The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Atheist Creep @RichardDawkins Destroying His Own Reputation

Posted on | August 1, 2014 | 28 Comments

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.”
Romans 1: 18-19 (KJV)

Three days ago, I took notice of how notorious atheist Richard Dawkins had grossly offended many liberals with his Twitter rants about rape and pedophilia. One is reminded of last year’s atheist sex scandals which involved, among other things, Professor Lawrence Krauss’s defense of the billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Such is his appetite for self-destruction that Richard Dawkins is now being denounced by a feminist columnist in the Guardian:

Another day, another tweet from Richard Dawkins proving that if non-conscious material is given enough time, it is capable of evolving into an obstreperous crackpot who should have retired from public speech when he had the chance to bow out before embarrassing himself. . . .
This is Dawkins in 2014: a figure of mockery, a man so convinced that he possesses God-like powers of omniscience that he can’t understand why everyone’s getting angry at him for pointing out the obvious. Why won’t we all just learn how to think, damn it! . . .
Remember when Dawkins was widely respected? . . . I don’t. Having grown up after Dawkins made the transition from lauded science communicator to old man who shouts at clouds, it’s hard for me to understand why anyone continues to listen to him about anything.

Dawkins made his reputation as a “lauded science communicator” on the basis of his selfish arrogance, and is now destroying himself because of that same trait. Dawkins was embraced by liberals, so long as he limited his attacks to Christians. Now that he’s offending Muslims and feminists, however, Dawkins gets no love:

It’s hard to deny that Dawkins’s ‘secular fundamentalism’ — as liberal commentators now describe it — makes for an embarrassing spectacle. When enraged pensioners pick fights with total strangers, one’s natural reaction is to go and sit somewhere else on the bus.
But Dawkins was just as offensive when his target was Christianity; it’s just that the Left didn’t have a problem with his description of Pope Benedict XVI as a ‘leering old villain in the frock’ who ran ‘a profiteering, woman-fearing, guilt-gorging, truth-hating, child-raping institution … amid a stench of incense and a rain of tourist-kitsch sacred hearts and preposterously crowned virgins, about his ears.’
As I said at the time, that article — in the Washington Post, no less — ‘conjures up the image of a nasty old man who’s losing his marbles. It’s not very nice about the Pope, either.’ But Dawkins has not become any crazier in the intervening four years; he’s simply widened his attack on blind faith, as he sees it, to include Muslims and feminists.

Da Tech Guy points out that atheism is not random in its hostility to religion. Atheism has a teleology — a purpose, an inherent goal — having developed in the West as a means of undermining the social and legal authority of Christian morality. Atheism is therefore not equally hostile to all religious beliefs, nor is it objective in its selection of targets.

People who hate Christianity nowadays declare themselves “atheists” in much the same way as people who hate America once declared themselves “Communists.” For that matter, it’s the same way women who hate men call themselves “feminists.” The claimed label is a means of rationalizing one’s hatred in a self-flattering way, by distinguishing one’s own enlightened sophistication in contrast to those whom one ridicules as ignorant simpletons for their traditional beliefs.

“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”

Nearly 2,000 years later, this verdict still condemns them.





 

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • Pingback: Da Tech Guy On DaRadio Blog » Blog Archive » Richard Dawkins Busts a key Myth of Atheism

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    Richard Dawkins has to work hard to damage his reputation further…

    When you just realize he is a nut burger, things start to make more sense with him.

  • Peregrine John

    That is beautiful. I shall henceforth call him by his adoptive Native American name, Shouts At Clouds.

  • NeoWayland

    I’ve no love for Dawkins.

    But if the only alternative is placing “social and legal authority of Christian morality” above my own, then we have a problem.

  • richard mcenroe

    We don’t. You do what you want, scooter, and spare us the “an thou hurt no other…” horseradish. How much more proof do we need that that just does not work?

  • Quartermaster

    Arguing with Neo is like shouting at the wall. It might relieve a bit of stress, but it does nothing for the wall. He has his own solipsistic drummer pounding in his head, and that’s the only drummer that matters to him.

  • Quartermaster

    He has always been a nut. I have yet to see anything from him worth reading. He really couldn’t damage his rep anymore.

  • http://youtu.be/ZGPHeP32hLU CrustyB

    People like him are constantly trying to piss off their parents. Most of us outgrow that and start to judge the universe on its own terms by the time we’re late teenagers. Others become Richard Dawkins.

  • NeoWayland

    I’m not asking you to follow my code.

    I’m not even asking you to allow me to follow my code.

    I’m telling you that I won’t follow your code just as you would tell me that you won’t follow mine.

    Now we could find what we agree on and work from there, or you could spend effort telling me why your enlightenment requires my sacrifice.

    I think the former would be more productive, but I would enjoy your frustration at the latter too.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    He is devolving into a simpler life form.

  • NeoWayland

    Neo is the movie character. I was NeoWayland long before that came out.

    Solipsistic is the wrong word. My perspective is different, yes, but it’s not about me.

    And hello to you too.

  • Quartermaster

    Sorry, but solipsistic is a very good word to use here.

  • Quartermaster

    Science support devolution. Evolution, not so much. The shame of Dawkins is that he chose to be a lower life form.

  • Matt_SE

    I have to give him credit, though. One main argument against Dawkins for years has been that he’s too cowardly to attack Islam (and for good reasons). He’s done that now.

    Maybe he and Salman Rushdie can room together.

  • Pingback: Atheist Creep @RichardDawkins Destroying His Own Reputation | That Mr. G Guy's Blog

  • Pingback: Richard Dawkins managing to annoy people (again) | Batshit Crazy News

  • Pingback: Barack: ‘Stop Hatin’ All the Time’ | Regular Right Guy

  • NeoWayland

    Except for the business with my title, I don’t usually ask for myself.

    I ask that people extend the same consideration that they expect from others. That’s not so hard, is it?

    It’s just a variation of the Golden Rule after all.

  • DeadMessenger

    Atheism has a teleology…

    Indeed it does. As a Christian, people sometimes ask me why God doesn’t just, for example, heal everyone in the world as proof of His existence. And I say it’s not only because He doesn’t have to prove who His is – His true followers already believe Him – but that even if He healed all sickness and righted all wrongs, people still wouldn’t believe. And if He righted all wrongs, the people would also complain about having their free will impinged upon.

  • http://www.quidblog.com/ PeterP

    True atheists are secure in their unbelief and don’t find the need to mock and denigrate believers. Richard Dawkins’s atheism is phony. He uses it to buck up his fragile self worth by deluding himself that he is intellectually superior to the great unwashed masses. “See, see, I am smarter than you.” 1000 to 1 this imbecile would soil himself in a foxhole requiring his Christian comrades to save him.

  • concern00

    The funny thing is most of his obnoxious tweets are logically coherent. The thing he hasn’t quite come to terms with is that his only base of support, albeit dwindling, comes from the left to whom logic and facts are anathema.

  • Pingback: Javier Bardem Isn’t Anti-Semitic Anymore… This Week | Regular Right Guy

  • Mike G.

    I still say he was a great game show host…wonder why he gave up that gig? /s

  • Pingback: Jaclyn Glenn Rule 5 | Batshit Crazy News

  • Daniel O’Brien

    Smitty can decipher this:

    !Christian != Atheist

  • Wombat_socho

    He’s not the only one. True statement.

  • Daniel O’Brien

    Thanks. It gets lonely out here sometimes. :)

  • Paul H. Lemmen

    I agree. It is not only valid but also elegant in it’s simplicity.