HEPPY EASTER

[boxy]

You'd be a harsh critic to have a problem with Jesus, himself... it's his followers, who invoke his name in a misguided appeal to authority, that disgust me with some of the shit they made up after his death. Resurrection, my arse.

[J.W. Frogen]

I have a problem with "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

I don't want people doing unto me what they would have done unto them, what if they are masochists?

[Swami Dring]

On the serious side of things of course almost every religious tradition has far more complex human thoughts, ideas, philosophy, and yes, some times wisdom than most children's stories.

Take Jesus (who probably did exist, unlike the Tooth Fairy, though I do not think he resurrected, unlike Hey Hey It’s Saturday), there is much that he says and teaches that is extremely valuable even to the secular humanist or atheist, the tooth fairy analogy is facile and reveals that at least for those atheists who use it, there is a reflexive faith that religion is totally and completely false and destructive rather than an serious or thought out examination of it’s complexity.

As to political faith, or blind faith in political ideology, the instincts are very much like the instincts of the religious fundamentalist, often with the same or even greater destructive consequences.

This reveals that the idea of religion versus the atheist is simply a dispute of reason versus irrationality if flawed, it is not an accurate assessment of how either group actually behaves and is too simplistic a defense of atheism.

My Tooth Fairy analogy was not with Jesus but with the magic poof. See, the reason you, J-Dub, don't believe in the Tooth Fairy is exactly the same reason that I don't believe in little goddy. The logical progression is identical. And it's the exact same reason that believers in little goddy don't believe in thor and isis and mercury and the other 5000 or so magic pooves.

And now I shall prod the asses of agnostics with a fork. Agnostics like to groove on the claim that they're all open minded & shit. But I would bet my hat, if I had a hat, that the average agnostic is not sitting on the fence with regard to the Tooth Fairy. They would "know" that there is no Tooth Fairy. But when it comes to little goddy, they become all wishy-washy & open minded. And the reasons for this are the same reasons which lead theists to their fantasies: stupidity, fear and egomania.

[boxy]

Perhaps the reason is the same reason they don't argue with kids about the existence, or not, of the Tooth Fairy? Sometimes it's for the best, to allow people to have their little fantasies.

[Swami Dring]

It's a fair point, boxy. Sometimes I wonder if I'm being a little cruel by rubbing believers' noses in their own stupidity. Not just online. I do it in real life too.

But there is always that chasm between the kid who simply enjoys his fantasy, and the adult equivalent whom is not content to merely enjoy his fantasy. YOU must enjoy it too and if you don't..............................well, the passage I cut & pasted from Fark.com sums it up nicely.

[J.W. Frogen]

The tooth fairy analogy is still facile for the previous reasons stated; most religions traditions have complex narratives about the nature of God or enlightenment as well as revealed narratives of what it is like to experience it. Anyone familiar with comparative religion will find much of it as beautiful and profound as a lot of philosophy or poetry.

This does not make it empircally true, but most believers believe it is true, (this is Hitchen’s great flaw, he often can not believe they really believe) but many if not most religious people have experienced it as true. Unlike the Tooth Fairy which is so simplistic children do not have to be told it is not true, the grow out of it.

Also the fact that religion is universal in every culture and practiced by the majority in every culture reveals a far more complex human process than Dawkins is willing or capable of thinking about.

Much of his criticism is as emotive and irrational as the faith he condemns.

[Hebe]

Leave the Tooth Fairy alone. I made a lot of money out of that sucker.

[Swami Dring]

The tooth fairy analogy is still facile for the previous reasons stated; most religions traditions have complex narratives about the nature of God or enlightenment as well as revealed narratives of what it is like to experience it. Anyone familiar with comparative religion will find much of it as beautiful and profound as a lot of philosophy or poetry.

The Tooth Fairy analogy is most excellent. It would be a simple task to invent a complex narrative about the nature of the Fairy as well as revealed narratives of what it is like to experience it. It would be simple because I would just make that shit up. Just like religion. Plenty of works of fiction are beautiful and profound, but that is not a reason to believe that the fictional characters contained within them are real.

