Comments on: Atheist bus ad draws Xian fire

By: Ivan

Ivan — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:47:57 +0000

Stephen Green is talking Boswelox.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:00:43 +0000

“Dawkins is the atheist Stephen Green.”

I must have missed when Dawkins has tried to sue people for “being offensive to atheism”? Does he run an organisation that calls for law to be based on some made up book? Just take a look at the things that people criticise the Christian Voice for, and show me evidence for where Dawkins does anything near comparable.

I often hear this comparison of Dawkins to theists like Green, or worse, and it’s complete nonsense. Dawkins writes books and gives talks. If that’s all religious people like Green did, no one would care about it.

There’s a ridiculous double standard when it comes to atheism versus religion, and the fact that people moan about nothing more than an advert for the British Humanist Association, when no one cares about religious adverts, proves this point.

The BHA are a charity – why aren’t they allowed to advertise, just like every other charity does?

By: martyn

martyn — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:46:30 +0000

Aye Rosin, you be careful of those atheists and their truckbombs in the name of…err reason?

By: marc

marc — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:34:21 +0000

“Dawkins really has no excuse for his base intellectual dishonesty”

and example of which is… [fill in the blank, please 19]

And for your further edification, Roisin, Dawkins does say “oh my God” – such an exultation is part of the language.

See, if you’re going to bring people to book, you’d better be prepared to cite examples. Dawkins may be visceral in his approach, but I can’t find any examples of him being dishonest.

By: Tony

Tony — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 14:33:43 +0000

The piece by Green states that he found the idea amusing. This is actually a rare thing to see an invisible friend believing moron having a sense of humour. Lets be honest, the vast majority of religious representative’s never seem to have a sense of humour.
Could we then, in theory, laugh them out of existence?

By: Roisin

Roisin — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:12:58 +0000

Btw, I’m with Jeremy 4:13pm on this: two sides of the same coin far as I’m concerned. Only maybe they should be allowed near buses–_very_ near. Think Dawkins will go ‘oh my god’ with several tons of bus progressing to him? Or will it just be ‘oh my reason’?

By: Roisin

Roisin — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:09:52 +0000

What a load of bull. Green may be objectionable and immature, but Dawkins really has no excuse for his base intellectual dishonesty; he really should know better. At least Green displays a sense of humor, unlike the atheists who have such a stick up their @rse lately they make the most fanatical bible thumpers everywhere look as chilled out and easy going as a party of pot heads eating chocolate.

By: martyn

martyn — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:06:48 +0000

But at least Dawkins talks facts most of the time but while Green still lives in cloud cuckoo land.

By: marc

marc — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 07:06:18 +0000

Bloody hell, I put the radio on and there’s the Rev. Rosemary Lane Priestly (talk about nominative determinacy!) bubbling on about how the Atheist bus contains the word, “probably”. Guess no on told her that was only put in at the insistence of London Transport.

These people get on my moobs because they claim the right to be happy and fulfilled because of faith (implying we don’t enjoy the same; or perhaps even deserve it).

@Jeremy (the difference between Dawkins and Bird Shit [if you bothered to listen to either] is that Dawkins invites debate; Dawkins has a debating website; Dawkins’ books invite people to think WHY religion is bollocks. Bird Shit just wants people to follow his line – period.

By: Atheist Campaign » Thanks to the bloggers

Atheist Campaign » Thanks to the bloggers — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:49:12 +0000

[...] Media Watch Watch (UK) [...]