"There are would-be murderers, all around the world who want to kill you and me, and themselves, because they are motivated by what they think is the highest ideal..." - Richard Dawkins

In this two-part documentary, Oxford Professor Richard Dawkins examines how religious faith is gaining ground in the face of rational, scientific truth. The program takes you to some of the world's religious hot-spots, both in America and the Middle East. Dawkins meets with religious leaders and their followers, as well as scientists and skeptics to examine the power of religion. Interviews with former Pastor Ted Haggard, the novelist Ian McEwan, the former Bishop of Oxford, and others offer valuable insights into the global impact and consequences of faith in the 21st century.

Along with his million-copy bestseller The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins' Root of All Evil? has helped inspire people of reason worldwide to say "Enough is enough!" Our modern world is the product of a long march from ignorance and fear to the Enlightement and beyond, always guided by the power of science and reason. To now abandon our endeavour toward progress and knowledge for faith and superstition puts humanity in peril.

I watched these two docs a few days ago but didn't immediately reply. I was struck by it's focus on many points brought up here by others on this board and discussed some might say to death. But what struck me more was the absolute total lack of replies. Here is a concise and complete point of view on the madness of organized religion.. and no one comments. Not our resident radical religious fanatics voicing there view or even their outrage.. and nothing either from the atheists.. bBut I would understand the lack of comment from the atheists.. a silent "I told you so", maybe.
Still.. the best most rational and reasoned doc yet on this subject.... and no comments. Strange.

well, i still havnt watched it yet, but if its snooty atheism you want, well you've twisted my arm.

DOWN WITH CHRISTIAN MIND SLAVES!! THROW THE CHRISTIANS IN TEH FIIIIRREE!!!

there that should pave the way for some religeous douche bag :-D your request has been fufilled

Maybe you should watch them.. excellent part concerning arrogance.. or snootiness.. as perceived by the good rev Ted Haggard.. the renowned good shepherd, the Voice and Leader of the christian right wing and it's agenda of religious orientated family values, head of the largest single church in the USA, counsel to the prez himself, and staunch anti abortionist and vigorously outspokenly anti gay .. Also an admitted meth head gay sex addict. Well after he was caught. Now that's snooty arrogance.

:-D

yeah i got excited when i saw it's richard dawkins, someone posted a bunch of fucking sweet speaches by him and some other people. they were all brilliant, im sure i could dig up the links.

Here is a sweet link for you
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6...h&plindex=0

Stop blaming everything on God and religion! You know a lot of times bad things like this is done purely for power and greed. As long as you say yea you the man Dawkins!! Means to me you are blinded by a injustice faith and those Innocent people in 911 and the ones that are still being killed because of 911 all died and dieing in vain as we speak. If this keeps up you will not have to worry about religion after a few years. A NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!!!!!!!!!! BTW BUSH IS NOT A CHRISTAN!!!!!!!!! WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Miss.. This is the most disjointed and incomprehensible mumbo jumbo post I've known you to make... Still I'll try and make some sense or ask you for clarification...
How can you blame an imaginary figure?? That's as weird as blaming the tooth fairy for not giving me enough money for my teeth I lost as a kid. It's the people who believe in this stuff, yet act out in total contrariness to their belief system that's the prob.
As for your next sentence... what exactly do you mean by "this"?? what are you talking about.. the good rev TH or what??
And what does 911 have to do with this doc??
I would only hope that in just a few years religion would be a none issue replaced by reality and reason.
And again.. what does NWO have to do with this doc??
And last.. for not being a christian... despite claiming to be from his own lips.. Bush sure has the christian ear and vote. Did you miss that point at your local house of worship when they were claiming Bush would bring back family values.. like stealing, lying, cheating. and killing.

The first part of this doc was about 911!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dawkins brought it up! Or did you not watch the same doc as i did?

And I don't have a house of worship...I don't go to churches and 2nd I didn't vote for Bush I don't trust a thing he does or says!! Do you think that religion is going to be replaced by reality and reason? LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Making one single sentence reference to 911 does not make even the first part of this doc about 911. As a point on religious fanaticism, it is very relevant to the topic.
You laffing your ass off at the mention of my hoping for an age of reality and reason... as if you prefer an unreal and irrational life... is very disturbing,
But please stick around.. as I believe you are a good example of a Christian.. and make for a great instruction aid to this doc.

