This bloke's got my attention as an atheist:

In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.
“There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings,” Dawkins said. “I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death.”
In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.
“I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse,” he said.
Dawkins

Although the text originated in 2010, it has taken on a second life, being sent to and fro on Facebook and Twitter and providing fodder for discussions, even among atheists, of the benefits of Christianity for modern society.

Dawkins was trained as an evolutionary biologist, but achieved his greatest celebrity not through biology but through his pop atheism, regularly debating theists in public and penning diatribes against God and faith.
For a generation of young atheists, Dawkins gave disbelief a thin veneer of intellectual cachet and offered a justification for the belief that atheism was somehow grounded in science.

In his 2006 bestseller, The God Delusion, Dawkins famously compared religious education to the sexual abuse of children, concluding incredibly that the latter was actually preferable to the former.

Referring to the clerical sex abuse crisis, Dawkins wrote that as “horrible as sexual abuse no doubt was, the damage was arguably less than the long-term psychological damage inflicted by bringing the child up Catholic in the first place.”

Faced with the suicide bombers and child rapists of radical Islam, however, Dawkins finally found something that he thought was worse.
Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter @tdwilliamsrome

(Breitbart)

Good points. I agree.

Agree with what K?

I don't understand - is he advocating a vigorous christian proselytising campaign in muslim communities? I don't understand what he means by "best defense".

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 3:41pm:

Agree with what K? I don't understand - is he advocating a vigorous christian proselytising campaign in muslim communities? I don't understand what he means by "best defense".

He's back-pedaling on his usual anti-religious zealotry. He's conceding that ethically, Christianity has some worthwhile qualities.

But yes, I was wondering how a devout atheist like Dawkins would prop up Christianity in a sort of clash of civilizations with Islam, which is what he is suggesting.

Jesus gave some of the best knowledge to the world. It would be crazy to throw out ethics like do unto others or love thine enemy just because you don't agree with all the attached rules, rituals and cosmology.

Karnal wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 3:48pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 13th, 2016 at 3:41pm: Agree with what K? I don't understand - is he advocating a vigorous christian proselytising campaign in muslim communities? I don't understand what he means by "best defense". He's back-pedaling on his usual anti-religious zealotry. He's conceding that ethically, Christianity has some worthwhile qualities. But yes, I was wondering how a devout atheist like Dawkins would prop up Christianity in a sort of clash of civilizations with Islam, which is what he is suggesting. Jesus gave some of the best knowledge to the world. It would be crazy to throw out ethics like do unto others or love thine enemy just because you don't agree with all the attached rules, rituals and cosmology.

http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/naturalwonderers/files/2012/04/alain_de_botton.jpg

Yes i agree too, which is why although i am actually agnostic, i dont poo on christianity.

Muslims believe Muhammad and Jesus are prophets

Compare the teachings and actions of Muhammad and Jesus. It's clear Christians are given a peaceful message

Jesus gained followers through a message of peace.

Muhammad gathered up 10,000 raving lunatics and converted most of the Arabian gulf by the sword

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 3:41pm:

Agree with what K? I don't understand - is he advocating a vigorous christian proselytising campaign in muslim communities? I don't understand what he means by "best defense".

he is reminding people that the insanity that is Islam is a great evil on the earth

Dawkins always seems to be a bit black and white from my point of view.

I'd be curious to see the original quotation of his in full, as they only gave a few sparse quotes. 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 3:41pm:

I don't understand - is he advocating a vigorous christian proselytising campaign in muslim communities? I don't understand what he means by "best defense".

I think he means from a cultural perspective, I assume in a similar manner to populist U.S. views on Islam would be a pretty harsh deterrent for Muslims.  Weird thing for a prominent atheist to say though, as literally every atheist I've ever heard speak on the topic is critical of Islam.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 3:41pm:

I don't understand - is he advocating a vigorous christian proselytising campaign in muslim communities? I don't understand what he means by "best defense".

I would say he is just pointing out Christianity is the lesser of the evils when it comes to religion and perhaps atheists should focus their attention on Islam instead of Christianity.

