General Discussion

Nine

(1,741 posts)

136. If you think acceptance of evolution follows an easy religious/nonreligious divide, you're mistaken.

Wed Jan 8, 2014, 10:48 AM

Jan 2014

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution#Support_for_evolution_by_religious_bodies

Molleen Matsumura of the National Center for Science Education found, of Americans in the twelve largest Christian denominations, at least 77% belong to churches that support evolution education (and that at one point, this figure was as high as 89.6%).

Interestingly, people don't seem to consistently follow their own church's teaching with regard to evolution. Mormon acceptance is low, at 22%, but that church has no official stance on evolution. Catholics accept evolution at a rate of 58% and yet evolution is taught in Catholic schools and I believe the Vatican has even endorsed it. I don't know what explains the 42% non-acceptance rate among Catholics but the blame does not lie in official church teaching.

More interesting to me is how many of those who see themselves as defenders of science and rationality fall back on their own prejudices instead of looking at actual empirical data.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

324 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Kick if you agree with this assessment about the influence of religion on people. [View all] Nanjing to Seoul Jan 2014 OP

The Onion: Local Church Full Of Brainwashed Idiots Feeds Town’s Poor Every Week Nine Jan 2014 #1

+1. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #2

Is it necessary to believe in gods to help one's fellow man? BlueStreak Jan 2014 #3

Nnnnnnope. cherokeeprogressive Jan 2014 #119

No need to bring out the strawman so soon... MellowDem Jan 2014 #36

Help me out. I am missing the point. nm rhett o rick Jan 2014 #46

People stevil Jan 2014 #65

I agree with that point but that's not the point of post #1. nm rhett o rick Jan 2014 #68

Really? stevil Jan 2014 #80

Ask the author of the post. I did by didnt get an answer. nm rhett o rick Jan 2014 #83

The point stevil Jan 2014 #91

how is that point relevent to the original point in the OP? Duer 157099 Jan 2014 #127

In other words a person can have some pretty twisted beliefs about imaginary friends BlueStreak Jan 2014 #134

Totally agree, but it's like asking Duer 157099 Jan 2014 #160

"if you walk to school or carry your lunch" Seeking Serenity Jan 2014 #278

If that's his point (notice he didnt stick around to discuss) then there are a lot better rhett o rick Jan 2014 #258

Only religious people are kind. dorkulon Jan 2014 #164

The point is that this OP is just smug bigotry. Nine Jan 2014 #259

Your argument is a strawman argument. The OP does not "basically" call anyone a "brainwashed idiot" rhett o rick Jan 2014 #262

How would you feel if someone described you in those terms? Nine Jan 2014 #270

How about, "Church auctions off treasures to feed poor"? Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2014 #57

"What is Something Will Never Happen for a thousand, Alex." Ikonoklast Jan 2014 #300

Yep. Unca Jim Jan 2014 #60

Depends on what sort of enlightenment you seek. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #157

Yep, Tyson is a better voice... Unca Jim Jan 2014 #172

I don't think Dawkins does that. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #177

Weird how you are so sure you understand another's motivations without asking. Unca Jim Jan 2014 #290

Yes, and I attack Libertarian ideology as well. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #292

I guess I am not explaining the point of my objection very well... Unca Jim Jan 2014 #296

Which is why chervilant Jan 2014 #247

Who said anything about proselytizing? Unca Jim Jan 2014 #291

You did, obliquely: chervilant Jan 2014 #307

Derp... Unca Jim Jan 2014 #313

Nice non sequitur MNBrewer Jan 2014 #152

K&R But this is only one of the things about religion that worries me. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #4

Yeah, exactly, often the point of some (many?) of the religious is to make other RKP5637 Jan 2014 #86

More than divisive, they program the unsullied human mind to accept the notion of completely Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #106

I'm pretty sure it was Arthur C. Clark. Hatchling Jan 2014 #169

OMG, I'm so embarrassed. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #248

It seems IMO to be a hard wired brain function, hence leading IMO to more substantive proof of the RKP5637 Jan 2014 #228

