DELETED_74993

Izi · 18 Jan 2010 at 10:54

I am just suprised people don't realise he is acting this way because he has too.

He cares passionately about what he believes, and unfortunatly that means fighting religious nut jobs. It really is a case of fire with fire.

If people have a problem with that I understand, but for me I am sick of it and I will back him no matter how petty or hypocritical his actions may seem.

scorza · 18 Jan 2010 at 11:09

Izi said:
I am just suprised people don't realise he is acting this way because he has too.

He cares passionately about what he believes, and unfortunatly that means fighting religious nut jobs. It really is a case of fire with fire.

If people have a problem with that I understand, but for me I am sick of it and I will back him no matter how petty or hypocritical his actions may seem.

I think the bigger hypocrisy is using the fact that there are two charities in DEC with a religion in their name as an excuse to not donate for the victims of the Haitian earthquake.

Steveh_monkey · 18 Jan 2010 at 11:18

I think because he spends a lot of time doing the religious Nut Job circuit in America, and one of the arguments they like to use over there is that Athiests can't be moral. Occaisionally a fundamentalist likes to suggest that atheists justify the Holocaust because they all believe in survival of the fittest etc.

Luckily as we live in a far more sensible society we don't have this problem, we've more or less seperated morality from religion so an organization like this does look rather petty.

V4NT0M · 18 Jan 2010 at 11:58

lol, these forums never cease to amaze me, you've all got gigantic chips on your shoulders about something. To all those "ZOMG Richard Dawkins is a..." people, answer this question:

Do you think that as a result of his actions more or less money will go to a "good" cause?

Naffa · 18 Jan 2010 at 12:04

Dolph said:
While I can't comment for anyone else, personally I dislike fundamentalists of all beliefs, Dawkins isn't worthy of special dislike in that regard...

Richard Dawkins is not a fundamentalist, and it's absurd to suggest he is.

I also don't get why people think he's a tool, I've read some of the posts in here and don't really 'get it'. He's set up an aid package to be funded by atheists, to go to secular organisations. I think that's a good thing, because secular organisations generally don't have an agenda other than that of good doings. Whatever Dawkin's motivations are, the point would be felt far more in the States as so many religious people claim that atheists are incapable of morality and good.

Skyfall said:
Do you think that as a result of his actions more or less money will go to a "good" cause?

Absolutely. None of the money will be spent on stopping people from using condoms because believe it or not, they're worse than AIDS!!1 None of the money will be spent on stopping people getting abortions or any fundamentalist nonsense like that, it will go as aid and help those in their time of need.

AGD · 18 Jan 2010 at 12:05

I don't see this as dawkins trying to push his atheist agenda - it is just for people who want to give money who want to make sure it is not going to fund any missionaries/religious propaganda etc. It's not necessary clear to everyone which charities have religious aspects so this is an easy way to get around that.

hurfdurf · 18 Jan 2010 at 12:07

Richard Dawkins owns, if anyone is getting upset about him behaving like a religion, then surely his point is made?

Tripnologist · 18 Jan 2010 at 12:13

I'm Agnostic Humanist but will just be donating to Unicef on payday.
I don't have any problem with this initiative though as it will no doubt result in more money going to help those who need it and lets to be honest here, that's really all that matters. I just don't feel the need to make a statement out of it. Unicef...religious groups..dawkins.. it doesn't matter who you give to really as long as you give something.

Rameses · 18 Jan 2010 at 12:15

No idea who he is, even google failed to impress me. Unicef is the only charity I have donated too, if not the http://www.dec.org.uk/ will do too.

4T5 · 18 Jan 2010 at 12:18

What's all the fuss about ? It's not like anybodys died or owt !!!

Vesta_Man · 18 Jan 2010 at 12:59

Dawkins is my Hero!

Naffa · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:06

Vesta_Man said:
Dawkins is my Hero!

Nitefly · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:09

Skyfall said:
lol, these forums never cease to amaze me, you've all got gigantic chips on your shoulders about something. To all those "ZOMG Richard Dawkins is a..." people, answer this question:

Do you think that as a result of his actions more or less money will go to a "good" cause?

That's not the point - he's effectively accusing other charities as having 'sinister' religious motives. Not all religious charities send aid hand in hand with their deity, nor does anybody accepting aid have to believe said deity.

I find his sentiments to be quite frankly bizarre. If people are using Christianity as a reason to give aid, surely this only shows that religion can (insert the word 'occasionally' here if you are inclined to do so) be a good thing?

Not really the right time to be bringing up religious animosity in my opinion.

Brian Stuart · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:19

How on earth does she say to one of the worlds greatest evolutionary biologists, "show me the evidence" with a straight face.
Wish he had expanded more on the "you can only be moral if your Christian" argument that she alluded to.

Vonhelmet · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:23

Cry more, Dawkins.

Brian Stuart · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:26

vonhelmet said:
Cry more, Dawkins.

steve-h · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:35

scorza said:
I think the bigger hypocrisy is using the fact that there are two charities in DEC with a religion in their name as an excuse to not donate for the victims of the Haitian earthquake.

Or a reason to set one up that isn't religion related (why the hell would a charity be? It's not just religious people who give to them...)

A breakdown of what has happened

Richard Dawkins opened a charity for a well needed cause.
100% of donations will be going towards the cause.

Pudney@work said:
No, he really is a tool. He belongs on an atheiest version of Fox news.

You're a tool and belong on the atheist version of fox news.

scorza · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:47

steve-h said:
Or a reason to set one up that isn't religion related (why the hell would a charity be? It's not just religious people who give to them...)

A breakdown of what has happened

Richard Dawkins opened a charity for a well needed cause.

100% of donations will be going towards the cause.

DEC isn't a religious group, only an idiot would argue that they were. Christian Aid and Islamic Relief do a lot of good work around the world, anyone who argues against giving to them purely because they have religion in their name is being petty and bigoted.

What Dawkins has done is that he is furthering his own cause by exploiting the victims of the Haitian earthquake. It's downright despicable. Do you honestly think that more or less money is going to get donated to the organisations that are best placed to offer aid because of his actions?

V4NT0M · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:56

scorza said:
What Dawkins has done is that he is furthering his own cause by exploiting the victims of the Haitian earthquake. It's downright despicable.

Exploiting? lol

scorza said:
Do you honestly think that more or less money is going to get donated to the organisations that are best placed to offer aid because of his actions?

Why would it be less?

Dark_Angel · 18 Jan 2010 at 13:57

Tefal said:
Rather tasteless trying to score point off other peoples suffering

Still thankfully Richard Dawkins isn't the typical atheist/agnostic and is more akin to the KJV evangelical type that pop up in SC for a few weeks every so often before getting banned.

Agreed. You're giving money to help a country out.... not "well, I don't believe this so I'll give my funds through these guys for no reason in particular."