digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

CNN Anti-Atheist Hit Piece - write them to protest unanswered hate-speech

scienceblogs.com — Panel discussing discrimination against atheists includes *no* atheists. Quotes: "What does an atheist believe? Nothing." "I think they need to shut up" "The real discrimination is atheists against Americans who are religious" "We have strong Christians and... atheists are not strong." Banner behind panel: "Why do atheists inspire such hatred?"

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -34/+636Watch the video segment via the link in that post and decide for yourself. And then contact CNN to complain:
    http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?11

    Imagine a segment about discrimination against blacks that included only whites, saying "they should just shut up", and "They are on the attack. It's obnoxious and they do need to shut up..." and "I think they need to shut up about crying wolf all the time and saying that they're being imposed upon." (direct quotes from the panel)

    Imagine a segment about antisemitism that included no Jews, with panelists saying "That's the one reason our country has not become like Europe because we have strong Christians and because Jews are not strong" (that is a direct quote from the panel with the word "atheists" replaced with "Jews").

    Imagine a segment about anti Muslim sentiment in the US, with no Muslims on the panel, saying "They don't have a good - marketing. If they had hallmark cards, maybe they wouldn't feel so left out." (Direct quote from the panel).

    Not to mention the giant banner behind the whole thing accusing us of "inspiring hatred".

    *****.
    • z00k, on 10/12/2007, -22/+191Such a ridiculous video... ***** the hell out of me.

    • nazuraki, on 10/12/2007, -40/+349How I would have loved to see Dawkins there...
    • UglieJosh, on 10/12/2007, -267/+73Bah, I think Dawkins does more to make atheists look bad then he does to make them look good.

      His material is great but, in person, he comes off as an arrogant, elitist *****.
    • nazuraki, on 10/12/2007, -47/+150Elitism isn't always unwarranted...
    • lukas88, on 10/12/2007, -436/+69So athiests can go on youtube and say all sorts of nonsense about other religions (especially christianity), but when people do the same to them it they consider it "hate speech"?

      Look, athiests, you need to realize that you are just another faith. Many people of faith have learned to live with and respect other faiths, it is time you make an effort too.

      For the record, I don't think people should disrespect athiests or any religion purely for what they believe. Judge them by their actions and keep an open mind.
    • Billiam627, on 10/12/2007, -184/+37@josh

      I totally agree, Dawkins is one of the smartest people alive today, but he is such an ass...
    • petroK, on 10/12/2007, -19/+86@lukas

      the problem is that the rest of the world (gathering from the anti-atheist sentiment of the law and many of those in power) doesn't look at atheism as "just another faith" and that is where so much of that backlash comes from.
    • Julolidine, on 10/12/2007, -30/+252I find it disturbing that most of America would not vote for an atheist, no matter their personal accomplishments or qualifications. I think the stats were something in the low teens would even consider voting for an atheist....and 20% or so would consider voting for a Muslim.

      If seriously people believe that God would help you make the proper choices - well just look at the current presidency. I think a monkey throwing darts at a board probably would have made better decisions on average.
    • captaineuphoria, on 10/12/2007, -13/+258How the ***** can you compare Youtube to CNN, Lukas? One of them is a video site and the other one is a multinational news outlet. You're either a ***** moron or a troll. Most likely both.
    • SniperGX1, on 10/12/2007, -21/+91I think everyone of any race, religion, gender, political standing, sexual orientation, version of vista favoritism, file system favoritism should just relax. There is free speech for EVERYONE. Some people hate atheists let them speak their mind. Then we will have our turn. Thats how America used to work. You are only a true supporter of free speech if you defend the view you do not agree with
    • smoothmedia, on 10/12/2007, -15/+274@lukas88

      Hate speech is hate speech. The difference is that an atheist posting a hate speech about a religion to youtube is putting his views out in the open for all to see, while others are free to defend, attack, debunk, or denounce his claims. A video posted on youtube has little influence over the general public. What CNN did here was promote hate-speech of a group of people based on their (lack of) religion, and did so on a national stage! Most wouldn't have a problem with this piece had CNN used a balanced panel of theists and atheists, even if the theists comments were identical. The opportunity for the general public to see the atheists defend their beliefs is what's missing.

      Secondly, real atheism has nothing to do with faith at all. Of course it does SEEM that believing that a god does not exist when he cannot be disproven is taking a leap of faith. However, virtually all atheists (Dawkins included) know that there is at least the possibility that god exists. We also know that there is a possibility that the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Unicorns, and Gremlins exist. We simply do not believe that they do, due to lack of evidence. Atheists CONCLUDE that God does not exist based on all available evidence, we do not have to BELIEVE.

      Your claim that "many people of faith have learned to live with and respect other faiths" is true, but of course, many atheists have learned to live with people of faith as well. Many theists have also failed to make any effort at all to tolerate people with differing religious views. Should atheists "respect" theistic views? Well, atheists should respect the RIGHT of a person to hold such views, but there is no requirement to respect the views themselves.

      Let's say that my friend reveals to me that he believes that only the white race is pure and people of other races should be exterminated. I have no obligation to respect these beliefs, since I believe that they are not only incorrect, but immoral and potentially damaging to society. I can't however, say that he does not have the right to have those beliefs. Why would an Atheist have to respect a belief system that in his view is incorrect, obstructs scientific progress and is potentially harmful to society? The difference here is that religion, unlike any other kind of belief, is taboo to criticize. A person who discriminates against blacks will have his beliefs challenged in the public square, while a person who discriminates against gays gets a free pass so long as he does so in the name of some deity or religious faith. As Dick Cheney says...."that's hogwash".
    • gldfshnpcklejar, on 10/12/2007, -14/+55@lukas
      It's hypocrisy at it's finest. You think you can say whatever the ***** you want about atheists, full of as much hate as you can muster up in your tiny little skull, while condemning atheists for causing some non-existent damage.
    • DoctaStooge, on 10/12/2007, -6/+135It's sad when the person that makes the most sense in that "panel" is a man who covers the NBA for ESPN.

      I am Christian myself. I think that the majority of people in the country are Christian. However, I have friends who are Atheist and I have no problem with it. What happened to the people profiled in the 1st part is wrong, and the two women who were guests misguided the discussion away from the true goal of it.
    • ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -53/+10And how ironically that "crying wolf" sounds from a black person..
    • texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -109/+15"Imagine a segment about discrimination against blacks that included only whites, saying "they should just shut up","

      Apples and oranges. You can't choose your skin color...but you can choose your beliefs.
    • handband2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+68Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiyJzWy3CDQ&eurl=

      Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPHnXrU5JzU&eurl=
    • BHRecon, on 10/12/2007, -9/+172"The Babel fish," said The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy quietly, "is small, yellow and leech-like, and probably the oddest thing in the Universe. It feeds on brainwave energy not from its carrier but from those around it. It absorbs all unconscious mental frequencies from this brainwave energy to nourish itself with. It then excretes into the mind of its carrier a telepathic matrix formed by combining the conscious thought frequencies with nerve signals picked up from the speech centres of the brain which has supplied them. The practical upshot of all this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything said to you in any form of language. The speech patterns you actually hear decode the brainwave matrix which has been fed into your mind by your Babel fish."

      "Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God."

      "The argument goes something like this: 'I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, 'for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'"

      "'But,' says Man, 'The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'"

      "'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanished in a puff of logic." - Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
    • iPirate, on 10/12/2007, -57/+17@texpundit

      Are you insane? There is no way possible to choose what you believe.
    • Phatt138, on 10/12/2007, -9/+52tex - so you should 'choose' to be Christian so that you won't be attacked for NOT being Christian? Since I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you're religious, let me remind you that the Christian God hates 'lukewarm water' and that his followers were initially persecuted because they refused to submit to popular religious beliefs - something that you, in your hypocrisy, no doubt find quite admirable.

      ...talk about apples and oranges...
    • masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -18/+73I think the biggest problem in atheism is that both atheists AND anti-religion confuse the correct meaning of "atheism."

      From the Oxford English Dictionary:
      atheism
      • noun the belief that God does not exist.

      The term "atheist" implies that it is a neutral belief, that is, an "atheist," in the true form of the word, does not hate religion and does not hate religious people. Rather, an atheist is simply someone who believes that there is no god, just like a Christian is someone who believes that there is one god and a hindu is somebody who believes that there are many gods.

      Unfortunately, there are many people who hate religion as much as radical religious folk hate gays. And many of these people call themselves "atheists" which is a bit ambiguous because while it IS true that they don't believe in a god, they ALSO hate religious folk. And conversely, many peaceful atheists call the hateful ones "atheists," as well.


      Basically, what it comes down to is that there are radicals in every religion. Many people here on digg hate Christians because when they think of "Christianity," they think of the Westboro Baptist church. Many people the world over hate Muslims because when they think of "Islam," they think of the radical terrorists in the middle east that wish for everyone who does not belong to their faith dead. And many Muslims hate Jews because when they think of "Judaism," they think of the radical Zionist Jews that would gladly kill all of the Muslims in the middle east in order to get their "God-given" land back.

      Likewise with Atheism, when many people think of "Atheism," they think of the loud, obnoxious people that say that the world would be better without religion, that religion is the cause of all hatred and suffering on Earth, and the many other hateful, stupid remarks towards religion.
    • TheCod, on 10/12/2007, -24/+11I guess no one read the blog article where the video is posted. Here is just one sentence:

      "Sometimes, though, it's possible to detect the rot of bigotry in little things: like a panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included."

