Bestselling author Dinesh D'Souza's new book What's So Great About Christianity has just been released. D’Souza is the Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Hmmm. I can’t figure out if that title is an insult to the atheists or the gays.
New term: Gaytheist.
- Bill Vance
I would add Atheism and Islamo-Fascism to the above quote.
What? Do the atheists want to be married now?
Most queers are in fact atheist or at least profess said belief. In reality, there are no human atheists, only animals. When disaster strikes, even the atheist will beg his maker for mercy. In war, when the bullets start flying over the head of the atheist, first they pee their pants, then they ask God to save them. Recall all that found God when 911 hit.
No, Muslims are the new gays. Atheists are the new Muslims.
If he feels it necessary to tell me how "bright" he is, maybe he isn't all that "bright".
Just why do we even listen to him? Earth shaking scientific thesis? No. Tremendous technical accomplishments? No. Solid business leader? Military hero? No. Oh, I forgot, he’s a wordspinner (or member of the chattering class). Never did nuttin’...no how. Put words on a page and other mindless libs chose to believe him. Sorta like Gore. Guess we should listen to him to eh? After all, mom....everybody else is doing it.
So Dawkins wants to further debase the currency of thought, eh? The atheists already claimed “freethinker”, which was supposed to sound positive. Let them keep to that rather than ruining another perfectly good word.
I think it may be a good idea. A lot of people are naive about the tactics used by the homosexual/gay rights movement. A bright rights movement may possibly make those tactics more transparent to some people.
I think that the term “theophobe” best describes Dawkins.
Oh boy - almost direct quotes from some of our Darwinist-obsessives here!
No wonder that so many Americans say they are opposed to evolution. They believe that evolution is atheism masquerading as science, and Dawkins confirms their suspicions.
LOL - that is going to leave a mark. Get ready for Darwinists demanding to know what D'Souza's scientific training is, and how many peer-reviewed papers he has written.
I think that most gays are atheists, so this would make a gay atheist, a two-fer.(two affirmative action credits for the price of one) What it would really do is enlarge the gay lobby to include hetero-sexual atheists and give them a legal stance that they can use to advance the gay agenda (separation of church and state). Even though the separation of church and state is a bogus regulation, it has a national precedent that is lacking in gay rights.
Can we just get rid of the tired “this is the new this” line as if everything is an analogy to fashion?
Basically, they're both the same class of living Straw Man Arguments, and equally useless to the discourse as a whole. Anyone using them to make a point is usually just muddying their own point.
>>”Bright” kind of reflects the high opinion that atheists have of their own intellectual abilities.<<
Except they are not very smart at all. Every single “atheist” that I have challenged on his/her faith has eventually admitted they were really agnostic.
Wanna see how a real atheist would live? Watch Natural Born Killers.
I am not aware that atheists are particularly oppressed, actually. They are certainly free to have all the steamy bath-house sex they want. Or am I confusing my liberation movements here?
Of course there’s a difference. You would never ask an atheist whether your new end table would go with the drapes.