and I agree.

from the uk guardian...


full story>>>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/

Yknow, Dawkins has some good points and whatnot but he's easily as much of a grating jackass as Christian Fundamentalists.

What does Brian Dawkins have against the pope?

From my experience your [broken] link sucks but I can't see why anyone would legitimately want the Pope on trial unless it some other propaganda play on the whole pedophilia "scandal".

It's because Dawkins has some kind of douchebag-vendetta against all that is spiritual or religious.

I agree with this completely.

But from the point of view of an atheist, he's hilarious when he's talking to someone like Ted Haggard.

Ok link is fixed. It's not so much that I think this pope in particular needs to stand trial as there needs to be a complete investigation into the Vatican And especially the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

I think this was a really good article - the Higgins part was very interesting. The pope, of course, should be able to be called to face trial like everyone else. I think it's too bad though, that Dawkins and Hitchens are the ones doing this.

infallibility is a complete defense

http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5429

For anyone that thinks that Dawkins is a dick, you should really check out the Hitchens debates. I personally feel like they both hold back too much. It's about time we send these ****ers a message.

This...

I don't want to put words in his mouth but it probably has a lot to do w/ the sentiment of these ****ers being "above the law".

I think it's about time someone called Catholicism out on this bull****. I just wish it wasn't an atheist, since his arguments will be cleanly and easily dismissed as from a bitter atheist with a chip on his shoulder. Sadly, a Christian would more likely succeed.

Reason being: this isn't a battle between atheism and theism, but that's what this automatically becomes now. The man certainly has a sense of justice, but his politicking absolutely blows.

Edit: I realize Dawkins isn't technically atheist, but he's close enough to where it won't matter to the average person.

...why did you put scandal is scare quotes?

I'm pretty sure that almost everyone has tried to call them out on this bull****. It's been well known about for decades if not centuries.

?

Foosball?! People still play/watch that?! Humor is wasted on me.

Haha, Macfarlane, that is a photo of a man who can bring down the Vatican.

Well, old Benedict better give Berlusconi a call. I'm sure he has some friends who can fix this.

From all "anti-theists" that I've heard, I prefer listening to Christopher Hitchens. Probably in part to the fact that his debates are usually quite civil (albeit there are, of course, exceptions). Or maybe it's the Brit accent.

I need to read around this, but I pre-emptively agree with Baconfish. Dawkins is often right, but he's always a dick.

I can't wait to see how this turns out. I just hope that I get a fair warning so that I can kick back w/ a bowl of popcorn.

Dawkins is never a dick

He is a very nice man who says outrageous things

Ok, how about:

I tried to read The God Delusion and despite agreeing with almost every word he said I still wanted to ram the hardback up his arse because he comes off as a deeply smug man.

Because that is the truth.

Read some Hitchens. Aparart from his books (religious and otherwise), he writers a column for Vanity Fair (not religous column, just stuff).

This one (circa 2004) made me chuckle quite a bit:

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2004/02/hitchens200402

He doesn't come across as smug, he comes across as despairing or exasperated. It's often hard to tell the two apart, but the clue is that he almost certainly doesn't take pleasure out of being right when the majority of the world's populating is wrong.

I'm surprised to hear people saying worse things about Dawkins than about Hitchens. I enjoy both of these guys but Hitchens is by far the most insulting towards people w/ irrational beliefs. He has a book about Mother Theresa called "The Missionary Position" for ****'s sake. He said on national television that he was happy that Fallwell was dead & that he didn't care about the feelings of his family. He's so convinced that the people he debates w/ &/or interviews w/ aren't a threat that he comes drunk half of the time. He even flipped off Bill Mayer's audience & shouted "**** you" when they disagreed w/ him. I ****ing love that guy. Dawkins, Dennett & Harris are far less likely to be insulting or outrageous. I personally feel like they all hold back too much & should start sticking it to people like Hitchens does.

Wow that interview clip is painful to watch. Christopher Hitchens should stick to communicating his message thru text.

This is a personal favorite of mine. Still think that Dawkins is bad?

You clearly misunderstand what smug means if you think you're not.

If anything I think Richard Dawkins is frequently just frustrated that people are unable to see the world from a logical point of view.

Smug requires getting some kind of satisfaction or enjoyment from the situation, and I don't think Richard Dawkins does. And neither do I, it's frustration and nothing more.