      I am an atheist and would be disgruntled as well, IF they were actually doing what you are saying they did. The fact is that they were showing that there is bigotry towards atheists. It would be the same if people said "There is no hatred towards christians" and then CNN got a group of atheists to talk about how christians bring hate to themselves. I am not saying that they made this point clear, how many times has a digger completely skewed the story to get it to front page? Exactly.
    • lukas88, on 10/12/2007, -45/+11There are convincing, well thought out arguments in favor of atheism. Many philosophers whom I respect were proponents of atheism, and while I am not atheist myself, I feel like the idea is a benefit to the world and worthy of inspection.

      I was not trying to say otherwise. All I was saying is that what happened on CNN is the sort of thing that atheists are guilty of themselves. It doesn't matter if it is on CNN (who really considers them unbiased anyway?) or YouTube. True, it gives it a more sinister feel when the people pretend to be unbiased, but that doesn't change what it is.

      Maybe if atheists collectively realized that their ideas are not objectively superior to anyone elses, we would all be a little happier.
    • MaVeRiCK42, on 10/12/2007, -10/+103I had no idea how religious the USA is. I thought it would be roughly comparable to the UK. How wrong I was!
    • jfujita, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2Video:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPHnXrU5JzU&eurl=
    • ipodsweatshop, on 10/12/2007, -30/+92It's because they're very fearful people. They fear that atheists are right. They fear God. They fear their own desires because they're told to. They are weak people by nature and they form big groups to feel strong.

      Most "hard core" religious people are very unattractive physically, ever noticed that? They ended up being god warriors because that's the only group that accepted them without question. They take in the weak and make them feel strong with fairy tales about tons of virgins, heaven and hell. The rest were so young during the brainwashing that they can't dismiss all of the stories so they stick with it.

      It all comes down to weakness and searching for answers. Those who are too weak, stupid or lazy to try to understand the world and how complex it really is default to the easy "poof it was there" explanations offered by religion. Don't be angry at them, feel sorry for them.
    • texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -32/+7@all the assholes ripping on me and digging me down for my previous statement:

      I was NOT picking sides or being hypocritical of anything. I made a simple statement. YOU are the ones assuming what my beliefs (or lack thereof) are.
    • ngonzales80, on 10/12/2007, -6/+56I am a Christian and I have to agree that this was a terrible piece.

      After watching the 1st half, I was wondering what the outrage was all about. CNN did a "fair and balanced" approach to the issue. Then I saw the 2nd half. MAN, that was unfair. Yeah, they had the ESPN guy there speaking up for atheists but he was drown out by the two women.

    • JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -23/+12Wooowww . . damn, if that blond ***** isn't a great example of fulfilling extremely negative jewish stereotypes then I don't know what is.

      I haven't seen a debate where _every single point made_ was entirely wrong in a long time.
    • schwab002, on 10/12/2007, -26/+6i agree that dawkins is an ass. Sam Harris would much better represent atheists with his ruthless and cold logic.
    • WhereAmI, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27Lucas,
      Atheists do not "ban" together like you think. Its not like that. This is a case when Atheists do ban together, because we are being threatened by some religous people. Whats that? SOME religious gruops? NOT EVERYONE IS OUT TO GET ATHEISTS. And, speaking on behalf of this Atheist, know that. I have religious friends and we joke about this *****, and I agree "sure, according to your logic I am going to hell. According to my logic I rot in the ground, and so will you, and nothing more"

      You go and have fun with your church. I am going to go and have fun with my life (not that you don't either, read on.) We are not different, I still feel, love, hate, etc. I also have morals. You want me to say all Christians are child rapers? Of course not. But I am quite sure 90% of the child abusers (in the US) are Christians. WHY is that? Because there are A LOT of Christians in America. So, does that mean when an Atheist is trying to take down something of yours, does that make me automatically with them and against you? If you think that, burn in hell, child raper. After all, I am just using the same logic as you.
    • kitchengeek, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5Huh. That's not what my Oxford English Dictionary lists as the definition of 'atheism'.

      I will agree that part of the problem with the debate is that it's difficult to get people to agree on the definition of atheist/atheism. Some, usually on the religious side, maintain that atheism requires a positive belief in the non-existence of gods. Others, typically on the atheist side, maintain that atheism minimally requires only a non-judgmental lack of belief in gods.

      This problem is intractable, I fear, because it's often difficult to find Christians who will agree on the definition of 'Christian', too.
    • mlaninfa, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16I am shocked that CNN would produce such crap! It looks like I will have to send an email in protest.
      Also, I agree that more Atheists should "come out of the closet" so that more of the public can be educated about what Atheism really means. The problem is that most of my Atheist friends tend to be loaners and also don't enjoy shoving their beliefs down other people's throats. But, that is what most of society does to us Atheists by saying "bless you" and "have a blessed day" constantly.
    • deepdiggdude, on 10/12/2007, -25/+14I made up some slogans for atheists:

      Get the hell out of our lives.
      Let there be reason.
      Morals don't come from the Bible. You be the judge.
      The faithful: prey for the church.
      Enlighten up!
    • Crass22, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4fQA9mt-Mg
    • randyzaia, on 10/12/2007, -125/+11Athiests = people who like to ***** on other people's religious beliefs because it gives them a sense of smug satisfaction.
    • johnny2shoes, on 10/12/2007, -7/+51randyzaia = insecure dumbass.
    • randyzaia, on 10/12/2007, -67/+8Insecure about what? I'm an agnostic.
    • jsballardx, on 10/12/2007, -28/+10Atheist are the reason the world is so terrible. Atheist kill babies and I have scientific evidence of mass atheist baby graves.

      BABY KILLERS!!!
    • dmoney06, on 10/12/2007, -4/+34randyzaia:

      do you realize how hypocritical what you just wrote is?
    • jmkiii, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3@texpundit

      If you already have a baseball bat, why do you need to add spikes?
    • phatalbert, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4The very opening of the segment includes an atheist.

      I'm not saying the video is balanced, but the description is inaccurate.
    • quiltmaster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11@JonForTheWin
      I think you will find most Jews aren't like that. Lets just say that Jews know what it is like to have your beliefs suppressed. That chick was just a bad-apple, every religion has them but religions shouldn't be judged by them. Christianity isn't judged by Hitler.
    • kelbear, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6Both the offenders and the offendees are being hypocritical douchebags. Man the ***** up and quit crying about what somebody else thinks about you. Sheesh.
    • Asshate, on 10/12/2007, -24/+11***** JESUS GOD IS A ***** ALLAH SUCKS A FAT *****!
    • bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -7/+40I feel sorry for you my Christian brothers. You live in a secular nation. Designed so (http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html) by our fore fathers. Patriotism, after all your posturing, does not require blind faith in your supernatural flying harp dealer.

      Read: The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins

      Excerpts:
      http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/catalog/titledetail.cfm?textType=excerpt&titleNumber=689776

      Quotes from the book:
      - Albert Einstein
      "I don’t try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to stand in awe at the
      structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to
      appreciate it."

      - Thomas Jefferson
      "Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."

      Where to find it (Amazon): http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004/sr=8-1/qid=1170804552/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-8033885-9862442?ie=UTF8&s=books
    • GoBack2Europe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17This is like when CNN has been having these "Racism In America" round tables and including nothing but blacks and whites.
    • GeneralFault, on 10/12/2007, -7/+26"Insecure about what? I'm an agnostic."
      Question... meet answer.
    • Pile, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4This is really outrageous.. if you want to know the real deal on the religious debate and the shenanigans of theists in real life, here's a collection of stories:

      http://www.bsalert.com/artsearch.php?fn=1&as=58&dt=2&pm=50

    • pixelguru, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17My message to CNN:

      Fortunately, our free country gives you every right to speak freely about your misconceptions, biases and prejudices against non-theists. Just don't try to call it a debate without bringing both sides to the table. Freedom of religion includes the freedom NOT to be religious (and I will NOT just "shut up" about it as your anti-American panel so rudely suggested.)
    • bobcat7407, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2@ipodsweatshop

      It's comments like that that cause problems. No matter your religion or belief that's an unnecessary and useless comment that only demeans others. If people could just learn to talk to each other like adults and realize that others are not idiots just because they don't believe like you then we wouldn't have nearly as many problems in our world as we do now.
    • rslc, on 10/12/2007, -5/+45Everytime I see any American say " US is a Christian country", I really want to laugh.

      1) By declaring itself as a Christian country, its no difference from Middle East Muslim Countries.

      2) Religion and politics should never mix. Religion in Politics, will only promote more hatred, conflicts and war especially from religious nation.

      3) The fact that president Bush is a Christian, and openly uses "God" in his speech eg in the Iraq war,
      is already a huge Disgrace to America.

      And this CNN video is going to spoil US image even more.

      ps: Im only telling the truth, and I'm not an American.
      Americans should really wakeup to reality, its for the good of the nation and the world.
    • Navitron, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13I know its more then 14 million and that number will keep growing once people start opening there eyes. Due to the advent of the internet your not just limited to what your parents say or your church, you can hear the opinions of thousands of people. That number is gonna keep growing, I'm a former devout christens and after just doing some research and just thinking so hard on the issue it became clear religion is just a sham. My parents and church were just prodding me along this whole time. Everything stems from religion all the hate in our world it was because of the jews 60 years ago, now its Muslims. Its all ***** atheists should be the most trusted not feared, thats complete ***** who would be better then a atheist who doesn't have a religion. A person with a religion is the worst person to trust to make a logical decision because there so confined in there thinking. CNN is just spreading BS and by 2020 its going to be almost half of the population you can quote me on that, people will start waking up to this complete lie. Think about it what about back in ancient times the babylonians the Romans the Greeks they all had there own God/s and close to 100% of the population believed in these god/s its gonna be the same thing with Muslims, Christians, Jews ect... 3000 years from know there gonna look back and be like wow they killed each other over absolutely nothing... Just a belief.