A lot of leftists bash Christianity while giving Islam a free pass, it might be a wake up call for those dickheads ,how many Christian based countries have the death penalty for thought crimes like atheism, is it zip zero zilch.
13 make that 14 countries with the Islamic state have the death penalty for atheists.

The Allah of the Quran preaches the worst of living creatures are atheists-agnostics perhaps it's about time atheists started pointing out the truth with Islamic ideology.
quran.com/8/55

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 6:03pm:

A lot of leftists bash Christianity while giving Islam a free pass ...

Link?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 6:11pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13th, 2016 at 6:03pm: A lot of leftists bash Christianity while giving Islam a free pass ... Link?

Peccahead is the worst offender for defending Islam by calling critics of that religion islamophobes.

Peccahead the Islamic apologist. ;D :)

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 6:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 13th, 2016 at 6:11pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13th, 2016 at 6:03pm: A lot of leftists bash Christianity while giving Islam a free pass ... Link? Peccahead is the worst offender for defending Islam by calling critics of that religion islamophobes. Peccahead the Islamic apologist. ;D :)

he does love to demand links, especially to facts already well known.  I am waiting for him to tell us the difference between providing a LINK and providing a URL.  Then once he has made his position know, that perennial idiot mothra can join in.

so predictable3

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 6:03pm:

I would say he is just pointing out Christianity is the lesser of the evils when it comes to religion and perhaps atheists should focus their attention on Islam instead of Christianity.

Like I said, no atheist I've ever heard speak on the topic of Islam has given them anything less than a complete bashing.  People tend to focus on the issues close to where they live, and because most of the worlds best known atheists come from the U.S, largely they focus on the issues that effect them, like separation of church and state (or lackthereof) and the creation/evolution topics.

Very rarely are atheists silent on the topic of Islam though.  I don't know where you got that idea.

Stratos wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 6:49pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13th, 2016 at 6:03pm: I would say he is just pointing out Christianity is the lesser of the evils when it comes to religion and perhaps atheists should focus their attention on Islam instead of Christianity. Like I said, no atheist I've ever heard speak on the topic of Islam has given them anything less than a complete bashing.  People tend to focus on the issues close to where they live, and because most of the worlds best known atheists come from the U.S, largely they focus on the issues that effect them, like separation of church and state (or lackthereof) and the creation/evolution topics. Very rarely are atheists silent on the topic of Islam though.  I don't know where you got that idea.

atheist do in fact spend most of their time attacking christianity.  look at dawkins.... 30 years onl and it has only now occured to him that Islam is a horrible infection.   took him long enough...

Boges dawkins is saying "if we have to have crazy people, let them be Christians". He isn't advocating the Christian faith, just that if crazy people are to exist in this world, let them at least no blow sh1t up. 

You agree?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 7:09pm:

Boges dawkins is saying "if we have to have crazy people, let them be Christians". He isn't advocating the Christian faith, just that if crazy people are to exist in this world, let them at least no blow sh1t up.  You agree?

it is more than that. It is a recognition that the followers of Jesus ie Christians dont do this kind of stuff. kinda implying that Jesus has quite an impact on His followers.

it is dawkin's first step towards discovering just how wrong he has been.  a better book would be the Dawkins Delusion - a criticism of human intellectual arrogance.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 7:00pm:

atheist do in fact spend most of their time attacking Christianity.

Maybe look at atheists from non-western countries.  Do you think atheism is an exclusively western ideology or something?

People critisise what they experience.  I doubt many middle eastern atheists spend much time on the intricacies of nut-case Christian sects. 

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 7:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 13th, 2016 at 7:09pm: Boges dawkins is saying "if we have to have crazy people, let them be Christians". He isn't advocating the Christian faith, just that if crazy people are to exist in this world, let them at least no blow sh1t up.  You agree? it is more than that. It is a recognition that the followers of Jesus ie Christians dont do this kind of stuff. kinda implying that Jesus has quite an impact on His followers. it is dawkin's first step towards discovering just how wrong he has been.  a better book would be the Dawkins Delusion - a criticism of human intellectual arrogance.

So Jesus teaches his nutjob to not blow sh1t up. What a relief, I wonder what would happen if Jesus wasn't around for the nutties.