I've not read this, it sounds interesting. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #250

" ... what about those of us for whom it never made any sense, even as little kids, when we were RKP5637 Jan 2014 #297

Unrec. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #5

I unrec your unrec. HERVEPA Jan 2014 #27

ok.we disagree. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #32

I'll add my unrec to yours. I can not believe over 160 duers rec'd such a stereotyping post uppityperson Jan 2014 #269

Some don't realize how demeaning the op is. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #271

Seriously. I have not attended organized religion since I was young, but this goes beyond uppityperson Jan 2014 #272

+1 hrmjustin Jan 2014 #273

Dawkins is an ideologue on this topic, and I see no evidence he's ever given any intelligent thought struggle4progress Jan 2014 #6

Actually, ronnie624 Jan 2014 #10

As I said, there's no evidence he's ever given any serious thought to the matter struggle4progress Jan 2014 #53

Your post is an ad hominem attack against him. ronnie624 Jan 2014 #58

I'm sorry if I somehow gave you the impression I think he's an a-hole struggle4progress Jan 2014 #64

Your future in politics appears quite limited. goldent Jan 2014 #77

Might could be. Then, again, unlike Dawkins, I don't cultivate the self-indulgent habit struggle4progress Jan 2014 #92

That's okay. ronnie624 Jan 2014 #85

Thank you for giving us all permission to think! FrodosPet Jan 2014 #142

Oh, you're welcome. ronnie624 Jan 2014 #163

Well I never new much about Dawkins zeemike Jan 2014 #66

No, he doesn't have enough of a sense of humor to invent stuff like Pastafarianism struggle4progress Jan 2014 #70

! AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #219

You are as ignorant of biology as you think Dawkins is of religion. LAGC Jan 2014 #93

You know zilch about my views of biology, and you read carelessly without comprehension struggle4progress Jan 2014 #99

what?? trekbiker Jan 2014 #254

Dawkins is quite sure that any scientist who "compromises" with religious people struggle4progress Jan 2014 #277

Gould's NOMA is crap skepticscott Jan 2014 #286

"...ultimately determine every aspect of how an organism looks..." not completely true. nt yawnmaster Jan 2014 #206

Indeed. LAGC Jan 2014 #298

I don't consider him a 'demi-god'. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #158

I might be one of the few who generally agree with you.. pangaia Jan 2014 #288

Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist! longship Jan 2014 #90

I agree that evolution is the key to understanding biology in the context of the other sciences struggle4progress Jan 2014 #96

Again, Dawkins (and many others) see this as an important battle. longship Jan 2014 #98

You hide far too much behind the pronoun "this" struggle4progress Jan 2014 #100

"This" is the battle between science and religion. longship Jan 2014 #105

I keep seeing people complain about the bigotry and tribalism of religion Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #112

Ironic that you do not stand and oppose those clerics who call gay people by demonic Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #120

You're not as omniscient and infallible as you presume. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #129

Half agree with you. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #130

I'm not sure "education" is the atheist panacea some presume. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #135

And plenty of those scientists don't apply the critical thinking of their disciplines to their faith NuclearDem Jan 2014 #137

The belief that all things can be explained by "science" is itself an act of faith Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #146

No, belief in the scientific method and methodological naturalism is not based on faith. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #159

"We have a fairly good grasp on the natural laws of the universe" Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #165

The burden of proof and standards for scientific theory is extremely high. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #179

Um, the belief that I can remove the seat on my motorcycle with a 10mm wrench isn't 'faith'. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #166

Yes, I know; I was speaking in common vernacular. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #170

I don't use the word faith in that manner. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #176

"if such things exist, and cannot be observed, described, or understood, what do we do" Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #197

No we haven't. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #208

Nobody said anything about excising people. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #161

Okay but Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #168

But they don't. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #174

So you would be opposed to abolition or charity or public education Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #183

I would expect them to source that AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #185

What if an atheist claimed tht survival of the fittest Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #205

I would point out to that atheist that they are invested in the eugenics misconceptions of the 1920' AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #214