      In till Christians find a cure for cancer, in till Muslims find a unlimited energy source, in till Buddhists discover how to do light travel. Technology will be the shining beacon for mankind not some belief in a flying spaghetti monster or Santa Claus that will grant your wish if you prey hard enough.

      Say Amen to that.
    • Comatoast, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8"I think everyone of any race, religion, gender, political standing, sexual orientation, version of vista favoritism, file system favoritism should just relax. ...That's how America used to work. You are only a true supporter of free speech if you defend the view you do not agree with"

      Sniper, that's NOT the point. This is supposed to be journalism (is there such a thing anymore?). Rationalist has made the point; can you imagine a "news" show holding a panel about antisemitism or discrimination against blacks and NOT INCLUDING SOMEONE FROM THE GROUP BEING DISCUSSED??!

      Not only that, but stacking the deck with two ultra-right wingers whining about prayer in school and how that would bring some MORALITY back to schools. This was a calculated attack...not a "discussion", "round-table" or anything else.

      And if you believe that this is a "christian nation", well then welcome to the "Muslim world". And you're ALL delusional...
    • tyho, on 10/12/2007, -25/+4The CNN piece is not hate speech, it's just speech, and protected by the same constitution you inflamed atheists want to use AGAINST the free practice of religion. America was born from God fearing religious persecuted people fleeing Europe. I see more hatred on these forums than anywhere on CNN or in any church anywhere. Tell me you poor persecuted atheists, what is the worst thing a religious person ever did to you?

      Most of the time it's just try to pass on their belief to another human being because they think they can save you. This is a gesture rooted in kindness regardless to how predisposed to hating them you may be. Atheists are a small minority in America and thank God for that if you folks in this post are any example.

      Oh and buried for an inaccurate sensationalist title.
    • JoCliMe, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Go ahead and get your hatred out for Fox News, but at least on every single issue I've seen discussed there are members of both sides, and not just one. Most of the other news stations (like CNN) seem to lack this "feature"
    • gardnert1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9"I think everyone of any race, religion, gender, political standing, sexual orientation, version of vista favoritism, file system favoritism should just relax. There is free speech for EVERYONE. Some people hate atheists let them speak their mind. Then we will have our turn. Thats how America used to work. You are only a true supporter of free speech if you defend the view you do not agree with"

      So why would you tell us to relax when people are having their rights violated? Americans in general are utterly intolerant of any atheist comments. *****, people actually KILL people just for being atheist! And countless other contemplate it as well. If we are taught that hating blacks for being black is wrong then why arent we taught that hating atheists for being atheists is wrong? Might I add that hatred towards atheists is possibly the stupidest thing anyone could garner... I mean, EVERYONE is an atheist, as we all know, because NO ONE believes in EVERY god out there, "atheists" just happen to believe in 0 while others believe in 1. Atheists have FAR more reason to hate religious people because of what they believe and what their beliefs have done to themselves, their children, and this country. Religions preach violence towards non-believers, which is evident even now. Religions stifle progress in science which could prove to be extremely detrimental to the human race. And religions cause people to be "good" for fear of punishment in the supposed after-life. I can safely say that I am MORE moral and ethical than ANY religious person simply because I am not driven to do good by the fear of eternal damnation.
      ***** religion, the bane of humanity.
    • rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -3/+44@tyho:

      "The CNN piece is not hate speech, it's just speech,"

      There is a simple test: replace the word "atheist" with the word "Jew" in every sentence the panel said - only assuming everyone on the panel was Christian. Also, change the banner in the back to say, "Why do Jews inspire such hatred?" Then read it again and look in your heart and ask yourself, honestly, if it was "just speech".

      "and protected by the same constitution you inflamed atheists want to use AGAINST the free practice of religion."

      Straw man. No one is trying to use the constitution against the free practice of religion, but rather to protect our right to practice our own, nontheistic beliefs.

      "America was born from God fearing religious persecuted people fleeing Europe."

      America was born from a fundamentalist sect fleeing persecution by other Christians in Europe.

      "I see more hatred on these forums than anywhere on CNN or in any church anywhere."

      You must live a very sheltered life.

      "Tell me you poor persecuted atheists, what is the worst thing a religious person ever did to you?"

      Tell me you poor persecuted Christian, what is the worst thing an atheist ever did to you?

      "Most of the time it's just try to pass on their belief to another human being because they think they can save you. This is a gesture rooted in kindness regardless to how predisposed to hating them you may be."

      But when an atheist tries to share their belief with another human being because they think it might be better for them - and gesture rooted in kindness - that is "hateful" and "inflamed"

      "Atheists are a small minority in America and thank God for that if you folks in this post are any example."

      So are Jews - do you hate them too for standing up for their rights, and asking for equal respect and dignity?

      Look in the mirror, and you might see the very thing you claim to see all around you - hatred, bigotry, fear, misunderstanding and intolerance.

      All I want is to raise my children in peace and to freely express my beliefs in the same way you do. Is that too much to ask, Great White Christian Master?
    • Elranzer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Truth be told, I'm all in favor of packing all the evangelists up and shipping them into space.
    • k8cpa, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Jesus Saves :-P
    • Comatoast, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8@tyho
      "The CNN piece is not hate speech, it's just speech, and protected by the same constitution you inflamed atheists want to use AGAINST the free practice of religion."

      Why is it that every group/individual that is skating on the thin, thin ice that is unreason has this notion that a group that's opposed to thier view has an "AGENDA", a "PLOT" to bring them down. I don't know ANY athiests who want to take away anyone's right to worship whatever they want. What we ARE opposed to is having, specifically, christian dogma shoved down our throats via the government that is also OUR government as well as the government of millions of muslims, jews, buddists, hindus, and those that choose to worship ancient Greek gods for that matter.

      Our nation was NOT founded on christian beliefs, nor by christians. There is NO mention of god in our constitution. Read on...
      www.thenation.com/doc/20050221/allen
    • tyho, on 10/12/2007, -17/+1Should I be honored the maker of the post responded to my comment? Not with any sense mind you just more of the same, turning my question/comments around like a kid in a schoolyard. Did I push a button? It's sad you will raise children like you.
    • mmortal03, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"Most "hard core" religious people are very unattractive physically, ever noticed that?"

      Nope. I have met some "hard core" religious people that were attractive and some that were unattractive. Correlation does not imply causation.

      I know what you are getting at, though.. It is the same thing that people say about nerds. The reason they do/did so well in school is because they are/were unattractive, are/were shunned by their peers, and so have/had more time to focus on their school work. I think this might be a concept that seems probably and so is easy to latch onto in passing, but I really don't know how much merit you can really give it, in reality.
    • Shuk, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I hope Jon Stewart or Colbert satirize this and further the positive outlook for atheists... or hell, even just reasonable people!
    • Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9So, Atheists are supposed to "shut up" and "not impose their beliefs on others"... I wish more people would tell that to the evangelical Christians. Couldn't prayers in school and the pledge of allegiance be considered imposing beliefs in atheists and non-theists?
      Thankfully it's not quite as bad here in Canada.
    • jakefloyd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5These two women are complete hypocrites. They are doing exactly what they accuse atheists of doing: imposing their ideas upon others. Whatever happened to freedom of religion?

      What angers me about their arguments is that there will always be a minority that does this. Most people keep their beliefs to themselves. In fact, I've seen many more Christians trying to shove their beliefs into others' heads than Atheists.
    • JKrem, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Calling an Atheist angry is the exact same thing as calling a Jew cheap.
    • djlosch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8"in god we trust" wasn't our national motto until the cold war, and it made merely spotty appearances on some currency starting shortly after the civil war

      http://www.djlosch.com/article_In_God_We_Trust

      and i don't recall, but i think "under god" was also added during the cold war. the pledge of allegiance existed for at least 100+ years without any mention of god, and has undergone like 4 or 5 revisions.
    • nickstl77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13This guy hit the nail on the head..

      "In other news, an all-white panel agreed that racial tensions were primarily caused by "uppity n*****s", then discussed where to buy white sheets in bulk, how to get stains out of your hood, and why America is a "white nation" and it's important to maintain that heritage. Why, practically all of the Founding Fathers were white, doesn't that just settle it? (Male, too, but I think I've made my point.)

      Did they really expect to have a meaningful discussion of the issue when one of the sides (the subject of the discussion!) was excluded a priori? You don't have to be a journalism major to see the problem with that approach."

    • noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@maverick42

      The USA is insanely religious. In fact, if you were to compare the USA and Israel (mind you, Israel was founded as a Jewish country, and that is specifically written in its decleration of independence), you'd find that there is a higher percentage of Atheism (in Israel it is called "חילוניות", which approximately translates as "secularism"), and much less of a stigma attached to it. In fact, there is more of a stigma attached to Christianity in Israel than there is to Atheism.
    • Adune0Warrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This is the complaint that I sent to CNN concerning this matter.

