Letter to a Christian Nation . . . by Sam Harris . . .

[OneBlueSky]

http://www.randomhouse.com/kvpa/harris/

More than 50% of Americans have a “negative” or “highly negative” view of people who don’t believe in God. 70% think it important for presidential candidates to be “strongly religious.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
“A person who believes that Elvis is still alive is very unlikely to get promoted to a position of great power and responsibility in our society. Neither will a person who believes that the holocaust was a hoax. But people who believe equally irrational things about God and the bible are now running our country. This is genuinely terrifying.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
44% of Americans think Jesus Christ will return in the next 50 years. (22% are “certain” that he will, another 22% think he “probably” will.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
“According to the most common interpretation of biblical prophecy, Jesus will return only after things have gone horribly awry. Imagine the consequences if any significant component of the U.S. government believed that the world was about to end and that its ending would be glorious. The fact that nearly half of the American population apparently believes this should be considered a moral and intellectual emergency.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only 28% of Americans believe in evolution (and two-thirds of these believe evolution was “guided by God”). 53% are actually creationists.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Despite a full century of scientific insights attesting to the antiquity of the earth, more than half of our neighbors believe that the entire cosmos was created six thousand years ago. This is, incidentally, about a thousand years after the Sumerians invented glue.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
80% of Americans expect to be called before God on Judgment Day to answer for their sins. 90% believe in heaven. 77% rate their chances of going to heaven as “excellent” or “good.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It is terrible that we all die and lose everything we love; it is doubly terrible that so many human beings suffer needlessly while alive. That so much of this suffering can be directly attributed to religion—to religious hatreds, religious wars, religious delusions and religious diversions of scarce resources—is what makes atheism a moral and intellectual necessity.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The president of the United States has claimed, on more than one occasion, to be in dialogue with God. If he said that he was talking to God through his hairdryer, this would precipitate a national emergency. I fail to see how the addition of a hairdryer makes the claim more ridiculous or offensive.”

http://www.randomhouse.com/kvpa/harris/

[Maraya1969]

1. I think we should remind people that NOW does not have the corner

on horrible times. Remind them of the Black Plague that wiped out 1/3 of Europe. Then there was the Holocaust, The Crusades was a long killing spree perpetrated by Christians in the name of religion. There was that Asian guy who killed his way through a few continents, (forgive me, I forget his name and the details and it's late and my eyes are blurry).

There really has not been a peaceful time in the history of man that we know of. Probably back when we were hunters and gatherers there was not as much fighting. Killing a Woolly Mammoth probably fulfilled the testosterone needs of the men back then. Maybe we just have to much time on our hands.

:P

[Laha]

2. Was that Atilla the Hun?

Ransomed Rome for wagons of pepper at one point I believe? Dunno for sure tho, I'm certainly no history buff

[Random_Australian]

3. I thought he was talking about Ghengis Khan.

Or he could be talking about Stalin or any number of people.

Because like he said, now does not have a monopoly of bad things!

[Maraya1969]

6. Genghis Khan is it. But what about my name suggests I am a man?

I am a women :hi:

[Random_Australian]

9. I didn 't even see your name.

I rarely see more than a persons' post, and nothing in it made it clear one way or another, so I left it on the default, male.

Sorry about that, I guess I just don't pay attention.

[Random_Australian]

4. Mmmm... I'll contend one point:

"That so much of this suffering can be directly attributed to religion (...) is what makes atheism a moral and intellectual necessity"

I would have thought that getting people to get along was not mutually exclusive with religion, although it IS mutually exclusive with this out-group forming crap I hear so often from people who are religious and also normally good people excusing themselves of something bad.

In other words, atheism is healthy but it is not the answer to that particular problem.... that is, not the answer if we make put individuals into two groups and give one power.

But as far as religion goes, I would say there is some way to get people to NOT do the various extrememly stupid things they do in the name of religion.

[kwassa]

5. so, how many Sam Harris threads are we going to have?

There are certainly enough Sam Harris devotees to start their own group, isn't there?

So much of his stuff gets reprinted here that I begin to worry about copyright infringement.

[greyl]

7. It's a mystery. nt

[okasha]

8. St. Sam of the Waterboard

may not have "worshippers" in R/T, but he certainly has a coterie of swooning fanboys.

[varkam]

10. Well at least that's a new label.

To be honest, worshipper was getting a little old. I, for one, am happy to know that there is a new insult which may be hurled at me.

[okasha]

13. "I might smirk and feel a little pity for you"

but I think you're managing to work up quite a bit without my help.

[varkam]

15. I was in a pissy mood when I wrote that.

And I should not of phrased it like that. I apologize if it offended your sensibilities.

[okasha]

17. And I'm in a pissy mood tonight.

The Congress of the United States has just joined your guru in endorsing torture, thereby throwing out the Bill of Rights and nine hundred years of increasingly progressive jurisprudence. Sorry your widdle peelings are all hurt, but I threw out a whole list of less kindly words before I got to "fanboy."

