Quote:
Originally Posted by prisonchaplain
Over, I'd suggest that Dawkins is wrong about religion. It is not the inspiration or guiding force for wars and evil in the world. Rather, wicked men use religion to their own ends. Faith itself is nuetral. It can be used for great good or ill. (I'm not saying God is nuetral, but rather 'religion').
It is perhaps true that Christianity has been manipulated for evil over the centuries. However, in less than 100 years, humanism (or atheism, if you will) was misused to kill tens of millions in Maoist China and Stalinist Russia--not to mention the death of one-third of Cambodia's population in the killing fields of anti-religious fervor.
|
I think he is fundementally wrong also. I do think he does have a valid point about the violence of religion in the past (and present), but I do not think he is being intellectually honest when he plays one hand against religion, and then ignores the scientific communities culpability in many scientific "disasters". Whether it be a purposeful "attack" on mankind (Hiroshima) or accidental (Chernobol). I think, bottom line, Dawkins suffers from a fundemantal lack of honesty.
O43