      I am complaining about you coverage about atheists being too militant. One thing that I noticed is that on your counsel of people that are discussing this issue you have no Atheists why? You should represent both sides of the field to be truly objective of which you have failed. I am an Atheist and I find this disturbing. How is this any different from when Christan were being suppressed by the romans until Constantine added it as their religion from the flaming cross that he saw in the sky. FYI the words "under god" in the pledge of allegiance was not added to it until February 8, 1954 and was introduced to congress by Representative Charles Oakman. Before this the words "under god" were not in our pledge of allegiance. The Treaty with Tripoli which was approved unanimously by the Senate in 1797 under the administration of President John Adams clearly states in Article 11 of the treaty states, "[T]he government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…." so that pretty much gets rid of the United States being a "Christan Nation". The first attempt of branding our currency was in 1863 from religious out cry and it appeared on lots of American coinage. But, before this time there was no "under god" on American currency whatsoever. But, on July 11, 1955 President Eisenhower signed public law 140 making it mandatory that all coinage and paper currency display the motto "In God We Trust." Later the next year he signed Public Law 851 which officially changed the national motto of "E Pluribus Unum" to "In God we Trust." Also during this time of integrating the words god into our once secular government they also made a statue for all federal justices and judges to swear an oath concluding with "So help me God." All of these laws were made during the Cold War era (except the coinage branding in 1863.) which was fueled by the need to include "In God We Trust" into numerous things to combat the "godlessness" of communism. I would be perfectly happy to say the Pledge of Allegiance if it was the original pledge. And I would stop complaining if our currency would be changed back to the way our founding fathers wanted it to be. I see the struggle of Atheists as no different than the battles that African-American fought for there freedom and to get rid of discrimination against them. Or the battle that Christians fought to not be discriminated against by the early Romans. This is not the way our Nation's founding father wanted it to be. As the constitution and other early documents made during early America clearly state. We should restore America to what they wanted which was to be a secular nation and not to favor any religion over another. Next time you do a story like this please present both sides and be more educated.

      Thank You For your time,
      Andrew From
    • yauhin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@navitron:

      I agree with everything you said (I myself am an atheist), but btw Buddhists don't believe in a god.
    • Rodzirra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It looks like the reality-challenged are starting to get scared. Such outright bigotry is a good sign that they feel they're losing the debate.
    • TheWorm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The funny thing is, Atheists never even want to cause any trouble. It's just the christians who think we're all evil and sinners.
    • smackywentz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7My fellow Athiests,

      At first like many of you I was absolutely lucid over watching this episode. I wanted to destroy a church I was so angry just so that the piece on Paula Zahn would have been warranted. But I got to thinking a little bit, after my blood stopped boiling, and I realized I am ecstatic about this piece. I am loving that they fear us so much that they have to do this hate show. Its empowering finding that I am part of the next great movement, and that I am ahead of the bell-curve. In history books they will look back at this and other things just as outlandish that will most certainly come to pass, and students will laugh and scorn at the "'crazy Thiests' who believed that there was some God watching over them." They will probably head to the cafeteria cracking jokes about it, and wondering what kind of world that must have been, that people could have been so naiive...
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Absolutely unbearable. I did send CNN an e-mail after watching, even though I promised myself I wouldn't (tired and need to get work finished).

      I cannot stand this. My message (sorry if it became an angry rant):

      "Where was the breaking point? When was the exact moment that CNN devolved into the equivalent of a Fox News clone?

      I watched a special on Atheism the other day on CNN and was simply appalled! I sat aghast as a determined hit piece on 10 million Americans was shown before me. I watched as CNN spread horrible propaganda via background foxnews-esque banners (e.g. "WHY DO ATHEISTS INSPIRE SUCH HATE?"), as four clueless, woefully ignorant, predatory panelists -- not one of which was Atheist of course -- attacked a huge group of people based on their beliefs. I can only imagine how minorities in the past felt when going through the equivalent. The African Americans, the women, the Japanese, the slaves, the gays (still), the disabled, the Muslims (current), anyone who opposed Bush 5 years ago or the war 3 years ago, and Atheists in America since it existed.

      It is as if Americans don't know the background on their own country anymore! There was only one panelist in the CNN hit piece who had an ounce of understanding of the importance of our Constitution, and the meaning of equality for all of America's citizens. It is simply despicable what I watched and heard on a NEWS program!

      I had sincerely began to regard CNN higher than the other cable news channels. I though CNN had begun to take the high road -- used facts rather than slander, intelligent discussions on current situations facing the country and world, real information without the added bias and agenda. It never was quite there but it was closer to real journalism than any of the other cable news stations. I saw CNN striving to become the opposite of Fox News (and I use that program in my comments a lot as THE ultimate insult to journalism), and suddenly CNN is on the same level as them! I mean, the propaganda evident in the news piece actually RIVALED Fox News in the magnitude of your attack.

      What is particularly incredible is that CNN had just shown a video detailing EXACTLY what the interviewees had been describing! The irony is so vast that I find it impossible to understand how your studio didn't come to the realization. Here, a couple of citizens in some southern town is forced out of their lives by the religious community there who take great offense at their differing beliefs, and then a CNN panel take it a step further and calls for all Atheists to "SHUT UP" and leave! Paraphrase: let's eradicate all Atheist Americans so we don't have to hear their point of view.

      It's too bad the concept of the Bill of Rights and our founding father's vision for America is lost on so many of its new citizens. Time to open a few history books CNN! In fact, if you're going to do a report on a mass group of people, maybe it would be wise to do some type of research on them before you broadcast your ***** to the rest of the country! Maybe then it'll become apparent that an Atheist have individual beliefs stemming far from "nothing", and just as importantly, maybe CNN can get a reminder of what it means to be a real journalist, and become that responsible television media that we are so lacking today. Welcome to the spin zone.."
    • yossarian84, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This website stats say something a little different than the 1-3% CNN claims (granted they claim only atheists but who are they kidding): nonreligious/secular/atheists/agnostics make up between 13-15% of the US population according to the graphs on the following website... the SECOND largest group in the US not to mention the group has experienced a 110% increase in the last TEN years. Also this group of people is the fourth largest group worldwide at 890 million. When you talk about atheists you have to at least include agnostics... I'm not atheist but agnostic (I don't believe you can prove there is a god, but I also don't believe you can't prove there isn't a god)... but if I had to choose Christan or atheist I'd choose atheist in a heartbeat.

      http://atheistempire.com/reference/stats/main.html

      For a little biased sided source (even though I think they still use the same ARIS poll):
      http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm

      ps - those two women were ignorant dumb asses and should at least have a college education before becoming an analyst
    • yossarian84, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2correction for above so I don't look like a dumbass: "I don't believe you can prove there is a god, but I also don't believe you CAN prove there isn't a god"

      also meant to say for a little less biased source... proofreading is a bitch
    • FuckDigDotCom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Does anyone have a list of the advertisers so we can contact them?
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@quiltmaster
      I didn't say jews were bad I implied that dumb bitch makes jews look bad.
    • mocheeze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I just sent an email to Stephen Smith thanking him for his courage and conviction in standing up for my beliefs, even though he doesn't subscribe to the Atheism view. To me, that's the definition of freedom of speech. When you can stand up for someone's right to say something that contradicts your own view, it is one of the most honorable contributions you can make to our society. Thanks Stephen!
    • BGFeltenink, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Lol, I just loaded the page and saw 666

      here's a link to the image
    • BGFeltenink, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1digg stripped my html so here's another go:

      http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/8125/lolsatannk6.jpg
    • priceless721, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1wow too bad those black people don't remember when they were persecuted against, oh wait they don't, lost complete touch with reality. But i am sure if reperation money came about they would be loving it saying how bad it was and how they deserve so much, back 50 years and more ago the black nation was persecuted more than any other (well the holocaust was pretty bad too but i guess the jewish blonde one forgot about that too) how can they be so ignorant they don't even have a far-off dream considering that they should think of opposing angles of this issue. i guess 97%-99% of viewers are christian or such, so ratings are number one. Which means money and greed run that argument. So it should of said the "out in the open" crowd's names and then say "compensated advisor" underneath.
    • Brenan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@texpundit

      You say you cant choose a skin color, but you can a religion. i have 2 problems with that.

      1) what about people that are raised to believe something, and resisting those believes would mean virtual discernment and disgrace within that family? they cant very well just choose to not believe it.

      2) You cant just CHOOSE what makes the most sense to you. i.e. if you see a color, and someone says its blue, but you swear its more of a green, is that a deliberate choice and does that give the blue guy the right to mock you? By your logic, you are saying atheists should either be expected to change their religion so it conforms with your own, or they should just expect to get ridiculed. THAT is the very definition of intolerance.
    • graberc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Yeah, uh - I don't get the annoyance. What you want to be a protected class of indvidual for what you dont' believe?

      And we aren't talking about Athesist but these people who go around telling everyone how smart they are (and how stupid everyone else is). . .why wouldn't they instill hatred?
    • jadedcynic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is unbelievable. The man was the only one being rational in that panel. Those silly athiest haters.
  • UglieJosh, on 10/12/2007, -16/+243(((HUNTER: What does an atheist believe? Nothing. I think this is such a ridiculous story. Are we now going to take "In God We Trust" off of our dollars? Are we going to not say "one nation under God?" When does it end?)))

    In God we Trust was not originally on the dollar. Under God was added to the pledge YEARS after it was written..............

    What an ignorant *****.
    • thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -63/+21They were added due to majority consent. When the majority no longer consents, then they should be removed. But just because a minority finds the words "Under God" should not qualify them for removal.

      That being said. This was not a fair "panel".
    • fasda, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16when did "in god we trust" get added? around the same time as under god?
      • BoneheadFarker, on 03/28/2008, -0/+0It was added in response to the rise of communism, as a way to move the US away from Russian influence. Blame McCarthy...
    • Shivalyn, on 10/12/2007, -7/+67For the record I don't think that atheists are even the source of this argument. I'm atheist and could care less if "in god we trust" is on my currency. As long as a dollar is still worth a dollar, I'm happy.

