[ExI] Tolerance

[moulton at moulton.com]

On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 17:48 -0800, Lee Corbin wrote:

> But there is an important asymmetry that arises when
> we go beyond just considering our "internal" (though quite
> public) discussions among us atheists. Say that two
> persons A and B converse, and A lets it be known he's
> religious and B affirms that he's an atheist. The
> situation is not symmetrical: already B is implying
> that A is a dupe.
 
Slightly false since not all religions are theist.

Now there are some religions which are theist.  So instead of leaving this example let us make it specific.  Let A be a Christian who believes in the literal truth of the entire Judeo-Christian scriptures (what is commonly referred to as a Fundamentalist).  And let B be an atheist who says there is no God.  Now B may feel that A is a dupe, or B may feel that A is going through a period of transition until A arrives at a higher level of understanding or whatever.  The point is that we do not know exactly what B thinks about A.  However we know what the Fundamentalist position is about B; the Fundamentalist position comes right out of the Bible and says that B is a fool.  Yes it is in the Bible and to quote the entire verse:
The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds,
there is none who does good
Psalms 14:1

Now we know that not all religious are Fundamentalist.  The term "religious"
covers a variety of positions.  So my point is that we need to avoid
oversimplifying complex issues.  

> It's the *added* shrill militancy of people like Dawkins
> that I find repellent.

Dawkins is not a "shrill militant" by any reasonable usage of the phrase "shrill militant".  I have been present on three different occasions where Dawkins spoke at length and he is not shrill. 

> You don't have to read much history
> to see the same vicious certainty in revolutionary France
> or Russia, or even in Hitlerite Germany. The intolerance
> is palpable.
 
This is totally both false and disgusting.  To try to smear Dawkins by reference to the French or Russian revolutions or to "Hitlerite Germany" is intellectually dishonest and contemptible and anyone who does so should be ashamed.

Fred