But that would merely be your opinion. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #223

But we see that struggle every day, right now. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #229

Is the world more peaceful? Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #233

And where are the soviets now? AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #236

Your what-ifs are all over the place here. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #220

Actually, that's pretty much where I'm heading. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #225

Actually... AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #232

That assumes resistance is always possible. Assuming resistance had been exhausted Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #235

Resistance can't BE exhausted, when that very question/option you offer is up for consideration. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #237

That's a whole other can of worms--whether religion provides the only basis for morality. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #240

It's a battle between knowledge and ignorance, Progressive dog Jan 2014 #253

Religious faiths have spawned and continue to spawn many scientists and people of knowledge. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #256

And also promote ignorance where knowledge conflicts with faith. Progressive dog Jan 2014 #257

Assumes causal link. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #263

So if a thing is negative religion is to blame, if it's a virtue religion is just a coincidence. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #264

In that example, it happens to be so, yes. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #266

The battle between people who say skepticscott Jan 2014 #317

If you think acceptance of evolution follows an easy religious/nonreligious divide, you're mistaken. Nine Jan 2014 #136

That is interesting. longship Jan 2014 #138

And what useful moral principles skepticscott Jan 2014 #285

What worries me about Dawkins is that he teaches people to be satisfied with quoting Dawkins. rug Jan 2014 #7

Like a cult. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #9

Oh, Jeez... Hissyspit Jan 2014 #12

These posts don't belong in gd. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #14

Agreed. Union Scribe Jan 2014 #23

Religion posts tend to get heated and should remain in the forums designated for them. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #25

Agreed. theHandpuppet Jan 2014 #56

The pope is responsible for the recent laxity on religion in gd. Take it up with Francis :-) Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #28

Wouldn't know. I have "pope" "papal" etc Union Scribe Jan 2014 #31

Actually the fact that a thread has lots of views replies and recs has been Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #35

Flamebait isn't called that for nothing. Union Scribe Jan 2014 #38

I'm curious what great harm you think will ensue if we continue this discussion. Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #40

no harm at all but what is the point of the sop if it is not enforced. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #42

As a former gd host you know quite well that it isn't that simple at all. Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #48

You make good points. it is not that simple. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #50

Look downthread. Union Scribe Jan 2014 #94

skinner said they can stay for now. I agree they should not be but it is his call. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #34

When and where did he say that? Nine Jan 2014 #293

This is what I found in ata on dec 3rd. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #294

Found this as well hrmjustin Jan 2014 #295

The pope is a very public figure and a player on the world stage. zeemike Jan 2014 #71

+1,000,000 hrmjustin Jan 2014 #76

the dawkins is a very public figure and a player on the world state. Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #115

The pope doesn't think women and gays deserve full rights. Arugula Latte Jan 2014 #175

Allowed, but not unchallenged. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #184

You want to stop that cycle? zeemike Jan 2014 #186

Riiiight. Quietly acquiescing to the Catholic Church has been a great strategy over the centuries. Arugula Latte Jan 2014 #187

Wow and instant reply zeemike Jan 2014 #188

...I thought that it was Obama's fault. SoapBox Jan 2014 #72

no, he's a muslin. Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #116

? so that excuses a ridiculous slam? Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #26

what the Dawkins is full of himself? hrmjustin Jan 2014 #30

really? Where does Dawkins do that specifically? Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #13

$19.95 USD rug Jan 2014 #59

that is a pathetic response. Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #113

The response suits the question. rug Jan 2014 #123

Wait! That's NOT the host of Family Feud! panader0 Jan 2014 #118

Yeah, it can be a turn off. I don't think people realize how they sound to others. freshwest Jan 2014 #37

+1 hrmjustin Jan 2014 #44

Personally, I don't know who Richard Dawkins is (yet). . .but I like the quote. Nanjing to Seoul Jan 2014 #54

That you don't get the cacophonous irony of your reply is profound in itself. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #73

I'm sure you're not calling me deluded. rug Jan 2014 #79

Do you believe in a magical being that knows everything that everything does at every moment? Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #87

