarer was this advocation deemed authentic and not ludicrous), only recently atheists have come out, voicing their opinions. Besides, these new atheists are self professed, they figured out they were atheists on their own, they didn’t have the support of books and the media to instill ideas…simply put, they developed all these ideas on their own, and surely afterwards, the %age of atheists skyrocketed…so one can only imagine that there will be more atheists in the future, since now many more sources are available, and its become at least a little more acceptable to publicly announce professed atheism. you can easily trace the increase in atheists to a higher standard of education, therefor why advocate a final war between atheists and theists, when you can gradually destroy the idea through knowledge and non violence? considering the highly unlikely probability that the atheists of the world will unite and destroy the theists, you will still have the same problem the Pagans posed to the Christians in Constantine’s time…war will let you control territories, not minds. people will end up believing what they want because that is the concept they can best grasp(even if it is highly unintelligent), and if atheism will enforce its philosophy(which no doubt it will since it will have the audacity to wage a global war), then atheism would have become just as spiteful, ambiguous, and delusional as Christianity, and history will repeat itself with the atheists being thought of as the suppressors and irrationals. war will get us nowhere. Why wage wars on the concept of who thinks the right way anyways? its like saying i think I’m more right then you so the only logical solution that i can come up with is to take out my sword and challenge you to a duel…its completely irrelevant to your being right or wrong, and it is about the same thing a haughty, selfish brat does when he doesn’t get his way

    alex
    07/5/08 at 10:12 pm
    

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Tired of filing this information out everytime you leave a comment at the Largest Minority? Why not register as a user? You also get full access to our forum!

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>