The atheist’s comments continue an irresponsible pattern of demonizing one religion while celebrating the one he grew up with

  • @raspberriesareyummy
    link
    English
    -27 months ago

    He did come across like that, yes. I guess in part because he’s prominently know for being an atheist, which is not much of an accomolishment in and of itself

    • @Jarix
      link
      English
      2
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      For advocating atheism at a level of discourse not seen often. And for being an author of some very good books on the subject.

      Hes done more for the cause of atheism in our time than most people will ever be as accomplished for anything. Him being an atheist is a fact that is well known about him, it iself is not what has given him prominence in our time

      Oh and he coined the term meme.

      And then theres all that stuff about evolution he was able to educate everyone on.

      • @raspberriesareyummy
        link
        English
        17 months ago

        The evolution bit was Darwin, easy to confuse the names :p (I hope you were joking)

        • @Jarix
          link
          English
          17 months ago

          No i meant what i said. Im not sure you understand or you are joking and i honestly i think and i cannot tell which one so heres something for you to consider because i accept it the facts in question

          The following list of publications by Richard Dawkins is a chronological list of papers, articles, essays and books published by British ethologist and evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins.

          (Quote from Wikipedia. Most of my knowledge comes from what i remember on wikipedia but i dont have a lot of it memorized. For what its worth)

          • @raspberriesareyummy
            link
            English
            17 months ago

            I wasn’t joking, I honestly didn’t know him as an evolutionary biologist because all public appearances I took a glance at were focused on his talking about atheism in a way that more often than not was hard to watch. So I would feel his unique selling point towards the (non-scientific) public were his debates regarding (a)theism.

            And looking at the statement that this post is about, I feel that I was right to always see him as not really worth spending too much time on. :/