Do you know what magic is compared to, I don't know, religion? rug Jan 2014 #95

Are you evading the questions? They were straight forward, unambiguous. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #108

Your premise is bogus. And now you're compounding it. rug Jan 2014 #207

careful, somebody is alert trolling. Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #117

Thank you. It's standard practice in this debate. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #133

The alert stalking claim is bogus. rug Jan 2014 #202

Trolling is not stalking. Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #305

I defer to your expertise. rug Jan 2014 #314

I couldn't stand that movie. ronnie624 Jan 2014 #97

Thanks. I try to put concepts into a cultural narrative that will be more readily received. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #109

I love that movie-- I just try to think of it as the story of Conarnold, Conan's cousin. Marr Jan 2014 #221

I guess I shouldn't say I couldn't stand the movie ronnie624 Jan 2014 #226

What worries me about the Bible is that it teaches people to be satisfied with quoting the Bible...n SidDithers Jan 2014 #156

What worries me is how many people pop off about religion without knowing what they're talking abot. rug Jan 2014 #190

What worries me is how many people pop off about Dawkins without knowing what they''re talking about SidDithers Jan 2014 #192

What worries me is how many people buy into his Islamophobic horseshit. rug Jan 2014 #193

What worries me is how many people buy into the Pope's homophobic horseshit... SidDithers Jan 2014 #194

You have simple pleasures. rug Jan 2014 #195

Yup. Exposing hypocrisy being one of them...nt SidDithers Jan 2014 #199

Irony is not. rug Jan 2014 #201

+1 cleanhippie Jan 2014 #252

Hah. You win. Arugula Latte Jan 2014 #276

Which you do on a regular basis. cleanhippie Jan 2014 #249

Do what? rug Jan 2014 #251

I agree. ronnie624 Jan 2014 #8

Yep. Vashta Nerada Jan 2014 #11

I have to take issue with this quote. Jamaal510 Jan 2014 #15

I am so far from being religious I can't even seen a church steeple, however ... LisaLynne Jan 2014 #16

Differnce is Santorum and Bachmann talk about their religion constantly while Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #125

Self-Centered Egomaniac Paints Billions With Broad Brush. nt onehandle Jan 2014 #17

He thinks too highly of himself. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #18

That description could apply to the Pope but the OP praises and promotes the Pope Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #126

Plenty of religious leaders think too highly of themselves. Dawkins shares that with them. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #141

That's your response? The anti gay language does not matter to you? Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #306

I was dawkins. you brought up the pope. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #311

+1 Glassunion Jan 2014 #29

You talking about the Pope? MellowDem Jan 2014 #39

Not a fan of Self-Centered Egomaniacs? progressoid Jan 2014 #51

Dawkins is a sexist, Islamophobic dick. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #19

That's quite a broad brush about Abrahamaic religions Art_from_Ark Jan 2014 #62

I didn't say it was universal. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #75

It's no worse than believing that science will save us, Art_from_Ark Jan 2014 #81

The scientific method is grounded in reality and evidence. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #84

I see 'Science' and 'religion' as pretty similarly capable of great and harmful error Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #128

This again? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #131

And or, scientists operating on the basis of religious dogma. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #216

Exactly. And any reason based person, having seen a community make such grave Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #303

Thank you! Duppers Jan 2014 #301

Presumably that explains to you why the Islamic world was a center of medieval learning, struggle4progress Jan 2014 #101

I didn't say highly-educated people couldn't be religious. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #111

Regarding the notion that Dawkins is arrogant, egomaniacal or closed-minded: dorkulon Jan 2014 #20

I do not claim to know everything. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #22

At worst, he's impolite. dorkulon Jan 2014 #149

I dont see it that way but I respect your see it differently. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #150

If the powerful convince the masses that if the poor are "good," MsPithy Jan 2014 #21

Religious thought, like every other intellectual exercise, lays traps for the lazy Maedhros Jan 2014 #24

I've always liked that quote. Union Scribe Jan 2014 #33

What worries me about Dawkins Nonhlanhla Jan 2014 #41

I don't think that it's quite correct to state that Dawkins consciously teaches people to be Maedhros Jan 2014 #52

