A note.
To Richard Dawkins: You’re being a dick. Yeah, I said it. Supporting Bill Maher? What are you thinking? That guy is a total whackjob! Have you seriously considered his position on Western medicine and vaccines? You’re giving him an award? Honestly? I know he’s supported atheism but is that enough? He doesn’t think critically and if he doesn’t think critically then he’s no friend of mine, atheist or no. Honestly, to me, atheism is about coming to a conclusion that you arrived at by … guess what? Thinking critically, that’s what. Bill Maher obviously didn’t do that since he’s a freaking nut bag about conventional medicine. Seriously. Think about it.
Cuddles,
Kate
Advertisement
Did you see Bill Frist give him a subtle tongue lashing?
Maher that is
Yeah, that was great!
If you’re referring to the Atheist Alliance International award, PZ Myers was at the ceremony and reported on the event on his blog: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/10/aai_evening_award_ceremony.php. Dawkins apparently was very clear that the award was for Maher’s work on Religulous and other atheist activism, but that his views on Western medicine in general and vaccines in particular are absurd and destructive.
Good, but I wouldn’t give Jenny McCarthy a humanitarian of the year award if she saved a trainload of orphans for the simple fact that she’s also extremely destructive. You can show your approval through actions (giving the award or approving the recipient of the award) even if your words say otherwise. I see where you’re coming from but I’m conflicted about it.
Well somebody had to say it
Might as well be me.
I’ve been listening to Maher speak about the vaccine stuff here and there and it’s embarrassing. Maybe we cold start a fund to enroll Bill in a couple of immunology courses at a school near where he lives.
Besides the award, has Dawkins come out in support for Maher?
I’m not sure if he has, Chad. I just know he got Dawkins’s approval for receiving the award. But yeah, let’s find a way to educate Mr. Maher.
You do realize that the award that bears Richard Dawkins name is not chosen by Richard Dawkins, right? You do realize he has no say in who gets that award, right? And you do realize that Bill Maher got the award as a result of his documentary “Religulous,” right?
Bill is a bit backwards about western medicine, that I will grant you, but your approach is a little disingenuous. Every human being has something they feel strongly about, especially in this country. Be it abortion, circumcision, the role of government, football, or which style of pizza is the best, you, me, we all are passionate about something that others would consider an odd way to think or just flat out wrong. And that’s perfectly fine. Just because a fellow atheist doesn’t agree with you on something, it doesn’t make them less of an atheist.
Let’s leave the petty nitpicking about everyone not fitting into our perceived mold of what another member of our society to the fundies. They’re way better at it.
Will, you DO realize Dawkins supported Maher as a recipient of the award that bears his name, right? And you DO realize…. I can’t keep this up. I feel like dick after one sentence of that. Imagine how you must feel! :(
Okay, so guess what? Are you guessing? Good. The good thing about atheists is that there is no society that we belong to. Do you also belong to societies for not collecting stamps? I didn’t think so. That means I’m free to sit here and criticize anyone in this not believing in god society for whatever I like. It’s not like the Atheist Pope is going to float down and smite me with a bronze bust of Darwin. So, no. There is no dogma that we all have to adhere to in order to be atheists. That’s kind of the point. I don’t have to agree with everything Dawkins does just because he’s kind of the figurehead of this, our non-religion. I’ll leave that to his sycophants. They’re way better at it.
So much anger. You’d think I pissed in your chocolate milk. If you display this sort of ire towards a fellow atheist, I’d hate to see what you’d do to a fundamentalist.
The matter remains that you essentially said that Maher isn’t an atheist because he couldn’t arrive at a conclusion via thinking critically. You basically oust him because he doesn’t think as you do.
Dawkins is on record several times–nearly constantly, in fact–as being in favor of a rational view of the world. He was the first Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science. Most of his life has been dedicated to educating the public about science, promoting a scientific worldview, critical thinking, and skepticism.
Then, he got widely known for being an atheist, and ran with it. Now, it seems, he is willing to support Maher simply for agreeing with him on the non-existence of god, despite the fact that Maher is consistently working against everything Dawkins built his reputation for supporting.
Hi Kate!
My view is that “Religulous” is deserving of an award for promoting an overtly critical view of religious claims, assertions and practices and, as such, is compartmentalized enough to deserve the attention and appreciation.
Maher, by the way, is not “working against *everything* Dawkins built his reputation” supporting. That’s just flawed hyperbole.
Maher has some other political opinions I disagree with, he is extremely biased against police and authority (other than liberal/democratic figures he likes), for instance, (which is not necessarily a bad thing, unless it is the default position regardless of dynamics and situational facts).
I still like the guy and think his public outreach regarding the issue of religious rote, ritual and dogma is spot on.
Steve Schlicht
Biloxi MS
Baseless name-calling and absolutely no information. The only thing of any relevance appears in the comments, provided by obviously intelligent readers (e.g. Will, Steve). Way to go, Kate!