mediawatchwatch.org.uk

From a different article in the same Sunday Herald, ad hominem attacks on Dawkins from two religionists upset by The Root of All Evil? before they’ve seen it:

Dawkins is well known for his vitriolic attacks on faith, and I think faith has withstood his attacks. He really is going beyond his abilities as a scientist when he starts to venture into the field of philosophy and theology. He is the guy with demonstrable problems,

says John Deighan, a spokesman for the Catholic Church.

These comments are meant to be inflammatory and don’t bear any relation to the facts. Even today, church schools are over-subscribed. He’s prejudiced.

bleats Mike Judge of the homophobic fundamentalist lobbying group, The Christian Institute.

Stung by accusations of homophobia which followed his Radio 4 PM interview (full transcript here), Iqbal Sacranie has tried, with characteristic ineptitude, to backpedal.

From the MCB site:

On the question of whether my comments were homophobic, it is utterly nonsensical to suggest that. We reject any form of discrimination, whether on the basis of race, religion, gender or age.

Race, religion, gender or age. Notice anything missing from this list? That’s like saying “it is utterly nonsensical to suggest we are Islamophobic. We have the greatest respect for Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and Sikhism.”

But people cannot be bullied to remain silent on views which they believe are important for society to understand

concludes the man who said death was “too good” for Salman Rushdie.

The Sunday Herald reports that Oxford’s “ambassador of rationality”, Richard Dawkins, is expecting a load of complaints “by the sort of people who tried to close down Jerry Springer: The Opera”. The first part of his two-part anti-religion polemic, The Root of All Evil?, is due to broadcast on Channel 4 tomorrow (Monday) at 8pm.

Dawkins:

…you’re simply not allowed to attack someone’s religion. You can attack their politics or their football team, but not their faith. I think it’s very important that this should be seen as complete nonsense. Why shouldn’t people be required to defend their religion?

Monday’s episode is entitled “The God Delusion”. Next week’s is “The Virus of Faith”.

Although the polemic is directed at religion in general, Ofcom will probably receive complaints from those belonging to the particular religions featured. Section 4.2 of the Broadcasting Code:

The religious views and beliefs of those belonging to a particular religion or religious denomination must not be subject to abusive treatment.

They may also try to argue that atheism (or even evolution) is a religion and that Dawkins is trying to “seek recruits”, thus contravening section 4.5. Can of worms, that one.

Looking forward to the show, and the backlash.

We noted before that the BNP had attended an anti-Sspringer meeting. They have now formally announced their support for their “fellow Christians” in “Action Group Springer”, a Christian umbrella group active in Plymouth, and have already joined in the leafletting outside Plymouth’s Theatre Royal.

A BNP Plymouth and East Cornwall correspondent reports:

…as previously predicted by Southwest Regional Voices, Plymouth Council whose grants help fund the theatre, are doing a “Judas Iscariot” by washing their hands of the matter. This is something they would not be doing had the “performance” been deemed insulting to Muslims!

In case you were wondering, Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver. It was Pontius Pilate that did the hand-washing.

Clever lot, the Plymouth BNP. So sincere, and informed in their faith.

UPDATE: The boneheads have now corrected their error. Judas has changed into Pontius.
(Thanks to DK in the comments)

Which is nice. But it is only Google UK which returns this as the top result.

If you want to help, you know what to do.

UPDATE: Just as a reminder of the self-important clownishness of the MCB, here’s Sir Iqbal Sacranie yesterday on the Radio 4’s PM programme, talking about homosexuality:

It does not augur well in building the very foundations of society: stability, family relationships. And it is something we would certainly not in any form encourage the community to be involved in.
[…]
Certainly it is a practice that in terms of health, in terms of the moral issues that comes along in a society, it is. It is not acceptable.

Each of our faiths tells us that it is harmful and, I think, if you look into the scientific evidence that has been available in terms of the forms of various illnesses and diseases that are there, surely it points out that where homosexuality is practised there is a greater concern in that area.

(From The Times)