XPost: alt.philosophy.zen, alt.society.liberalism, alt.society.kindness   
   XPost: talk.politics.theory   
   From: chanfu@gmail.com   
      
   Hollywood Lee wrote:   
   > Déjà Fu wrote:   
   >   
   >> ps:   
   >> In our laboratory experiments, our staff has found   
   >> that the KJV Bible, the Quoran and the Book of Mormon   
   >> produce virtually the same BTU/hr of heat in a modern,   
   >> high-efficiency stove. The Torah lags by nearly 40%   
   >> and is not generally available in motel rooms.   
   >>   
   >> (sorry, Lee - allah made me do it...:)   
   >   
   > I like Richard Dawkins' (author of the God Delusion among others) take   
   > on religion:   
   >   
   > --------   
   >   
   > http://www.wpr.org/book/dawkins.html   
   >   
   > Richard Dawkins talked with Steve Paulson about the dangers of   
   > unquestioned faith and why he thinks atheists are among the most   
   > intelligent people.  An excerpt follows:   
   >   
   > . . . .   
   >   
   > Q: My sense is that you don't just think religion is dishonest. There's   
   > something evil about it as well.   
   >   
   > A: Well, yes. I think there's something very evil about faith, where   
   > faith means believing in something in the absence of evidence, and   
   > actually taking pride in believing in something in the absence of   
   > evidence. And the reason that's dangerous is that it justifies   
   > essentially anything. If you're taught in your holy book or by your   
   > priest that blasphemers should die or apostates should die -- anybody   
   > who once believed in the religion and no longer does needs to be killed   
   > -- that clearly is evil. And people don't have to justify it because   
   > it's their faith. They don't have to say, "Well, here's a very good   
   > reason for this." All they need to say is, "That's what my faith says."   
   > And we're all expected to back off and respect that. Whether or not   
   > we're actually faithful ourselves, we've been brought up to respect   
   > faith and to regard it as something that should not be challenged. And   
   > that can have extremely evil consequences. The consequences it's had   
   > historically -- the Crusades, the Inquisition, right up to the present   
   > time where you have suicide bombers and people flying planes into   
   > skyscrapers in New York -- all in the name of faith.   
   >   
   > Q: But don't you need to distinguish between religious extremists who   
   > kill people and moderate, peaceful religious believers?   
   >   
   > A: You certainly need to distinguish them. They are very different.   
   > However, the moderate, sensible religious people you've cited make the   
   > world safe for the extremists by bringing up children -- sometimes even   
   > indoctrinating children -- to believe that faith trumps everything and   
   > by influencing society to respect faith. Now, the faith of these   
   > moderate people is in itself harmless. But the idea that faith needs to   
   > be respected is instilled into children sitting in rows in their   
   > madrasahs in the Muslim world. And they are told these things not by   
   > extremists but by decent, moderate teachers and mullahs. But when they   
   > grow up, a small minority of them remember what they were told. They   
   > remember reading their holy book, and they take it literally. They   
   > really do believe it. Now, the moderate ones don't really believe it,   
   > but they have taught children that faith is a virtue. And it only takes   
   > a minority to believe what it says in the holy book -- the Old   
   > Testament, the New Testament, the Quran, whatever it is. If you believe   
   > it's literally true, then there's scarcely any limit to the evil things   
   > you might do.   
   >   
   > Q: And yet most moderate religious people are appalled by the   
   > apocalyptic thinking of religious extremists.   
   >   
   > A: Of course they're appalled. They're very decent, nice people. But   
   > they have no right to be appalled because, in a sense, they brought it   
   > on the world by teaching people, especially children, the virtues of   
   > unquestioned faith.   
   >   
   > Hear the full interview at http://www.wpr.org/book/Richard%20Dawkins.mp3   
      
   Thanks - another for the collection, which will soon   
   become 2 CD's.   
      
   Encouragingly, Richard's pendulum has swung a tad   
   more lately. He seems more confident and his older vids   
   are still on YouTube. Perhaps Sam Harris has had more   
   influence than he expected. Vic reports a well-attended   
   SH appearance in Denver (of all places) a week or so ago.   
      
   I was hoping to post a link to Julia's "Letting Go of God"   
   talk, but there's only one Julia Sweeney vid left on YouTube!   
   I wonder if that's really because of "copyright violation"   
   or something more elusive. Sent her an email question   
   about it - no answer so far.   
      
   Quite an interesting part of the matrix today was your link   
   to http://www.mandala.hr/5/baran.html and the apology issued   
   in 1992 by the Soto Zen hierarchy. The Christian Church has   
   still not, to my knowledge, apologized for the crusades, the   
   amplification of AIDS in Africa, the overpopulation problems,   
   the children of the poor, or "Mother Teresa" - the goddess   
   of death in India. We won't bother about the science dialogs.   
      
   Perhaps because that's because the Pope is infallible by   
   definition and the NRB (which could also be an acronym for   
   "New Republican Bible") has already been published in   
   some sense.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)