      I think most of the anti-God arguments are from the other religions that live here that think their god(s) should be represented equally. And since America has no official religion, they're probably right.

      But from an atheist standpoint, whatever. A little slogan on a piece of metal isn't going to make it true.
    • Enchantrem, on 10/12/2007, -5/+55fasda:
      I believe so. Mid 1950s. McCarthyism, and all that "we're not a bunch of godless communist Soviets" BS.
    • 98acura, on 10/12/2007, -121/+8Dont like "In God we trust." or "one nation under God" ?

      Get the ***** out... Simple as that
    • bumblescrump, on 10/12/2007, -3/+43@thcobbs
      They weren't added due to majority consent, they were added because communism was seen as an atheistic movement and they wanted to combat that here with christian values. Read your history books, particularly on the topic of the cold war. Oh yeah, your 5th grade history book is probably not the most accurate.
    • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -4/+48Having "In God We Trust" on our money is the ultimate blasphemy for a religion whose originator said "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's."

      I'm not really a hard-assed atheist like Dawkins, but I'm going to start telling people I am just for spite.
    • jmkiii, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42@thcobbs

      "Democracy exists to protect the minority from the majority" -Jimmy Carter
    • rnelsonee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24While "YEARS" is correct, I would say "decades" to put it into context. The pledge was written and used in schools since 1892. This means the pledge has not had "under God" for most of it's lifetime. And as others have noted, it was only added during the Red Scare.

      BTW, people like to think that actions taken decades ago are somehow more credible than they are today -- maybe because we're not really there, we just see the outcome in history books. Anyway, my point is that just because it's there doesn't make it the de-facto "correct" way to say the pledge.

      It's no different than if "under God" wasn't in there until now, and Bush decided that he'd want it in there, and some stupid, overreacting-to-terrorists Congressmen passed it into law, and it stayed there. Fast forward 50 years, and people would be having these grand debates about it, and the Supreme Court would hear it, and it'd be all over the news. And why? Because some idiots wanted to add some words. These are the same idiots that started calling french fries "Freedom Fries".

      The debate is not worth my time. When *I* say the pledge, I say it the way it was written. I pay homage to Bellamy (the original author), not some crackpot who thought that people of a different gov't system were ultimate evil of the world.
    • Daveecee, on 10/12/2007, -5/+40"As long as a dollar is still worth a dollar, I'm happy."

      I'm not. Our dollar's value is going doooown.
    • ophilye, on 10/12/2007, -7/+32I'm with Shivalyn.

      Honestly, atheists don't give a damn what is on the dollar. There is also the all-seeing eye thing, and we don't exactly get that, either. No one does, but they don't fight to get it off the dollar. no one cares.

      However, this panel is like a KKK against atheists. I have never seen people with hatred for others that don't care to believe anything whatsoever. What, are they going to FORCE atheists to choose?? "Either choose christianity or buddhism or wicca. We don't care what it is, but you're destroying what I believe in by debunking it. Stop it."

      I truly do not understand. But, with atheism growing so rapidly, I suppose that is just what happens when a minority begins to threaten the majority's money.

    • CopperFalcon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29@98acura

      I believe in separation of Church and State and I believe in freedom of religion. These are basic American principles, so it really makes no sense for ME to get the ***** out. You, on the other hand, may find it more comfortable in a religion-soaked state, like Iran. Or perhaps the Taliban have a place for you. In any case, you hate American freedoms and you damage America, so I really don't see why you're sticking around.
    • texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2@jmkiii

      True...but democracy now is weilded like a spiked baseball bat by the minority against the majority. I doubt seriously that was the original purpose.
    • saladtossser, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17I want to get rid of "God keep our land glorious and free!" in O Canada, too
    • lowerdown, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10just replace god with allah, and we can all go home.
    • GliTCH82, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@Shivalyn

      That's *****, because Jews don't react to that sort of thing obnoxiously, they are a lot more tactful at handling these sorts of differences, and Muslims believe their God is the same God that the Christians worship. So who else is left from the "other religions" that would complain about "In God We Trust?"

    • GeneralFault, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I propose that it is changed to "One nation under democracy for wich we stand". Is that so bad?
    • rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22In 1954, under the dark cloud of McCarthyism, the secular, unifying Pledge of Allegiance, which American soldiers recited throughout both World Wars, was altered to add the words "Under God".

      This was not just a trivial change, like putting "In God We Trust" on the money. This was the first time in the history of the American Republic that the government imposed a religious loyalty oath on the people.

      In 1956, with McCarthyism at its peak hysteria, our uniquely inclusive National Motto, "E Pluribus Unum", Out Of Many, One, was replaced with "In God We Trust". E Pluribus Unum, a phrase from Horace's Epistles, which was adopted by our Founders at the birth of our nation on the recommendation of the Grand Seal Committee, which consisted of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, is still inscribed on the ribbon the American Eagle carries in its beak on our Presidential Seal.

      But the McCarthyites, with President Eisenhowever's collusion, preferred to divide this nation by faith in a misguided attempt to distinguish us from "Godless Communism". Our national motto, which inspired us through Independence, Civil War, 2 World Wars, and numerous struggles in between, a motto applicable to every American regardless of their religious beliefs, was replaced with an explicitly exclusionary one.

      Coupled with the change to our historic Pledge, this activist strike against our cherished American traditions betrayed our heritage and forever marginalized many Americans.

      Ironically, those who screech the loudest about "tradition and conserving Founder's intent" are the same people fighting against restoring our Pledge and our National Motto to their original form, which served this country (in the Motto's case) for 180 years.

      You think defacing our Founder's creation is not a big deal, yet I bet you get whipped into a frenzy at the thought of someone burning a flag.

      Imagine a Pledge that said, "One Nation, Under No God". Would it bother you to recite that? Then perhaps you can understand how we feel. This is not like tiny print on a coin, this is what my daughters had to recite each morning in front of their peers, led by a teacher who went out of the way to emphasize the "Under God" part, after making one of our daughters stand up in elementary school before Christmas and explain to the class "what she celebrated if she her parents didn't let her celebrate Christmas".

      One thing religious faith does not seem to have eradicated, even among the most self-professed pious, and that is hypocrisy.
    • navster15, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@ saladtossser

      I'd like to deal with the fact that our Canadian government actively funds religious schools (most notably Catholic) before we consider altering an ultimately meaningless song.
    • Ron999, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1jmkiii:
      "Democracy exists to protect the minority from the majority" -Jimmy Carter

      Really? How does it do that?
      The Constitution (if anything) protects the minority from the majority.

      But thanks for confirming my belief that Jimmy Carter is an idiot.
    • Tiak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@98acura

      If you don't like living in a nation in which we're free not to want to say whatever we don't want to say, and a nation that was founded specifically to NOT be a Christian nation, then get the ***** out.
  • AniceAtheist, on 10/12/2007, -15/+161Below is the complaint I just sent to them:

    Your network ran a piece on Atheism called "Out in the Open" with Paula Zhan.
    I want to inform you that like many fellow FreeThinkers that you have shown yourselves to be just another propagandizing news channel. You set up a debate of 'experts' to discuss the merits of atheism without any atheist in attendance! Then Karen Hunter (a panelist) says that Atheists should "shut up and let people do what they do. No, I think they need to shut up about it.". That they should "shut up about crying wolf all the time and saying that they're being imposed upon.".
    Another panelists Debbie Schlusse makes prejudicial statements like "That's the one reason our country has not become like Europe because we have strong Christians and because atheists are not strong. And I think that's a good thing." and your organization has no one to rebuke their comments. If you would replace Atheist with African-American or with Muslim you would never even have allowed such a conversation to have been broadcast! You are thereby condoning what they have said, and in showing your true colors have lost a long-time viewer. Luckily in our day of Internet and Satellite TV I have a multitude of international news channels that are not biased hate spewing channels such as yours. You might as well start using "Fair and Balanced" as well. Good Day.
    • russellnation, on 10/12/2007, -42/+11yes, Zinger

      CNN = crappy news network

      long live dawkins!
    • Enchantrem, on 10/12/2007, -27/+10"long live dawkins!"

      - Would Mr. Dawkins, this bastion of Libertarian ideals, really support the idea of suppressing what CNN wants to broadcast? Isn't it their right in the free market to offer whatever product they want?

      Or does that only apply when we're bashing Christians?
    • tobsterius, on 10/12/2007, -3/+51Gee, whenever I ask for an opinion about a serious topic such as religion or atheism, I immediately contact ESPN...
    • texpundit, on 10/12/2007, -24/+10"FreeThinkers"

      Will people stop with the "FreeThinkers" *****...please? NO ONE is *truly* a "free thinker." We all have our beliefs and our biases. Just because you disbelieve something does not automatically mean you are a "free thinker." You just subscribe to a different set of dogma...or anti-dogma.

      That said: people just need to leave people alone to live their lives...no matter their religion...or lack thereof.
    • Braska, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1The 1950's Senator Joe was definately not a "free thinker" in one bias, but was in another . . .
    • boyasunder, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14@enchantrem

      And is it not our right in a free world to criticize and call them out on their *****?

      Why so many people confuse criticism and suppression of ideas is beyond me.
    • captaineuphoria, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5@texpundit
      Protip: Look up 'freethinker'.
    • Enchantrem, on 10/12/2007, -16/+5boyasunder:
      blast, caught in my own hypocrisy. oh well.