Y'all shut up now. Who cares. If religion is toppled tomorrow the problems of the world are still going to be here. You think by just getting rid of people believing in a deity is causing the world pain? No, it is human nature. We kill, we are greedy, and we like control. Just because some guy in the 70's said imagine a world about religion and made it sound rosy doesn't mean it is true. Lastly some of the greatest atrocities in the last century were committed in a society where religions was frowned upon. Either way religion is not the problem imo, it is human nature and until people can actually move past their need to be destructive a world ruled by reason will never exist. Lastly I do believe in a God and I have read the bible but I only follow the red print because the rest is pretty much rubbish imo. Also for nobody replying to this video nobosy really cares about this stuff except for atheists with a temper problem, and christians that have a major malfunction, both of which would run the world into the state of decay that it is currently in because neither one respects the other. As for the documentary, it was meh but it was on the offensive too much for me, but hey what can you expect from the writer of the god delision. Now if you will excuse me i have a documentary on the history of the vibrator to watch.

I don't care if he made just 1 single sentence reference to 911 or 10 reference's to 911 the point is he did and he is blaming that on the wrong guy! Now you want to talk about this or not? I think Dawkins is wrong and is way off base and he is just using it to his advantage. Do you think those Muslims really had anything to do with the 911 attacks or do you think it was the big guy sitting in the big house? (ain't talking about God either)

You should look up the definition of projection.
I am not greedy.. I dislike control freaks.. I don't kill... and I do care. It is also human nature to want to better ones existence.. hard to do when the foundation is built on lies, delusion and denial.
Please give some examples of these atrocities you speak of and how they were completely separate from religion.
And last... christian, atheist or whatever.. some segments of society for the most part has a who cares attitude because either they have been taught they have no power or prefer to hand over their empowerment to others, perhaps to escape the responsibility of making a personal commitment and then taking positive action. Easier to blame it on the devil or god or evil or someone else... than approach it in reality, with reason, with resolution... with self responsibility. Maybe because it takes time away from their BOB. *battery operated boyfriend*... or docs on BOBs.

Everybody has the right to believe what they want to believe, it's not a complicated issue. The issue becomes complicated when said believers encroach on the lives of rationalists, especially if it results in human suffering or sacrifice e.g. telling Africans they shouldn't wear condoms despite a massive AIDS problem, or slicing up the genitalia of young children, or killing innocent people because they believe it's for the "greater good". This should be obvious to everybody; believe and worship what or who you want, in your own home, or where it will not affect my children or fill their minds with fantasy. That's it.

Forget the arguments of who's right and who's wrong, because that can never be proven. What is right is that we all have the right to believe what we believe; what is WRONG is that human suffering is resulting from these beliefs. Can you morally accept that your religious brothers are carrying out such atrocities? I couldn't, and I don't want any part of it.

My favourite part of the documentary was when the teacher of the evangelical school in London said something along the lines of "Without God's laws, people would not know what is right and what is wrong; rape, murder and peadophilia would be the norm." Are you kidding me? If you don't believe in God you would go around doing that stuff? That says more about you than it does about God, my friend. Get some help.

He made a simple reference to muslim religious fanatics driven by their religious beliefs and religious upbringing for causing their actions on 911. I'm sure you would like to swing this towards some other point to fit your agenda as is your way.. but lets keep this on track... Upbringing, indoctrination, and peer attitudes are strong motivators in the human psyche. I would rather share my space with some one grounded and realistic than with someone who has been taught a bunch of fables that leads him to think killing people for their religion is going to get them into heaven... or a minister that spews hate towards certain groups.. when in reality.. he is a member of the same group he attacks... even thou his imaginary friend says to "love thy neighbor as you would want to be loved". This is the insanity of religion. It isn't god's way or a spiritual path to use this set up to control and exploit people.. or to hypocritically revel privately in the ways that publicly are condemned as outrageous and immoral. To me that BS is outrageous and immoral.. and to defend it is just either more of the same.. or proof that the BS works on some people. I'm convinced with you... it's a double header... as you always have this need to control others when it comes to even the slightest questioning of religion... and you have the most typical christian methodology in your behavior in doing so. Anything goes and is A OK as long as you and your god come out on top. Just like those boys that flew them planes....
The point of the doc is the methods organized religion uses to convert and hold onto those converted, and especially those from a very young age. And now that their are hi tech gadgets and data and info on control and manipulation available to these people.. why the need to use if God is so magnetic and charming in it's power and love.. or hate.. or spite.. anger.. wrath.. jealousy.. OK... general overall pissy you're gonna fry in hell sinners soon as I bring on the apackylips attitude??