[varkam]

18. You might be forgetting we're on the same side, here.

I'm a progressive too, you know. I don't condone torture, and I'm just as peeved about what happened today. You know, it's really kind of fucked up that I actually have to explicitly state this here - that, somehow, because I like Harris, I must think torture is a good thing.

And as far as my "widdle peelings" go, don't worry. I've been called worse.

[trotsky]

29. Sam Harris is no one's "guru," okasha.

Why don't you try - just TRY - showing some respect to those who think differently than you? Atheists are not to blame for the torture bill, so please direct your anger toward the Republican party, not liberal atheists.

[okasha]

34. Uhm, trotsky, I have a great deal of respect for many liberal atheists

Many of my friends, including my writing partner, are liberal atheists. There are, however, intolerant and condescending individuals who happen to be atheists for whom I have no respect whatsoever, just as I don't respect, say, intolerant Baptists who want to saaayyyyve me.

There's a fairly common fallacy in this forum that says that anyone who differs with one of a small group of atheists somehow hates/despises/wants to persecute all atheists as a group. T'aint true.

[trotsky]

35. Your actions in this forum speak much, much louder than your words.

This thread is but one example among many. So please, take it somewhere else.

[beam me up scottie]

37. "tonight" ?

Too funny!

We've never seen you any other way, okasha.

A "pissy mood" is a lousy excuse for insulting varkam and treating him like your whipping boy after he apologized to you.

And predictably, you conveniently ignored the fact that the politicians who endorsed torture this week are your fellow believers, not atheists.



We'll just have to assume the "pissy mood" is a chronic condition, since you have never shown any respect or tolerance for DU atheists. In fact, it would appear the only reason you post in this forum at all is to insult atheists and bait us by misrepresenting our posts.




Using that famous okasha "logic", if Sam Harris is our guru because he's an outspoken atheist, that would make Ann Coulter yours, since she's an outspoken believer.
Here's a lovely pic for the swooning fangirl:

[Goblinmonger]

11. Is it that big of threat to you?

Should the big, mean atheists just keep quiet?

Why not add to the discussion about the OP?

[trotsky]

14. She can't add to the discussion because she's not interested in discussion

Only name-calling, apparently.

[kwassa]

26. Who did I call names?

Better spell it out because it didn't happen, of course.

and I be a he, not a she.

[trotsky]

28. It's "she" because it's not referring to you.

So sorry, got GM's response to you mixed up with his response to the other disrespectful person.

[catbert836]

19. Does a discussion of his book not fall under

the category of religion/theology, and thus does it not belong in this forum?

[kwassa]

27. Does it belong over and over and over and over?

I just did a search in R&T for "Sam Harris".

"Sam Harris" is in the title of 26 threads.

It pulled up mention of his name in 61 threads.

Think he gets enough exposure?

[trotsky]

30. What does it matter to you?

Ignore the threads if they bother you. Or does everyone have to run their thread idea past you first?

Harris is a liberal atheist who yes, has some ideas that not every liberal and NOT EVERY ATHEIST agrees with. But, he's out there, he's vocal, and he's a legitimate voice in the debate. Don't know if you noticed, but it's not like the current political landscape is exactly dominated by the atheist point of view. Harris is filling that void, for better or for worse, and he's going to get quoted a lot by people who just aren't used to hearing things like that out of the majority religious perspective.

[kwassa]

31. What does it matter to me? I would like this forum to be more interesting.

but it is what it is.

[trotsky]

32. Sorry, kwassa.

R/T wasn't created to please you, and you don't have any control over what others want to talk about.

But how brilliant was it on your part to post on this thread and keep it alive rather than just letting it sink away into obscurity? :eyes:

[greyl]

36. Your figures are incorrect.

I count his name in 8 thread titles, plus there are two threads whose subject is something he's written without mentioning his name. Two of those threads have anti-Sam Harris OPs.

He often writes about religion, so what's the problem? I don't think he gets enough exposure.

[Evoman]

25. Thats kind of mean.

The OP was just trying to start a discussion. I don't really think their is any need to cause a flame war here. If you don't want to discuss Sam Harris, then why not just ignore the thread. Why do you need to post these divisive words.

Do you want to start a fight? I don't get it.

[Goblinmonger]

12. The last quotation you list

is one of my favorites from Harris.

Disclaimer for the gaggle of clucking hens above: I do not agree with everything Sam Harris says. I did not especially like his "attack" on the Muslim world. I do like that he makes me think; I do agree with a lot of what he has to say about religion in general. I do not worship Sam, nor do I follow everything he says with a fundamentalist fervor. Though, check out my sig line for an invitation to a new group I'm forming.

So why DOES the addition of a hairdryer make Bush's claims of talking to god that much more inane?

[okasha]

16. But-but-but-but--

That's cherry-picking!