      The fact is, I'd rather people quit bitching about stuff like this in general. If you don't like what CNN airs, don't watch them. If enough people don't like what they air, their rating will drop and they'll shut down. I mean, what's the point of someone pointing and yelling "LOOK WHAT CNN DID!!!" to a bunch of people who either A) didn't watch CNN to begin with, therefore not contributing to positive ratings, or B) Watch CNN, and are intelligent enough to decide whether or not to continue watching when a segment like this comes up.
      The act of getting tens, nay i say dozens of internet peoples who never watch CNN to write Turner letters about how upset they are seems... well, silly. If you don't want to watch CNN, that's fine. What I object to is finding the 299 million other Americans who don't watch CNN, and telling them all to write letters. Ted Turner won't loose any sleep at night if a bunch of people who don't regularly watch CNN write him letters telling him they will continue to not watch CNN.

      I guess what I'm getting at is, why criticize, when the only real affect you can have on CNN is the one you already have: don't watch.
    • thepompano, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Here's what I wrote: The fact that CNN's piece on Atheists included no Atheists to defend their viewpoint and a disproportionate amount of Christians on the attack suggests not only that CNN is biased against Atheists, but also that CNN will give anybody a soapbox for ratings.

      I also wanted to take the opportunity to mention that I'm not even going to give lipservice to the idea that Atheists are "on the attack", because it's a stereotype which is false and unsupported at best, and hateful and ignorant at worst. Any cable television news network perpetuating this claim is as irresponsible as those who berate Atheists for "imposing their beliefs on others". A man should not be determined to be easily subject to prolysetizing others solely for his creed. The way in which others (including CNN) condemn Atheists for this percieved practice is condescending and it seems as if most of the blanket comments towards Atheists in that segment have a negative connotation. This isn't a persecution complex - it's common sense.
    • Doghound, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I simply can NOT believe that CNN would take such a stance. Normally I would ignore leaving feedback, but I couldn't sit idly with this one.

      This is what I wrote:

      I recently watched the piece titled "Out in the Open: Beliefs Under Attack" hosted by Paula Zahn. I must say that I complete appalled by the choice of panelists selected for the debate following the commercial break. To begin with, not a single Atheist was brought on to bring a balance to the debate. This was essentially 3 people on one side debating how atheism is wrong with Stephen Smith sitting close to the middle. To make things worse, the debate was not about the segment at all, but was practically an assault on Atheists. The panelists also mentioned a bunch of fallacies about Atheism (I promised myself to refrain from going into detail), which will definitely cause more distrust of Atheists among the American populous and create more stories similar to the first half of the segment. It disgusts me to know that CNN, one of the World's trusted news sources, would take such a stance and that such a question be posed in the background behind the panelists.

      I know I will not be the only person writing in today. As such, I hope that Paula Zahn will be inspired to give a sincere apology on air to Atheists.
  • siszam, on 10/12/2007, -99/+15So it's not hypocrisy for atheists to bash Christians, call us names and say Christianity should be banned but it is hate speech for CNN to say something about atheists. You atheists are the biggest bunch of hypocrites.
    • petroK, on 10/12/2007, -10/+41I'm not saying there aren't plenty of militant atheists who spread hatred for theism. I don't think most atheists want to ban Christianity, just to halt the laws that respect the establishment of theism and prohibit the free exercise of Atheism. I would rather make friends with a militant atheist than a radical fundamentalist Christian of Muslim.

      There is a long history of oppressing atheists in our country... I wouldn't blame the backlash on the atheists but the anti-atheist culture and power structure (as exhibited in this piece)
    • AtheistAcolyte, on 10/12/2007, -12/+15It would be if we restricted ourselves to Christianity. I hold no bars for Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Paganism, Dadaism, and so on. My beef is with religion in general.
    • Stradenko, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16@atheistacolyte

      I'm sure many Christians don't discriminate about which other religions they hate...just like you.
    • meshman, on 10/12/2007, -9/+20"but it is hate speech for CNN to say something about atheists."

      Hate speech? Like this?:

      "They are on the attack. It's obnoxious and they do need to shut up..." and "I think they need to shut up about crying wolf all the time and saying that they're being imposed upon."

      What's the matter? Can't take a spoonful of your own medicine?
    • Rabelais, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25@atheistacolyte

      Dadaism isn't a religion, it was an art movement of the early 20th century (Max Ernst, Man Ray, etc.) Really cool stuff. What's your beef with them?
    • EntropyFan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+39I have no wish to bash any religion. I'm just sick and tired of folks attempting to throw out the separation of church and state.
      Religion and law go together about as well as alcohol and guns.
    • AtheistAcolyte, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Nice catch, Rabelais. I wondered how many would get that. I remember learning about dadaism in a theatre history course. I did poorly in that section, primarily due to my distaste for the rejection of logic and rational thought it entailed and (perhaps a bit more relevantly) the distaste I carried for the course itself.

      @Stradenko -
      I don't hate religions... I think they've done a wonderful job propping up humanity for the past 10 millenia (give or take). I think no religion should be given a "free pass" from critical thinking, that's all. Religion is a vestigial organ of our culture, not necessary for the continued survival of our species. In fact, religion stands a fair chance of destroying us.
    • Jiffylush, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Hello, alcohol and guns ROCK!

    • Rabelais, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@atheistacolyte

      To critique an art movement based on a lack of "logic" or "rational thought" is like...well... criticizing religion on those same grounds. "Whaaaat? Religion isn't logical? OMFG!!!"

      Please. Logical positivism as a school of thought (in serious theoretical circles, mind you) has been dead since at least 1950 (cf. Wittgenstein, Austin, et. al.)

      Logic is a powerful language game that we play to achieve certain ends...and it definitely DOES NOT apply to religion. No serious thinking person would bother to critique religion on logical positivist grounds, because it is endemically and decidedly outside the sphere of "logic".

      Please note that I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiments...it's just that your argument is theoretically flawed. To scream and shout about how illogical religion is deflects attention from the very real structural power it contains, which is what the serious atheist or agnostic should be concentrating on. Religion is a performative concept... whether it is logically true or false is meaningless.

      /geeking out
    • tonton2012, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@atheistacolyte - how about chaos magick? http://www.barbelith.com/cgi-bin/articles/00000004.shtml
    • robofetus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Rabelais:

      Interesting comment. Unfortunately (or not), I don't quite agree, though perhaps I'm just not grasping your point.

      Religion exists outside of logic--to an atheist, this is elemental. However, to many theists, even weak ones, there is no illogic or inconsistency in a marriage of science and religion, there is no double standard when one demands proof for scientific concepts right up to, but not including, all metaphysical concepts. Demonstrating that illogic is the first, necessary step to restructure the debate.

      We should not just accept that religion fulfills different needs, and so should get different treatment. Inconsistency and double standards shouldn't be tolerated--indeed, they only continue to be tolerated in the places where it has been declared by fiat that they must.

    • Ihova, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1@Petrock

      I am interested to know what you consider " oppressing atheists in our country".

      You have the right to believe what you want, when you want, how you want.

      I have never in my life:
      1. Oppressed an atheist.
      2. Witnessed an atheist being oppressed.
      3. Heard about an atheist being oppressed.

      Must be something new.
    • AtheistAcolyte, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0@Rabelais-

      "To critique an art movement based on a lack of "logic" or "rational thought" is like...well... criticizing religion on those same grounds. "Whaaaat? Religion isn't logical? OMFG!!!""

      Dadaism wasn't just an art movement, it was a cultural movement manifesting itself primarily in art forms in response to the horrors of WWI. Dadaism isn't an art movement like cubism or impressionism, it represented a shift in the spirit of the times. At least, that's how it was presented to me.

      "Please. Logical positivism as a school of thought (in serious theoretical circles, mind you) has been dead since at least 1950 (cf. Wittgenstein, Austin, et. al.)"

      I'm not in a serious theoretical circle right now. I just think that critical thought is one of the greatest tools mankind has at its disposal.

      "Logic is a powerful language game that we play to achieve certain ends...and it definitely DOES NOT apply to religion. No serious thinking person would bother to critique religion on logical positivist grounds, because it is endemically and decidedly outside the sphere of "logic"."

      Again, I'm not critiquing religion on solely logical grounds, who said I was? I merely said I disliked the Dadaist movement for it's willful abandonment of logical and rational thought. I didn't say anything about why I dislike religion.

      "Please note that I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiments...it's just that your argument is theoretically flawed. To scream and shout about how illogical religion is deflects attention from the very real structural power it contains, which is what the serious atheist or agnostic should be concentrating on. Religion is a performative concept... whether it is logically true or false is meaningless."

      I'm not sure exactly what method you espouse for dealing with religion. Could you specify what you mean by the last couple phrases, from 'very real structural power...' on?

      "/geeking out"

      /geek on
    • Rabelais, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@robofetus

      "Demonstrating that illogic is the first, necessary step to restructure the debate."

      I appreciate the ideal, but try telling a religious fundamentalist that their belief is "illogical" and see how far you get. If religious people allowed themselves to be talked out of their beliefs by logical means, they would have been reduced to a small minority of inbred retards long ago. (It's not like the logical arguments against religion are particularly hard to grasp.)

      The point is that different discourse communities create their own rules of discourse. Just as rationalists have rules called "logic", religion has a different set of rules. Unfortunately (and I really mean that), logic does not occupy some unassailable, a priori position, as much as we would like to believe it does. Religious fundamentalism is currently a dominant discourse which cannot be "rationalized" away. It is possible and even common for these two discourses to co-exist in one person (are there no intelligent, rational religious people? I could name a few...) Philosophers like Kierkegaard have written vast tracts on this phenomenon of the intellectual "double standard" ('Either/Or' is a great read which I would recommend to anyone).