How come I don't blow sh1t up and I don't believe in Jesus?

It's hardly vindication of the religion. It's absolutely crazy to belief in Santa Claus.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 6:03pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 13th, 2016 at 3:41pm: I don't understand - is he advocating a vigorous christian proselytising campaign in muslim communities? I don't understand what he means by "best defense". I would say he is just pointing out Christianity is the lesser of the evils when it comes to religion and perhaps atheists should focus their attention on Islam instead of Christianity. A lot of leftists bash Christianity while giving Islam a free pass, it might be a wake up call for those dickheads ,how many Christian based countries have the death penalty for thought crimes like atheism, is it zip zero zilch. 13 make that 14 countries with the Islamic state have the death penalty for atheists. The Allah of the Quran preaches the worst of living creatures are atheists-agnostics perhaps it's about time atheists started pointing out the truth with Islamic ideology. quran.com/8/55

Being an atheist or agnostic is a crime in some countries....Who would have thought???

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/10/atheists-death-penalty-_n_4417994.html

:-? :-? :-?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 3:41pm:

Agree with what K? I don't understand - is he advocating a vigorous christian proselytising campaign in muslim communities? I don't understand what he means by "best defense".

Is he saying that because non-Muslims already have a religion that this means it's less likely they'll be persuaded to adopt Islam as their religion?

"Thanks, but I've already got a religion".

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 7:09pm:

Boges dawkins is saying "if we have to have crazy people, let them be Christians". He isn't advocating the Christian faith, just that if crazy people are to exist in this world, let them at least no blow sh1t up.  You agree?

;D ;D ;D

Of course, in drawing comparisons, it would only be fair to compare the Christianity of say 800-400 years ago with the fanatical Islam of today.
That would be more of a reasonable comparison.
What the Christian missionaries, or some of them, did in Central/South America, Africa, even Polynesia doesn't bear thinking about.

However, we are dealing with the here and now.
And here and now the decline in Christian support in Europe particularly makes it open slather for Islam to proselytise among Westerners and turn them into fanatics. I guess that's a proselytising that's OK by Gandalf though.

So what I think the guy is talking about is that Christianity needs to be revived in the West as a bulwark against Islam, because none of the politicians seem interested in doing it.

ps. except Trump of course

I think a better Bulwark against fundamental Islam is through science and rational reasoning.    However, do to the ongoing conflict, this is all but impossible in the sad region, but may be more valid in developed nations. 

tickleandrose wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 11:20am:

I think a better Bulwark against fundamental Islam is through science and rational reasoning.    However, do to the ongoing conflict, this is all but impossible in the sad region, but may be more valid in developed nations.

Science and rational reasoning is not a unifying force, so how could it act as a bulwark? 

tickleandrose wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 11:20am:

I think a better Bulwark against fundamental Islam is through science and rational reasoning.

If science and rational reason were a guard against this then we wouldn't have fundamentalists.

A secular society based on those principles, unbowed to any religious dogma though, might be the best response.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 10:55am:

I guess that's a proselytising that's OK by Gandalf though.

For the record - I am ok with any proselytising as long as its peaceful. I never said otherwise - so try not to strawman me again boges, cheers  :)

Really can't see where this is going but the world doesn't have worry about Christianity trying to blow it up.

I doubt in 2010 Dawkins saw a Christian revival in the West, even if he thought it the better choice of religion. The reason Christianity is preferable to Islam is because it has had its teeth pulled out, by the parliaments, education and logic. That is not going to happen in Islam; they are simply not interested in progress. It is Mohammed and the Koran, or nothing.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 7:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 13th, 2016 at 7:09pm: Boges dawkins is saying "if we have to have crazy people, let them be Christians". He isn't advocating the Christian faith, just that if crazy people are to exist in this world, let them at least no blow sh1t up.  You agree? it is more than that. It is a recognition that the followers of Jesus ie Christians dont do this kind of stuff. kinda implying that Jesus has quite an impact on His followers. it is dawkin's first step towards discovering just how wrong he has been.  a better book would be the Dawkins Delusion - a criticism of human intellectual arrogance.

