Comments on: What do Chuck Norris, the Pope, and Richard Dawkins All Have in Common? http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/ Atheism with Positivity Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:58:32 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Joel Sax http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/comment-page-1/#comment-98954 Joel Sax Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:28:12 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/#comment-98954 Dawkins should be up there for bad Biblical scholarship alone which ranks with the cherry-picking of the worst Fundamentalist. <blockquote>Sacrilege to include Dawkins! </blockquote> And this statement clinches the argument that he's setting himself up as atheism's leading dogmatist. Arf arf! Dawkins should be up there for bad Biblical scholarship alone which ranks with the cherry-picking of the worst Fundamentalist.

Sacrilege to include Dawkins!

And this statement clinches the argument that he’s setting himself up as atheism’s leading dogmatist.

Arf arf!

]]> By: MikeClawson http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/comment-page-1/#comment-98905 MikeClawson Fri, 07 Dec 2007 01:40:10 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/#comment-98905 Hitchens might have been a better choice than Dawkins for this particular list, IMHO. Hitchens might have been a better choice than Dawkins for this particular list, IMHO.

]]> By: Viggo the Carpathian http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/comment-page-1/#comment-98880 Viggo the Carpathian Fri, 07 Dec 2007 00:31:20 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/#comment-98880 I think that Dawkins made the list because he is zealous in his non-beliefs and a zealot by any philosophy is still a zealot. Don't get me wrong- I like Dawkins, but he and Hitchens and Harris are all a little over the top in dissing religion. As most religion is worthy of dissing, I'm cool with that. I think that Dawkins made the list because he is zealous in his non-beliefs and a zealot by any philosophy is still a zealot. Don’t get me wrong- I like Dawkins, but he and Hitchens and Harris are all a little over the top in dissing religion.

As most religion is worthy of dissing, I’m cool with that.

]]> By: stogoe http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/comment-page-1/#comment-98719 stogoe Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:40:31 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/#comment-98719 <blockquote>Since when is passion for the truth and passion for exhuming this world of superstition and delusion a bad thing?</blockquote> Well, you see, it might make the 'moderate' believers slightly uncomfortable. Making people ashamed of their silly dogma is exactly as bad as kicking a baby in the face. DUH!

Since when is passion for the truth and passion for exhuming this world of superstition and delusion a bad thing?

Well, you see, it might make the ‘moderate’ believers slightly uncomfortable. Making people ashamed of their silly dogma is exactly as bad as kicking a baby in the face. DUH!

]]> By: grazatt http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/comment-page-1/#comment-98676 grazatt Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:31:41 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/#comment-98676 <strong>D'Souza</strong> is in the lead. I wonder why? D’Souza is in the lead. I wonder why?

]]> By: The Unbrainwashed http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/comment-page-1/#comment-98599 The Unbrainwashed Thu, 06 Dec 2007 08:30:33 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/#comment-98599 Sacrilege to include Dawkins! Since when is passion for the truth and passion for exhuming this world of superstition and delusion a bad thing? Sacrilege to include Dawkins! Since when is passion for the truth and passion for exhuming this world of superstition and delusion a bad thing?

]]> By: Reed Braden http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/comment-page-1/#comment-98519 Reed Braden Thu, 06 Dec 2007 05:42:48 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/12/05/what-do-chuck-norris-the-pope-and-richard-dawkins-all-have-in-common/#comment-98519 I'm upset Allister McGrath didn't make the list. Or, what I meant to say, was this: that while some may find Mr. McGrath a positive figure in many of the variations of faith in Jesus, I find Mr. McGrath-no offence meant to him at all, I'm sure he's a wonderful person of that particular faith-a less-than-desirable speaker for his constant habit of wishy-washiness and his innate ability to talk for hours without saying anything or even finishing his first sentence, although some people may enjoy that style of debate and Mr. McGrath should continue if it makes those people happy, which it very well may do, on the other hand, one must ask himself (or herself) if, supposing that they have faith in Jesus, they would really want someone who is so apologetic to everything to be a spokesperson for their beliefs, but whatever is the consensus about Mr. McGrath, he is a nice gentleman with honourable intentions. Ugh... writing that made me sick. I’m upset Allister McGrath didn’t make the list. Or, what I meant to say, was this: that while some may find Mr. McGrath a positive figure in many of the variations of faith in Jesus, I find Mr. McGrath-no offence meant to him at all, I’m sure he’s a wonderful person of that particular faith-a less-than-desirable speaker for his constant habit of wishy-washiness and his innate ability to talk for hours without saying anything or even finishing his first sentence, although some people may enjoy that style of debate and Mr. McGrath should continue if it makes those people happy, which it very well may do, on the other hand, one must ask himself (or herself) if, supposing that they have faith in Jesus, they would really want someone who is so apologetic to everything to be a spokesperson for their beliefs, but whatever is the consensus about Mr. McGrath, he is a nice gentleman with honourable intentions.

Ugh… writing that made me sick.

]]>