Who is Melanie Phillips? She’s the twat who wrote this piece which appears, syndicated, in today’s Oz.
Clearly, the Murdoch stable are now taking an anti-atheist perspective, right alongside their Climate Change denier perspective and Conservatives-rule perspective in the on-going pursuit of fair and balanced reporting.
Yet another shrill critique by another shrill proponent for the irrationally religious in defence of the indefensible which they see as being under attack by that terribly intolerant biologist, Richard Dawkins. Yes, the same Dawkins, author of ‘The God Delusion’, ‘The Greatest Show on Earth: the evidence for evolution’, ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ and ‘The Selfish Gene’. The man who has an opinion on the evolution of life and the place of the metaphysical within it. Rather, the space within it occupied under false pretences by supporters of the metaphysical.
Let’s be perfectly clear on the issue of religion’s irrationality in defending it’s place. In terms of religion, let’s also be clear on just which religions appear to be taking umbrage to Dawkin’s position of ‘god’, the existence of, place in and rational behind its existence. Those would be Judeaism, Islam and Christianity. I haven’t come across a Buddhist, Hindi, Taoist, Shinto or Kallathumpian who has a beef with Dawkins’position, and probably won’t, so just those major three it seems.
Richard Dawkins, as anyone who has read ‘The God Delusion’ as I’m currently doing will realise, does not attack the concept of religion. Far from it, he recognises and accepts the need of some for the ability to exercise this thing called faith. He also recognises spirituality, as separate from and entirely different to religion, or the concept of ‘god’. Anyone who has listened to the man speak about his latest book, ‘The Greatest Show on Earth: the evidence for evolution’ will very shortly come to this realisation. A reader of the transcript of last Monday night’s QandA, or viewer of the online video of the same program will also be equally informed.
As a final rejoinder to the Melanie Phillips article, I would simply make this observation. If she is making a reference to said QandA program, in which both Dawkins and Steven Fielding appeared, then her accusation in her piece, claiming Dawkins described Fielding as ‘more stupid than an earthworm’ is an utter fabrication, as any reader of the transcript will discover. That single false statement utterly destroys her claim to some form of righteous position in labelling Dawkins as intolerant, instead reversing her pointing finger directly back to herself. Proof positive of the intolerance of the shrill, shrieking religious minority in western society. Richard Dawkins has an opinion. He is entitled to express that opinion. He expresses no disrespect, no affront and intends no harm or hurt. He makes a rational observation regarding an irrational, unproveable, indefensible foible of the human condition which seeks to place a metaphysical godhead at the forefront of human societal, cultural and philosophical evolution. For mine, he does it so very, very well.