Sarcasm... Nonhlanhla Jan 2014 #110

I find I like a lot of what most of the major prophets had to say. snot Jan 2014 #43

I'd go even further, and quote Steven Weinberg... SidDithers Jan 2014 #45

while it sounds reasonable, G_j Jan 2014 #47

Sometimes true. iandhr Jan 2014 #49

Which Dawkins was undoubtedly aware of when he said this, at Mendel's monastery muriel_volestrangler Jan 2014 #139

It also worries me that it influences war stronger than anything we know... MrMickeysMom Jan 2014 #55

I dont like the quote. While philosophers may not be satisfied with not understanding rhett o rick Jan 2014 #61

A lot of ad hominems toward Dawkins. immoderate Jan 2014 #63

I agree with you comments about the ad hominem attacks. Consider the sources. rhett o rick Jan 2014 #74

I really don't see the difference. immoderate Jan 2014 #89

I understand your point. It just seems to me that those comfortable with not understanding are ok rhett o rick Jan 2014 #274

That's a caricature Lydia Leftcoast Jan 2014 #67

Exactly. I miss unrec for posts like that. 163 recs for broadbrushing stereotyping caricature. uppityperson Jan 2014 #268

fuck religion Chaco Dundee Jan 2014 #69

K&R (nt) Autumn Colors Jan 2014 #78

Religious people aren't satisfied with 'not understanding'. They simply understand... Shandris Jan 2014 #82

Dawkins is right. as usual. sagat Jan 2014 #88

I just want to say I find this post demeaning. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #102

and yet you joined in on the slamfest against Dawkins Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #114

He is arrogant and he insulted people like me. So yes he will get words from me. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #140

so you would agree then that it is perfectly acceptable for anyone here Warren Stupidity Jan 2014 #144

Sure! Did you hear what he said against gay adoption the other day? hrmjustin Jan 2014 #145

my slamming him does in no way shape or form mean that critism of religion is not valid. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #143

what worries me about all human, religious and non religious, is their capacity to hate. liberal_at_heart Jan 2014 #103

absolutely! wildbilln864 Jan 2014 #104

Yep. Punishment for desiring knowledge is one of the first things that happens in the Bible. Arugula Latte Jan 2014 #167

It's worth an hour or so of your time to listen to Dr. Dawkins. Judge him for yourself, dimbear Jan 2014 #107

K&R libtodeath Jan 2014 #121

This certainly belongs in General Discussion. nt el_bryanto Jan 2014 #122

Nothing threatens religions quite so much as... 99Forever Jan 2014 #124

And also requires people to relinquish their power and become sheeple... polichick Jan 2014 #132

I kind of view religion and patriotism as the same thing Victor_c3 Jan 2014 #147

What if we don't agree? Savannahmann Jan 2014 #148

Yes, many counter-examples exist Lydia Leftcoast Jan 2014 #153

Aldrin is a living person, he is not dead. Speaking in the past tense is not appropirate. Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #309

I'd feel better about religion... Rozlee Jan 2014 #151

They do have a choice of being something else as they get older Lydia Leftcoast Jan 2014 #162

But, too many in your example are the exceptions to the rule. Rozlee Jan 2014 #191

I did say that the principles didn't have to be religious Lydia Leftcoast Jan 2014 #242

I'm an atheist who views Dawkins as a blowhard and an asshat. Throd Jan 2014 #154

That graphic sums it up for the radicals around here. ffr Jan 2014 #155

See my sig line - GoneOffShore Jan 2014 #171

Kick if you agree with this assessment about the influence of religion on people. The CCC Jan 2014 #173

Stalin was a seminary student. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #178

Hitler was an altar boy. Rozlee Jan 2014 #198

Stalin was no true atheist. rug Jan 2014 #210

He may have been. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #213

He certainly wasn't motivated by being a seminary student. rug Jan 2014 #215

Likely he was motivated by lust for power. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #217