This does not make it empircally true, but most believers believe it is true, (this is Hitchen’s great flaw, he often can not believe they really believe) but many if not most religious people have experienced it as true. Unlike the Tooth Fairy which is so simplistic children do not have to be told it is not true, the grow out of it.

I can understand why a person with a great mind like Hitchens would be incredulous at the absurd beliefs of theists. Perhaps you can't understand it, but it would be cruel of me to point out why this is. I think he's right that a lot of ostensible believers are in fact not. And not just because of the very low percentage of the population who attend church. My wife "likes" to believe, for the same reason that agnostics sit on the fence. She's hedging her bets. But she's actually an atheist. I said to her once, "if you had to bet our house on the question of is there/isn't there a god, and there was a way to know with 100% certainty, what would you bet the house on?" She said she would bet that there isn't. Most theists would bet similarly.

As for the last line, I didn't need to be told that there was no god. I worked it out by myself, and I was still in primary school.

Also the fact that religion is universal in every culture and practiced by the majority in every culture reveals a far more complex human process than Dawkins is willing or capable of thinking about.

You are confusing the symptom with the disease here. The disease is human weakness: greed, fear and stupidity. It's universal and it's anything but complex. These are the afflictions which lead to the symptoms, which are the thousands of gods so far invented. It is indicative of the fact that we are still fairly simple-minded, primitive apes, prone to wish-thinking and the abandonment of reason.

Much of his criticism is as emotive and irrational as the faith he condemns.

I suspect you meant to use the word "emotional" here rather than "emotive", but either way, this is crap. He and Dawkins are beacons of reason and sanity in an ocean of hysterical religious bullshit.

[J.W. Frogen]

You are so lucky Dring that I am too drunk for God to play me as an instrument of her wrath.

[AiA in Atlanta]

The tooth fairy analogy is still facile for the previous reasons stated; most religions traditions have complex narratives about the nature of God or enlightenment as well as revealed narratives of what it is like to experience it. Anyone familiar with comparative religion will find much of it as beautiful and profound as a lot of philosophy or poetry.

The Tooth Fairy analogy is most excellent. It would be a simple task to invent a complex narrative about the nature of the Fairy as well as revealed narratives of what it is like to experience it. It would be simple because I would just make that shit up. Just like religion. Plenty of works of fiction are beautiful and profound, but that is not a reason to believe that the fictional characters contained within them are real.

This does not make it empircally true, but most believers believe it is true, (this is Hitchen’s great flaw, he often can not believe they really believe) but many if not most religious people have experienced it as true. Unlike the Tooth Fairy which is so simplistic children do not have to be told it is not true, the grow out of it.

I can understand why a person with a great mind like Hitchens would be incredulous at the absurd beliefs of theists. Perhaps you can't understand it, but it would be cruel of me to point out why this is. I think he's right that a lot of ostensible believers are in fact not. And not just because of the very low percentage of the population who attend church. My wife "likes" to believe, for the same reason that agnostics sit on the fence. She's hedging her bets. But she's actually an atheist. I said to her once, "if you had to bet our house on the question of is there/isn't there a god, and there was a way to know with 100% certainty, what would you bet the house on?" She said she would bet that there isn't. Most theists would bet similarly.

As for the last line, I didn't need to be told that there was no god. I worked it out by myself, and I was still in primary school.

Also the fact that religion is universal in every culture and practiced by the majority in every culture reveals a far more complex human process than Dawkins is willing or capable of thinking about.

You are confusing the symptom with the disease here. The disease is human weakness: greed, fear and stupidity. It's universal and it's anything but complex. These are the afflictions which lead to the symptoms, which are the thousands of gods so far invented. It is indicative of the fact that we are still fairly simple-minded, primitive apes, prone to wish-thinking and the abandonment of reason.

Much of his criticism is as emotive and irrational as the faith he condemns.

I suspect you meant to use the word "emotional" here rather than "emotive", but either way, this is crap. He and Dawkins are beacons of reason and sanity in an ocean of hysterical religious bullshit.

The doctor recommends a strong dose of Joseph Campbell.