Nonsense. Christians have done all sorts of screwed up stuff in the past, it's the current culture that does not want to blow things up nothing inherent about the religion.

red baron wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 12:38pm:

Really can't see where this is going but the world doesn't have worry about Christianity trying to blow it up.

really? except for those bombing civilians in the middle east ...  :D :D

Opps, I forgot, we aren't counting those bombs in this discussion, are we?

issuevoter wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 1:02pm:

I doubt in 2010 Dawkins saw a Christian revival in the West, even if he thought it the better choice of religion. The reason Christianity is preferable to Islam is because it has had its teeth pulled out, by the parliaments, education and logic. That is not going to happen in Islam; they are simply not interested in progress. It is Mohammed and the Koran, or nothing.

an interesting if utterly incorrect statement. Christianity isnt a religion of peace for any other reason that that its Founder was a Man of Peace. Islam was founded by a brutal man of war.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 5:25pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jan 14th, 2016 at 1:02pm: I doubt in 2010 Dawkins saw a Christian revival in the West, even if he thought it the better choice of religion. The reason Christianity is preferable to Islam is because it has had its teeth pulled out, by the parliaments, education and logic. That is not going to happen in Islam; they are simply not interested in progress. It is Mohammed and the Koran, or nothing. an interesting if utterly incorrect statement. Christianity isnt a religion of peace for any other reason that that its Founder was a Man of Peace. Islam was founded by a brutal man of war.

Yeah, who hated homosexuals and rated women as second class.  His followers are very 'peaceful'.  Onky 30,000 dead frkm gun violence in the US.  Thats peace.

EVERY RELIGION is Ludicrous.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 5:25pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jan 14th, 2016 at 1:02pm: I doubt in 2010 Dawkins saw a Christian revival in the West, even if he thought it the better choice of religion. The reason Christianity is preferable to Islam is because it has had its teeth pulled out, by the parliaments, education and logic. That is not going to happen in Islam; they are simply not interested in progress. It is Mohammed and the Koran, or nothing. an interesting if utterly incorrect statement. Christianity isnt a religion of peace for any other reason that that its Founder was a Man of Peace. Islam was founded by a brutal man of war.

No, christians were not always the wusses they are today;

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/84/Ned_Flanders.png


Quote:

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Matthew 10:34

It doesn't matter how righteous you are if you are unable to defend yourself and the christian world has become soft, for those reasons described and more. 


Quote:

"To secure peace, is to prepare for war" -metallica

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 5:25pm:

Christianity isnt a religion of peace for any other reason that that its Founder was a Man of Peace.

He physically attacked people who had a different ideology to him.  Some would describe that today as a terrorist attack, and every sane person would call it assault.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 14^th, 2016 at 5:50pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 14th, 2016 at 5:25pm: issuevoter wrote on Jan 14th, 2016 at 1:02pm: I doubt in 2010 Dawkins saw a Christian revival in the West, even if he thought it the better choice of religion. The reason Christianity is preferable to Islam is because it has had its teeth pulled out, by the parliaments, education and logic. That is not going to happen in Islam; they are simply not interested in progress. It is Mohammed and the Koran, or nothing. an interesting if utterly incorrect statement. Christianity isnt a religion of peace for any other reason that that its Founder was a Man of Peace. Islam was founded by a brutal man of war. Yeah, who hated homosexuals and rated women as second class.  His followers are very 'peaceful'.  Onky 30,000 dead frkm gun violence in the US.  Thats peace. EVERY RELIGION is Ludicrous.

Jesus was THE great liberator of women. if you had any historical context you would know that.

I should have added that Christian God Freaks are not interested in progress either, except when it is forced down their throats by the secular world. If it was left to the Christians, we would still be burning witches at the stake.

issuevoter wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 12:40pm:

I should have added that Christian God Freaks are not interested in progress either, except when it is forced down their throats by the secular world. If it was left to the Christians, we would still be burning witches at the stake.

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/62671005.jpg


True.

Then again, if it was left up to Sir Booby we'd still be burning witches at the stake and hanging people in the streets.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 8:58am:

Jesus was THE great liberator of women. if you had any historical context you would know that.