Agreed. rug Jan 2014 #218

I agree with the statement, but Stevepol Jan 2014 #180

The difference between belief and knowledge is important. Coyotl Jan 2014 #181

I disagree Gothmog Jan 2014 #182

Some of you remember Stephen Jay Gould. Manifestor_of_Light Jan 2014 #189

However, he himself differed from Dawkins in that he believed Lydia Leftcoast Jan 2014 #244

As a life long atheist.. N_E_1 for Tennis Jan 2014 #196

You just touched on an interesting comparison. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #212

Well said. As an atheist who has read the Bible in English and Latin and who has taken enough Texas Lawyer Jan 2014 #260

Although I appreciate the message reflection Jan 2014 #200

Nah polihood Jan 2014 #203

I don't check my brain at the door when I go to church, nor do I feel like my religion is against hrmjustin Jan 2014 #204

+1 Nika Jan 2014 #209

I suppose I agree-- but more precisely, my problem is that religion teaches people that Marr Jan 2014 #211

Yes, as an atheist, I definitely agree. n/t RebelOne Jan 2014 #222

kicked and recommended.... mike_c Jan 2014 #224

Here's a list of people whose thinking was crippled by their belief in a God: Jackpine Radical Jan 2014 #227

an amendment to the statement about Einstein Duppers Jan 2014 #302

I think Dawkins has it backwards thesquanderer Jan 2014 #230

I had this argument with hardcore atheist that LOOOOVE Dawkins. dead_head Jan 2014 #231

a hundred years ago they agreed MisterP Jan 2014 #238

The image is cool dead_head Jan 2014 #243

100 years ago (and until recently) the soi-disant "Enlightened" championed the Muslims against MisterP Jan 2014 #255

I kick... mcdeavitt Jan 2014 #234

The problem with this post and with what Richard Dawkins says is stereotyping. Omnith Jan 2014 #239

Religion is not going anywhere. Puzzledtraveller Jan 2014 #241

Religion destroys a working mind. blkmusclmachine Jan 2014 #245

As a Catholic atheist, I dont' get that quote (and I'm generally a Dawkins fan). Sure, it's true Texas Lawyer Jan 2014 #246

yep. cachukis Jan 2014 #261

I am more a fan of Hitchens than Dawkins, but the quote is essentially correct... Demo_Chris Jan 2014 #265

I don't agree with that treestar Jan 2014 #267

yes, that is one of the ways it influences people wyldwolf Jan 2014 #275

I see the hate wars are continuing. Do people really have nothing better to do? liberal_at_heart Jan 2014 #279

It was a hate OP. Painting the entirety of religious people as dumb. onehandle Jan 2014 #282

I love these religious debates. another_liberal Jan 2014 #280

Really? el_bryanto Jan 2014 #281

I don't think they know what they want at all. another_liberal Jan 2014 #283

K&R! Phlem Jan 2014 #284

just when ya think it could`t get any lower... madrchsod Jan 2014 #287

Pedophilia ain't so bad guy, says something. onehandle Jan 2014 #289

You're getting increasingly desperate in your trolling attempts. LAGC Jan 2014 #299

... SidDithers Jan 2014 #304

Are you finally addressing the Dolan issue and the huge scandal it represents? Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #310

I don't know about that, just because someone finds religion Rex Jan 2014 #308

I wonder if this thread will be locked now that the other one was? el_bryanto Jan 2014 #312

I guess not - once again it's ok to attack religion at DU el_bryanto Jan 2014 #315

I emailed the host who locked my thread to ask that. Nine Jan 2014 #316

Kick...nt SidDithers Jan 2014 #318

Why? Union Scribe Jan 2014 #319

Because I think this thread is a good counter... SidDithers Jan 2014 #320

Yes those pro-pope threads are kind of a "fuck you" to people who despise the pope el_bryanto Jan 2014 #321

Both or neither...nt SidDithers Jan 2014 #322

No - definitely both el_bryanto Jan 2014 #324

It seems to me the solution to a polluted river Union Scribe Jan 2014 #323