      My point is that by accusing religious people of simply not grasping your logical argument, you are insulting their intelligence (which, believe it or not, many of them do possess) and are not adding anything to the debate. Logic describes the rule set of a discourse community which religion does not take part in. We cannot simply dismiss religion on those grounds because, as mentioned above, it is definitely a dominant discourse worldwide. I believe that it is far more important to point out and try to rectify the structural and genealogical features of religions which allow them to be used as weapons (cf. Foucault, etc.)

      My argument is not that we should tolerate religion because it is generally a force for good. I am simply saying that to ignore its status as an arbiter of present-day discourse is counter-productive.
    • AtheistAcolyte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@Rabelais -

      I think I see your point. You mean that, since religion is such a dominant force in the world, we do not have the luxury of engaging it on our rational terms. Rather, we'll have to adopt a different tack in engaging religion and probably start on their terms. I'd have to agree, and would be interested in hearing more on how to approach the problem.
    • mlmorg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Atheists never bash Christians, call them names, or tell them their religion should be banned. I personally know no Atheist who would/or has ever done that. The only thing that Atheists oppose is when religions add prayer in schools or add In God We Trust to the dollar bill; whenever religion is forced into their life. This nation was founded to have different beliefs or lack there of. This nation was founded to separate church and state so that the government could not force a religion or religion in general on anyone else. Public school's with prayer forces those beliefs onto others. That's why a law was enacted against it. Imagine if a muslim went to texas and forced muslim prayer in schools there. How do you think people would react? No one wants to be ruled by others. Many people in America, however, feel that that is incorrect. That this is a Christian nation, just because it has a majority of Christians, and therefore should shove that religion down others throats. Our nation was founded on certain civil liberties so that minorties would not be persecuted. So that this sort of thing would not happen. Atheists are a minority and should be allowed to speak up if they want. Anyone should be able to speak up. No one should be told to shut up. Civil liberties are there so that minorties can have a say in the country they live in. Just because a majority opposes a group of people does not mean that minority should be silenced. That minority SHOULD speak out and defend against their beliefs...read any civil liberties textbook. This has been going on since our nation was founded. There is no way an Atheist can infringe on your civil rights, so you should not infringe on ours. This is exactly how people feel about homosexuals. They think they are infringing on their beliefs just because they themselves act differently. This is the exact reason Matthew Shephard was killed in Laramie. The people there were fostering hatred towards others and making it seem like just because they existed they were hurting and infringing on other peoples society. This is why hatred towards blacks was/is so prevalent. Martin Luther King Jr. stopped that. Our civil liberties stopped that. It's just sad to see that America is not changing and probably never will. There are a bunch of people in America who believe one thing and hate everyone else who are not exactly like them. It's just very very sad. I don't see how anyone can believe in religion and love thy neighbor, etc. and at the same time hate others who are not like them. It's just horrible.
  • Arahka, on 10/12/2007, -5/+92Where in the constituition does it say that the United States is to be specifically a Christian country. Where was it decreed that we are Christian? I see a lot about freedom of religion but nothing about Christianity inparticular. Our founding fathers were not all Christians. Thomas Jefferson for one was a seeker of religion and towards the end of his life did a lot toward establishing the Unitarian Universalist religion. This ***** just ***** me off. I think we're a secular country. That people can have their religion but it can not be imposed upon people. Where do these ***** get off imposing Christianity, or imposing that you have to believe in a religion founded descended from Abraham (islam, judism, christianity) or you just don't count. If you believe that all religion is ***** that's your choice too. Why can't we be a secular society? What's so wrong with that? You want your children to be moral and pray? Well spend some time with them, teach them that. Don't depend on the schools for that part of their education, or send them to a Catholic or other private school.


    I need to move to europe.
    • AtheistAcolyte, on 10/12/2007, -4/+118Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, signed 1796:
      "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

      This was passed unanimously by the United States Senate, and signed by Pres. George Washington without a hint of discontent.
    • robdiggity, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18"Why can't we be a secular society?"

      Well, if you relax and take a breath you may come to the realization that we really sorta are. This society enables everyone (even blathering fools!) to speak their minds most of the time. Thank goodness there are an awful lot of forums to make up for those forums that are accidentally (or intentionally) unbalanced.

      "I need to move to europe. "

      No, you don't. What you need to do is not panic hyperbolically every time a twenty-something recent tv/film graduate associate producer sells a poorly conceived and possibly intentionally inflammatory segment to Paula Zhan.

      It's called trolling, and it's not just for the Internet anymore! In fact, you may find trolling has its historical roots in February sweeps daytime "talk" television.
    • adam84a, on 10/12/2007, -23/+3"I need to move to europe."

      Please do :)
    • joe122370, on 10/12/2007, -17/+2somewhere it says that "we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights". If you don't have a creator, you have no rights.
      • JonnyTruant, on 01/21/2008, -0/+0That's the Declaration of Independence. It is only a declaration of separation from the British Empire and holds no legal status in the foundation of our country. The Constitution, which defines our country, bears no statement endorsing any religion nor does it contain a direct implication of any religion. It specifically states that the government is to keep its hands out of religion.
    • Wosat, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2You got one thing right. You DO need to move to Europe. Bye!
    • tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7You don't want to move to Europe (well, I only have experience of the UK, so I'll just say you don't want to move here).

      We seem to have the opposite problem to you going on. We are seemingly SO DETERMINED to never, ever, ever offend anyone, that as a result we can say nothing. Yes, everyone has the ability to believe that they want, but because of this determination never to offend, it's essentially worth nothing. It's getting to the point where we can't have christmas trees in case it offends Muslims. Can't have any sort of religious symbols at all in case it offends some other religion. Everyone can believe what they want, but no-one can say so in case it offends. Trust me, you don't want to move into that because it will infuriate you like it infuriates me.

      The ridiculous thing is, no-ones actually offended by any of these things. Have you seriously ever met a Muslim who has adopted the western lifestyle and who is offended by a christmas tree? Of course not. Truth is, we're all told what might offend other people without those 'other people' ever being consulted. That's basically the definition of political correctness, and the UK is drowning under it. The powers call this 'multiculturalism', but really, it's trying to remove every semblance of culture so that no-one is any different from anyone else.

      You might as well stay where you are; over this side of the pond, we're suffering from a different but just as damaging problem.
    • bitcloud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I always thought USA was a secular democracy (that is to say, a "democracy" - the "secular" part becomes redundant)

      You can mod me down all you like, but the real Americans - the silent majority - understand that there are serious problems with a country that fails to understand democracy and insists upon imposing their corrupt view on the rest of the world.
    • lowerdown, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4i'm already on the plane
    • autc04, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@tizz66
      "You don't want to move to Europe (well, I only have experience of the UK, so I'll just say you don't want to move here)."

      I think the points you raise really mostly apply to the UK. In my opinion, most of continental Europe is not as bad as the UK, Canada or the non-Republican part of the USA in this respect.

      And on the general topic of moving to Europe:
      Atheists are not discriminated against here in Austria (I know first-hand; though our president prefers to call himself "agnostic" to seem less extreme). I guess atheists are a solid thirty percent of the population, or more among the under-30 crowd. Most of the rest is moderately catholic (and a few recent immigrants).
      The downside of moving to continental Europe is, of course, that you'll have to learn a language other than English sooner or later, and that you might want to practice saying "Ididntvoteforbush" very quickly as soon as anyone notices your American accent.
  • DFrag, on 10/12/2007, -101/+8"Why do atheists inspire such hatred?"

    Because they spread hatred for everyone of faith.
    • AtheistAcolyte, on 10/12/2007, -7/+49No, I think the people of other faiths do that quite well on their own, with no help from us.
    • Strider817, on 10/12/2007, -10/+45Nice flame but I'll bite.

      Atheism inspires hatred because in all religions turning against your god is a sin. Religious leaders preach things like, "You need God's guidance to avoid sin" or "God's forgiveness is the key to salvation." Naturally, someone who forsakes god's forgiveness or guidance is forsaking the worst possible thing imaginable. Since eternity is far more important then anything on this earth, it would make sense to them, that atheists should be shunned.

      As atheists we must realize that many religions believe we stand for everything they do not, chaos, disobedience, disloyalty, dishonesty, ect. Although this is far from the truth, we are fighting thousands of years of teachings that say "you must not question, you must be loyal".

    • mediatedthought, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11Wow. What a completely unfounded statement. Please read some Dawkins, and understand the compassion he has for those who disagree with him.
    • teamgwho, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17ya got that wrong. Religion promotes hatred of anyone not of that faith. it is virtually impossible to find a religion that doesn't put down, discriminate, criticicize, vilify or condemn those who are non members. Some are a bit more aggresive about it, but they all say the same thing: our way is the right way, the only way.

      So you have innumerable groups of people all claiming the other groups are the bad guys, the sinful ones, the ones going to hell. meanwhile the aethist looks on from the outside and sees all that money, time, and energy spent on fighting, "clensing", "education", etc etc. and says "you folks are destructive"

      what is that saying the enemy of my enemy is my friend? so it's quite easy for a jew, a muslim a christian to turn on an aethist, not just because he is an enemy of one of the,m but he is an enemy of ALL of them, and for once they can agree on something.

      and that is why atheists inspire such hatred. that and the fact that it's so damn easy for a religious person to be hateful.
    • TheChihuahua, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4@mediatedthought

      Compassion? Try contempt. Richard Dawkins is the biggest asshat I've ever heard of in recent times. He wants to battle religion, fine, let him go for it. But don't drag lots of other agnostics into his argument, which is all he seems to do.
    • boogface, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3@Strider817

      Just curious how an atheist makes a decision to whether something is right or wrong without some real right to base it against. If real right exists, where does it come from?
    • boogface, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@teamgwho

      "ya got that wrong. Religion promotes hatred of anyone not of that faith. it is virtually impossible to find a religion that doesn't put down, discriminate, criticicize, vilify or condemn those who are non members. Some are a bit more aggresive about it, but they all say the same thing: our way is the right way, the only way."