Er, no.  Not even close.

Not that that was uncommon for the time period he was supposed to have lived, women historically have almost always been treated as second class, including by the Christian church.  Even today in many popular sects, women are prohibited from performing certain roles, purely based on their gender.


issuevoter wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 12:40pm:

I should have added that Christian God Freaks are not interested in progress either, except when it is forced down their throats by the secular world.

I heard an insane speech from a U.S pastor a month or so ago, on why gay people should be executed.  Not some random small guy either.

issuevoter wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 12:40pm:

I should have added that Christian God Freaks are not interested in progress either, except when it is forced down their throats by the secular world. If it was left to the Christians, we would still be burning witches at the stake.

would you like to try your hand at an even basic justification for that mindless drivel?  while you are at it, consider that for a thousand years the ONLY schools and universities were run by the Church.  And all that art and music we still enjoy? virtually all of it came out of the Church.


you write drivel...

Stratos wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 12:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 8:58am: Jesus was THE great liberator of women. if you had any historical context you would know that. Er, no.  Not even close. Not that that was uncommon for the time period he was supposed to have lived, women historically have almost always been treated as second class, including by the Christian church.  Even today in many popular sects, women are prohibited from performing certain roles, purely based on their gender. issuevoter wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 12:40pm: I should have added that Christian God Freaks are not interested in progress either, except when it is forced down their throats by the secular world. I heard an insane speech from a U.S pastor a month or so ago, on why gay people should be executed.  Not some random small guy either.

more drivel.  Samaritan Woman?  woman caught in adultery?  remember that at the time, women were not considered to even posess a soul. Jesus preached to WOMEN.

you dont know much, do you?

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 4:09pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 12:40pm: I should have added that Christian God Freaks are not interested in progress either, except when it is forced down their throats by the secular world. If it was left to the Christians, we would still be burning witches at the stake. would you like to try your hand at an even basic justification for that mindless drivel?  while you are at it, consider that for a thousand years the ONLY schools and universities were run by the Church.  And all that art and music we still enjoy? virtually all of it came out of the Church. you write drivel...

I can't see why you guys are at each others' throats when you are both right.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 13^th, 2016 at 2:43pm:

This bloke's got my attention as an atheist: In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world. “There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings,” Dawkins said. “I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death.” In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments. Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad. “I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse,” he said. Dawkins Although the text originated in 2010, it has taken on a second life, being sent to and fro on Facebook and Twitter and providing fodder for discussions, even among atheists, of the benefits of Christianity for modern society. Dawkins was trained as an evolutionary biologist, but achieved his greatest celebrity not through biology but through his pop atheism, regularly debating theists in public and penning diatribes against God and faith. For a generation of young atheists, Dawkins gave disbelief a thin veneer of intellectual cachet and offered a justification for the belief that atheism was somehow grounded in science. In his 2006 bestseller, The God Delusion, Dawkins famously compared religious education to the sexual abuse of children, concluding incredibly that the latter was actually preferable to the former. Referring to the clerical sex abuse crisis, Dawkins wrote that as “horrible as sexual abuse no doubt was, the damage was arguably less than the long-term psychological damage inflicted by bringing the child up Catholic in the first place.” Faced with the suicide bombers and child rapists of radical Islam, however, Dawkins finally found something that he thought was worse. Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter @tdwilliamsrome (Breitbart)

Appears more to be an analist than an atheist. Perhaps he is a constipated christian soldier.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 4:10pm:

remember that at the time, women were not considered to even posess a soul.

I have no idea where you got that from.  I've never heard such a thing.  Please post where you got that idea from, or which culture it comes from.

I'm not arguing that Jesus was bad at teaching women compared to his time, but to act that a religion that in it's core scripture specifically discriminates against women is some kind of bastion of womens liberation is incorrect. 

You do recognise that the Bible specifically discriminates against females correct?

Stratos wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 6:00pm:

You do recognise that the Bible specifically discriminates against females correct?

I don't. 

A good man and a good woman are different things, reached by travelling different paths. 