[catbert836]

20. WTF does that have to do with anything?

You know, one of the greatest aspects of liberalism is that we have a broad world-view, and are willing to expand it by reading positions we don't necessarily agree with, or *gasp* respect people even though one or two of their positions might disagree with ours. Let's leave thinking in absolutes to the conservatives, shall we?

[Goblinmonger]

22. Did you even read my disclaimer?

It was aimed right at you. I even reference you in the disclaimer so you'd know it was for you. But, since you clearly don't get the difference here it is straightforward:

The claim of cherry-picking is aimed at those people that claim the bible is the word of god and use the bible as the core of the dogma for their religion. Ignoring parts of god's word because it doesn't jive with your worldview is clearly cherry-picking given that those people claim the bible is divine.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I do not claim that anything from the mouth/pen of Harris is divine. I do not claim his body of work as the defining body of my dogma. Actually, I don't have a dogma, but that's another story. Instead, I tried to make it very clear that I even disagreed with a lot of what Harris has to say. Finally, I said that the thing I liked about Harris was that he made me think (even when I disagree with him) and that the hairdryer bit was a good point.

Is that clear enough to you why it is different? Stop thinking that I see the world the say way that you do and that since I don't have a god to believe in I am going to fill that void with Harris. See, THERE IS NOT GOD-SHAPED HOLE IN MY HEART. I have no void to fill. I'm just fine as I am. No dogma, no god, perfectly happy.

[neebob]

21. I think the hairdryer question deserves its own thread.

That line made me laugh. It made me like Sam Harris. I'm thinking about joining the coterie of swooning fanboys. Can I be one if I'm a girl? Because I dowanna be a swooning fangirl - fanboy sounds cooler.

[Goblinmonger]

23. Sure you can!!!

I have appointed myself the head minister of the new religion. It's in my sig line. All you need to do to joing the coterie of swooning fanboys is to put it in your sig line. Unlike the catholic church, we let women in and they can call themselves fanboys if they want (or fangirls--it's up to them).

If you choose to accept, I appoint you first priest of the Harris religion.

[neebob]

24. I'm too attached to Hippy's move to France

like, I dunno, something bad will happen if I change it. Like the Hippy's move to France guys would die or something.

Darn, I really wanna be a fanboy. It's good to know I can be, though - and how easily I can change religions. Thanks!

Over dinner, a friend tried to tell me I'd get my faith back if something terrible happened, like I lost my son or something - and not just any faith, but the Mormon one!

"You would," she said. She just kept insisting, and I'm all, "No, no, I'm totally done with that."

I don't think this friend knows I'm an atheist. She's never been Mormon, either, so I was really flummoxed, wondering what possessed her to say such a thing. The conversation started when she asked how my mom's doing, and I said she's gone back to church and has a calling and seems pretty happy with that and her social life in general. Next thing I know, she's telling me I'll get my faith back.

Maybe she asked first. I don't remember, I was so surprised.

This must be the day of changing faith. Or I hope it's just a day, and not a week or a month on this theme.

[Zhade]

33. Okay, unwarranted sniping at atheists aside...

...he asks a remarkably cogent question regarding b*s*'s claim that he 'speaks to Gawd'.

Why WOULD it be thought insane by some if b*s* said some god spoke to him through an object (e.g., a hairdryer), but it isn't if the voice is allegedly in his head?

Hell, with an object one could at least TEST and VERIFY the claim, since we could all see and 'listen' to the object (assuming b*s* wouldn't move the goalposts by claiming only HE could hear anything from the object, which would have the same effect as the voice of 'god' being in his head).

With it all in his head - like pretty much all believers, and if you deny this I eagerly and sincerely invite you to submit evidence to the contrary - how can one know he's NOT insane? We can't see into his mind.

If b*s*'s god was, say, Gargamel (hmmmm...) I don't think a single believer anywhere would hesitate to say "He's nuts! He believes in a fictional character created by men! There's no evidence for this 'Gargamel' to be found!" (Another hmmmm...). Why do many believers not rightly say b*s* is likely mentally disturbed for believing his god talks to him?

I submit that it is the fact that believers ALSO, like b*s*, believe in higher beings for which there is no evidence outside of their minds (sorry, gang - if it helps, b*s* and I both like barbecue, but that doesn't mean we're alike at all) that keeps people from saying as such. And if they DO say it...they're pretty much being hypocritical, because their god is no more proven than b*s*'s god.

It's a serious question, posed in a humorous way, from a guy I wish would spend more time on critical thinking and less (none, ideally) on cursing Islam and praising torture (assuming that is not anti-atheist spin, I am not pleased with his stances there, and cannot support him for that reason).

The question, hard as it is, remains worth considering. So let's put aside the pointless sniping and examine it!

[neebob]

38. Believers snipe at me through my hairdryer

and I still think the question deserves its own thread. :)