The best point made... if a person is taught that they are personally responsible.. they tend to behave so.. but if they are taught it's somebody or something else responsible.. why step up. When I went to Catholic school we had a saying.. "Catholic school, graduating more criminals, perverts, and politicians than any other form of education!!!"

I'm not disagreeing that men and women do bad things in the name of religion...If I did that it would make me blind. Doing these things in the name of God makes me sick to my stomach to the point where I throw up bile. My Lord the one I love and the one that loves me doesn't like it either. I also don't like things being blamed on religion that is religion either. A lot of your big time Evangelist are corrupt to a point, but it is money and power that made them that way I believe. Some get there fingers in the politics cookie jar I don't think the 2 should mix (God speaks against it) it brings down the church almost ever time and gets a bad rap. The root to all evil is money...Not God! But religion should not be removed because of a few bad apples either. There is churches and religions that do good things also you know..Like "feed the children" for instance. But how come no one ever talks about the good things that religion does? I can give you a huge list. I also find it very sad when I hear people turning atheist after at one time having faith because of a church...why not leave the religion or the church, but keep your faith?

I just posted a doc about a 911 firefighter. Did you know most of these fire fighters are Irish catholics and there faith is what holds them together. Go watch the documentary and you tell me if you really want to take that from them? I dare any of you to walk up to one of these fine men and women that risk their lives to save lives and tell them they are brain washed and off their rockers just because they have faith in God and how right you are because you know for a FACT there isn't no God.

I'm glad you've put forward a reasonable argument! I respect people who have faith for faiths sake, if it makes them better people and happy because of it then who am I to judge? My quarms are not against faith in itself. I have faith in Science, you have faith in God. There's no problem; it's the misuse of the faith that causes harm. Without Science, a lot of killing would not have been possible e.g. guns, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons etc... But without God, the motivation for the use of this "bad science" would be dramatically decreased. All religion serves to do is polarize an increasingly detached society with religious hatred, propaganda and violence based on fictitious folklore and fantasy. Okay, a few churches have done a few good things, but these are clearly outshadowed by corrupt Pastors and all of the above.

So if you believe in a God, but not organised religion, that puts you in a safer, on-the-fence position, wouldn't you say?

Now show me the proof, the logic, the reason and the rationale for this "invisible friend"; it all comes down to a 'faith' issue. You have believed what you have been nurtured to believe. Again, this is all fine for some people, and not for others. I'd prefer proof, evidence, logic and reason to live my life by, not an omnipresent, incompetent, apathetic, manipulative, hipocratic Father figure who's followers have done far more harm than good in a world that needs a little more reason and empathy with humanity; REGARDLESS of which church they belong to. What is wrong with just doing the right thing, for it's own sake? Not out of fear for this all-seeing, all-judging peeping-tom in the sky?

Hmm I think I've lost my way in this rant and so I'll stop for good; obviously there's no offence meant!

EDITED: To bring up a group of Firefighters as a pathetic guilt trip has only damaged any argument you may hold, it is irrelevent and ignorant. Did I say we should take anything away from them? As long as they're not killing people or teaching my children in the name of Him, that's fine with me. The fact you would even consider laying a guilt trip into an argument like this loses all integrity of your view of the world. Jesus Christ.

I didnt say you was wanting to take faith from people, but there is some like Dawkins that do.

The root to all evil is money...Not God!......No, actually you are wrong.

What is called the "Human Condition" is where evil comes from. Violence is natural to humans. Thongs like money, power and religion simply succor our tendencies to act evil.

You keep thinking I'm an atheist.. I'm not.. but I'm also not a christian.. and I know a lot of heroic people who aren't that don't need a good fairy tale to motivate them to do such acts. But I wouldn't take anything from anybody, even if that's what they need... What I take offense is the obligation some think in trying to give me something I don't want or need.. and then trying to convince me I'm a bad person or going to fry in hell for my refusal.. Keep your religous beliefs and your judgments based on those beliefs to yourself.. thank you very much.