Life is not a zero sum game - choosing one path doesn't mean a person choosing another path is hard done by.  There doesn't need to be a victim in every situation.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 4:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 4:09pm: issuevoter wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 12:40pm: I should have added that Christian God Freaks are not interested in progress either, except when it is forced down their throats by the secular world. If it was left to the Christians, we would still be burning witches at the stake. would you like to try your hand at an even basic justification for that mindless drivel?  while you are at it, consider that for a thousand years the ONLY schools and universities were run by the Church.  And all that art and music we still enjoy? virtually all of it came out of the Church. you write drivel... I can't see why you guys are at each others' throats when you are both right.

how can two diametrically opposed positions 'both be right'?

... wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 6:15pm:

I don't.  A good man and a good woman are different things, reached by travelling different paths.  Life is not a zero sum game - choosing one path doesn't mean a person choosing another path is hard done by.  There doesn't need to be a victim in every situation.

That's fine, and while I don't agree with it wholly, would you agree that denying women the right to speak in church or become a teacher in the church isn't discrimination?

Yeah, but any belief system is going to be discriminatory by definition.  To live by any beliefs at all - Don't kill, Don't eat pork, don't be a dick - is to be discriminatory, even if only with your own conduct. 

The important thing is its not unfair discrimination.

... wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 7:04pm:

The important thing is its not unfair discrimination.

You don't think restricting certain non-physical jobs and restricting speech to one gender in certain places isn't unfair discrimination?

Stratos wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 7:15pm:

... wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 7:04pm: The important thing is its not unfair discrimination. You don't think restricting certain non-physical jobs and restricting speech to one gender in certain places isn't unfair discrimination?

Not necessarily.

For example, if fernwood fitness centres hire only female staff and accept only female members, let them. 

Sometimes it can be kinder to advise against - maybe even forbid - someone to take a certain path, than to let them stumble along and incur the consequences.  Parents do it all the time.  Would you say a parent telling their kid to go to bed, not to jump on the bed, or skull that bottle of vodka, is "unfair discrimination?"

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 8:58am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 14th, 2016 at 5:50pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jan 14th, 2016 at 5:25pm: issuevoter wrote on Jan 14th, 2016 at 1:02pm: I doubt in 2010 Dawkins saw a Christian revival in the West, even if he thought it the better choice of religion. The reason Christianity is preferable to Islam is because it has had its teeth pulled out, by the parliaments, education and logic. That is not going to happen in Islam; they are simply not interested in progress. It is Mohammed and the Koran, or nothing. an interesting if utterly incorrect statement. Christianity isnt a religion of peace for any other reason that that its Founder was a Man of Peace. Islam was founded by a brutal man of war. Yeah, who hated homosexuals and rated women as second class.  His followers are very 'peaceful'.  Onky 30,000 dead frkm gun violence in the US.  Thats peace. EVERY RELIGION is Ludicrous. Jesus was THE great liberator of women. if you had any historical context you would know that.

of courrseeee he was.  You are such a nut.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 4:09pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 12:40pm: I should have added that Christian God Freaks are not interested in progress either, except when it is forced down their throats by the secular world. If it was left to the Christians, we would still be burning witches at the stake. would you like to try your hand at an even basic justification for that mindless drivel?  while you are at it, consider that for a thousand years the ONLY schools and universities were run by the Church.  And all that art and music we still enjoy? virtually all of it came out of the Church. you write drivel...

yeah, for the children of the aristocracy. It took secularism to finally give education to the masses.

Keep going, you're selling your nutjob fiction really well for everyone.

Stratos wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 6:00pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 4:10pm: remember that at the time, women were not considered to even posess a soul. I have no idea where you got that from.  I've never heard such a thing.  Please post where you got that idea from, or which culture it comes from. I'm not arguing that Jesus was bad at teaching women compared to his time, but to act that a religion that in it's core scripture specifically discriminates against women is some kind of bastion of womens liberation is incorrect.  You do recognise that the Bible specifically discriminates against females correct?

the same place he got his drivel that every 'prediction' in the bible has been proven correct. He's a nut, he probably believes he drinks the blood of Jebus when he drinks wine. Just ignore him.