      Look deeper. What you describe are people who started with good intentions but turned to wickedness due to selfishness. The people who do what you describe do not change the truth behind the teachings, only your perspective of it.
    • spazoidspam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13@boogface
      I think that most people, even religious people, would be offended if you assumed they were only moral because their god is sending them to hell if they aren't.

      An atheist decides if something is right or wrong by reversing the tables and thinking how they would feel if they were in the other person's shoes.

      if your question is
      Should I steal?
      then ask yourself
      How would I feel if stolen from?
      the answer is "Bad", so you should not steal

      I would go even further and say that on average, atheists are more moral then religious people, because atheists can figure out why something is wrong, and many religious people only know something is wrong if they are going to be punished for doing it.

      Children need to be taught wrong from right, but adults should have the compassion to figure it out for themselves.
    • hplasm, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Athiests? Mostly they really don't give a ***** what ghost stories other people believe. Apart from the zealots- man, they REALLY don't give a ***** what other people believe!
    • eatbeefjerky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How do we decide whether something is right or wrong? I'll tell you. When I have to make a decision... for example, I need a new TV. Now I must decide how to obtain it. I can either work hard, earn the money, and buy it, help the economy, be a good citizen... or I can rob Best Buy. Now working hard and earning the money will take longer, but at least I know there is no risk of hurting someone else or legal repercussions... and working hard to earn something yourself feels kinda good, doesn't it? Yeah... I think I'll take the nice-guy route.

      You don't need religion to tell you what's right or wrong, and to imply that our society has become such that religion IS necessary to tell us what's right or wrong... scares me. Deeply. I find it absolutely LUDICROUS that I'm expected to follow the so-called "teachings" of some archaic fairytale in order to be considered moral. Particularly when that archaic fairytale advocates slavery, abuse of women, forcing a woman to marry her rapist, and murder.
    • boogface, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@eatbeefjerky

      I haven't yet said that we need a Religion to tell us what is right or wrong. I'm only asking whether a real Right exists and if it does, where does it come from? Who invented it? Was it a human?

    • teamgwho, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ boogface

      **Look deeper. What you describe are people who started with good intentions but turned to wickedness due to selfishness. The people who do what you describe do not change the truth behind the teachings, only your perspective of it.**

      forget the idea of whether or not there really is a god. Let's focus on the fact that a group of people believes there is. In the name of that belief they do terrible things. Almost all religious groups have waged war, commited murder and rape, burned cities and the like in the defense of that belief. Or should I say, the promotion of that belief. All of the major faiths have blood on their hands thru history.

      What I used to say (before I became an aethist) was that "I believed in God but not the church" because I felt that the organization of religion, the hierarchy, the establishment of men giving orders to other men on how to interpret the bible/koran/torah was what has ***** things up. If you as an individual are highly religious, read your religious book and discover meaning, that's one thing. you as an individual will not likely go and commit mass murder in the name of your god. When a "church leader" tells his flock that "this is how it is" & that "my interpretations mean you need to do XYZ" that's where we enter dangerous waters.
  • petroK, on 10/12/2007, -5/+49I'm an evangelical agnostic (you should hear me try to convert my athiest wife)... but this makes me want to join the Rational Response Squad. I haven't been so ***** off in a very long time.

    Love the way they have a panel on "Why do Athiests inspire so much hatred" and can't find a single atheist to sit on the panel...

    The only one even close to defending atheism was an ESPN sports analyst... a friggin Christian sports analyst.

    Imagine the same panel on Islam "Why do Muslims inspire so much hatred" without a single muslim on the panel ...
    (the answer to that question of course is the lack of Ramadan greeting cards)

    • UglieJosh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+36Wait............. I read the transcript rather than watch......... Are you telling me that the "Stephen Smith" from the transcript is Stephen A. Smith from Quite Frankly?

      The most rational opinion was from the sports anchor????
    • 1010011010, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18"The most rational opinion was from the sports anchor????"

      Isn't it usually? The best journalism and writing is on the sports pages, too. The "news reporters" and "editorialists" are mostly ignorant hacks.
    • spyrochaete, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I never knew who Stephen A Smith was until today but I'm glad I do now. I respect that guy big time for his opinions. He and I would have argued those women with exactly the same words, except that I do not believe in a god. He is absolutely tolerant of atheism and everyone's personal spiritual beliefs. Stephen A. Smith for ***** president.
    • Zera, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yep, I've always enjoyed Stephen A Smith's show, for his directness, insight, compassion, etc.

      As the clip started, I felt bad, because I assumed he was going to say something asinine and that my opinion of him would be ruined, therefore eliminating the joy I get from watching his show. But, I am glad to have been wrong! Stephen A Smith, YOU ARE THE MAN. Even though you said something stupid, "I know this is a Christian country" you said everything else correctly.

      I didn't know he was a religious fellow, and I don't really care, as most of my family and friends are religious, but I'm refreshed to see such competence from him, on YET ANOTHER topic.

      I'm glad Stephen A Smith didn't fall to the depths of Katie Couric with her whole "No Atheists in Foxholes" *****.
  • AtheistAcolyte, on 10/12/2007, -6/+85Here's my response to them:

    You recently ran a piece regarding discrimination in America against atheists, and I was horrified to see the panel discussion following the initial interview portion. Particularly, there was no atheist representation in the panel, so there was no counterpoint to how atheists in America feel discriminated against. I suggest you follow up on the many stories of discrimination that you yourselves allude to with your pre-panel segment. Many people in America are being hounded by religious groups and even their own neighbors just for their beliefs.

    A friend of mine, who is a homosexual, once said to my wife that we'll never understand how lucky we are to not have to worry if the guy across the bar will bash in our head with an iron pipe for flirting with him. I'm afraid that now, I at least have an inkling of his fear. I, and many others I know, are afraid to speak our beliefs for fear of reprisals. We *ARE* the homosexuals of the 80's and 90's, the African-Americans of the 50's and 60's, the feminists of the same era, and the Jews of the past few millenia. We are struggling for acceptance outside of the zoo-like curiosity of our theistic co-workers and neighbors.

    A comment was made about atheists believing in nothing. This is patently untrue, and misinformation of the highest order. Atheism is not nihilism as some would have everyone believe. Atheists can be swept up into an almost religious fervor just by observing the beauty of the natural world. Free thinkers such as myself believe in a naturalistic worldview, a belief that everything around us is natural and can be discovered through analysis of natural processes. Some theists can share a similar worldview, but a theist also believes in, at least partially, a supernaturalistic worldview. Atheists deny the supernatural, because we find it unfulfilling intellectually (and yes, spiritually, if there is a difference).

    Were you to replace the label 'atheist' with 'African-American' or 'homosexual' or 'immigrant' or 'Muslim' or 'Jew', you would be met with such angry resistance you would be hard pressed to not issue an apology to the aggrieved group. And yet I doubt there will be such an apology for us, since we are such a small minority and it will probably be hard for you to understand just how you have set back acceptance of atheists nation-(if not world-)wide in the span of five minutes.

    Perhaps I am too pessimistic. I truly hope that you will recognize the error you made and take steps to actually raise the consciousness of your viewers. I do not ask for apology; that would be too much to ask for. But I do wish you would ask a prominent atheist such as Sam Harris (http://www.samharris.org), Richard Dawkins (http://www.richarddawkins.net), or Daniel Dennett (http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/incbios/dennettd/dennettd.htm) on your show to present the atheist's perspective and actually balance out the tribunal of prejudiced panelists you invited onto your show.
    • Shawnosaurus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Hell, my response was,

      "Put atheistacolyte on your show. You'll have to look him up on Digg, but he has some good insights."
    • thelochness, on 10/12/2007, -21/+2Did you honestly just compare yourself to the blacks of the 50s and 60s?
    • kenthorvath, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13@thelochness: It's called an "analogy". Basically, it's where you point out similarities between two or more sets of things. The key word is "similarities". And yes, it was a valid analogy - both groups experienced discrimination and persecution.
    • johnnybluejeans, on 10/12/2007, -21/+4"We *ARE* the homosexuals of the 80's and 90's, the African-Americans of the 50's and 60's, the feminists of the same era, and the Jews of the past few millenia."

      Tell me about it! I mean, every day I hear about how Atheists are getting lynched by people of faith and are not allowed to sit in the same restaurants or use the same restrooms.

      Remember when those 6 million Atheists were systematically put to death in less than a decades time?

      Ooh, and I totally can't believe how Atheists are not allowed to legally get married in this country.

      Remember when Atheists weren't even allowed to vote?

      Oh wait a second.. none of that happened to Atheists.. it happened to Blacks, Jews, Homosexuals and Women.

      Before you make such an absurd statement, why not reflect on the kind of discrimination that these groups faced and then compare it to the discrimination that Atheists face (IE, absolutely none).

      An analogy implies similarities between similar sets of things. There are no similarities here. How can you compare the "descrimination" of a cable news show to ***** genocide?
    • Jadinlee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Well said. I submitted my complaints to CNN as well but I'm glad that others have voiced their concerns far more eloquently.
    • AtheistAcolyte, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@johnnybluejeans-
      Well, if you want to get into a ***** match, "atheism" and "godlessness" have been reasons to slaughter millions for centuries. Socrates was put to death for encouraging questioning of the Athenian god