Can't make this stuff up:

"Suppose that the eminent English biologist Richard Dawkins delivered a speech at the University of Regensburg in which he attacked supporters of Creationism and Intelligent Design theory as 'ignorant boobs' -- words that he has already applied in them in a written article.

"Now, let us imagine that Christian fundamentalists all over the United States, outraged by this inflammatory language, went on a violent rampage. Suppose that they lynched an elderly professor of biology, and attacked biology departments at several universities. Suppose that teachers of high school biology went about in fear of their lives, while many simply quit their jobs.

"What kind of article would [the Guardian's] Madeleine Bunting write about such a hypothetical incident? (...) Would Madeleine Bunting refer to Dawkins' speech as illustrating professorial stupidity? Would she imply that he was personally responsible for the death of the elderly American professor of biology, and describe the brutal murder as having been done 'in retaliation' for Dawkins' remarks?

"What fools the American Creationists have been to write books, give speeches, and attend the tedious meetings of School Boards, when by rioting, murdering, and running amok, they could have earned the sympathy and respect of enlightened intellectuals like Madeleine Bunting.

"Instead of being ridiculed as 'ignorant boobs,' even such prestigious left-leaning papers as The Guardian would rally to their defense, reminding us all that for Christian fundamentalists the teaching of creationism is 'non-negotiable...'"

Read this article and the article it links to. You know, if you want...

Comments

JD said…
I still think the irony of all of this is that the very people that he spoke of proved him right 24 hours after he made it. Some people are just idiots, and have no trouble proving that either.

PAX
JD
1:27 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Limits.

Here is a draft I found of something I wrote back in 2007. ................... I'm going to take this moment to sort of speak aloud. Which is really what blogs are for, am I right? A medium of one-sided discussion. I talk, and you listen. Only three or so people ever comment on my blog, so it really is like a one-way conversation. Google Analytics tells me I average about 11.5 (or so?) unique visitors a day, and about half of those are regular readers, and half are people that randomly get to my blog from a Google search or something. On a weekly basis, I end up having about 50 unique visitors. At any rate, the point is that I get to talk, and say stupid things, and you read, smirking to yourself while drinking your coffee. So, what's this post going to be about, Chris? This post is going to be about how awesome I am. Wait, wait - no I'm being serious. I really am awesome. But there will be some humility in this post also, because the second part of thi...
Read more

YES! YES! YES!

One of my favorite books is being released as a blockbuster movie - The Gates of Thermopylae . The movie will be called 300 - the supposed number of Spartans who held the narrow pass of Mt. Thermopylae for a number of days knowing they would eventually be smashed and killed to the last man, giving the Greek civilization a time to amass an organized defence from the well nigh million-strong marching force of Persians seething into the region. It's said that the events at Thermopolae were a hinge on which human history itself turned on for a day. Greek thought, very much a part of our foundation as Westerners - rationalism and belief that man is a logical being and can recognize the Truth through correct use of his noodle - survived the attempted murder by superstitious barbarism. You can read up on the Battle of Thermopylae here . It's probably one of the most inspiring stories I know. Told the Persian archers numbered so many that their arrows would blot out the sun, a so...
Read more

Australia gets progressive...

I read a story like this and I think to myself about how and why they chose 14 days as the limit. Think about it. It's completely arbitrary. Why not 15 days? Or 16? Or 20? Or 30? Or 100? Or how about 270 days? Wait, that's nine months. That would be barbaric! Really, the only thing that changes is the look of the human after conception. Wouldn't want to allow embryos to be farmed at 15 days! Oh, no! That would be bad! Maybe even... murder! Wait, when does it become murder? After it's born? Or wait, maybe right before it's born... hmm... but nothing changes in the 10 minutes it takes to exit the womb... so it's gotta be before that. Well, 6 months it looks too baby-like, like an actual person, and it cries and squirms as it gets ripped apart during abortions... so maybe like 3 months, or 9 weeks... yeah, something like that. Let's go with 14 days, because it's really small then and doesn't have arms or a head yet. Sounds good. W...
Read more