I don't think he wants to take anything from anybody.. like I just posted.. he doesn't want it forced onto anyone overtly or covertly..

Your projecting. there have been several peaceful societies throuout history and into the present where violence is not the norm. And even within violent societies, individuals and groups have stood up and voiced their non violence stance.

You outta write a book called "You Are Projecting".

Man is a predator, predation = violence. And there are many forms of violence. Violence doesn't necc. have to be physical.

For someone who wrote "Thongs like money, power and religion simply succor our tendencies to act evil." I've never seen a "thong" do that.. and actually that's just one of many errors in "you're" posts.. should you really be pointing out my one mistake.
Still.. you are projecting. Violence in any form is a learned behavior and not a natural one. Man learned to be a hunter predator.. just like he learned to be a agro gatherer.. just like man can learn to choose to lower himself to selfish base desires or rise above to a greater social goal. The so called "Human Condition" is an oft used crutch by those who would rather sit in the back of the room and be class clown than be up front and learn something that might just improve themselves as well as others.

Ok this is weird.... a tornado in brooklyn?
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/09/news/tornado.php

Never mind I do not want to add any fuel to the fire. I will leave by saying thank you and yall be safe.

I enjoyed this video ty

Famed UK scientist Richard Dawkins delivers a scathing indictment of religion's growing power in the post 9-11 world. Dawkins travels the physical and spiritual landscape of three great religions with pointed questions about the "process of non-thinking called faith."

He believes fundamentalist American Christianity is attacking science and he takes on Ted Haggard, one of America's most powerful Christian evangelists. He then travels to the heart of the Middle East, to Jerusalem to meet Jews and Muslims who defend their faith against his assertion that "irrational faith is back on the march" and harmful to modern civilization. Richard Dawkins holds a chair in the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University and is Britain's best known atheist. His impassioned defence of Darwinian evolution has earned him the nickname "Darwin's rottweiler."



http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...891339958467942

Richard Dawkins is amazing! I urge anyone who has the brains, to stand up for what is true, to read the book The God Delusion by Mr Dawkins himself. Amazing!

I once was a born n' baptised christian who attended church (and everything churchish) until my teen years, now as a 23 year old psych student, I get it! Those who believe in creationism are too scared to ask questions, and too frighted to acknowlege there is no "god".

Read Mr. Dawkins book, it will put your athiest thoughts into a better perspective.

For those who would label themselves as christian, I would urge to read this book as well. If you can read this book, and still maintain your faith, well then you certainly are a believer!

Believe what you want it doesn't really matter anyways

Dawkins is awesome. I read his book the ancestors tale. :-D it was awesome, lots of theories i wasnt familiar with and cool facts about our past. very well put together. i cant wait to buy more of his books

hahaha that fucking retard priest got laughed out of the discussion

So does this guy believe that all of existence spawned out of some accident? I don't understand the atheist viewpoint on the nature of reality.

And you all seem to not realize that there is a large difference between believing in a divine, all-encompassing entity, and being trapped in a manufactured paradigm, meaning one of the 3 Abrahamic religions.

And while you point and laugh at all the believers of a God, just know that some of the greatest minds of our time, much greater than yours, believe in a God, and that they are probably pointing and laughing at your ignorance.

So feel free to criticize the major religions, but try to understand that they do not speak for all that believe in a God. That notion is beyond foolish, and ridiculous when you're trying to come across as intelligent.

A common misconception, usually played and amplified by the religious to try and seed doubt in the mind of a believer, Darwinian theory is by definition not about chance and accidents. To understand this better I would suggest you read Dawkins book The blind Watchmaker, I think a vid copy is available to watch here somewhere on QSS.

Well the people that make and perpetuate these so called (myths) docs are the very religious type you're refering too.

Yes and greater minds have also been Deists, Monotheists, polytheists, Pantheons, Theists, Pagans, Agnostics and Atheists. There is no such thing as a persons right not to be offended, so if you don't want to be laughed at, come to the table with evidence and facts not with false claims, altered statistics and projecting in the worst form.

Tell me what is your definition of God? What is it exactly that you believe in?

Atheist or Anti-theist in a nutshell.

'Here is the point about myself and my co-thinkers. Our belief is NOT a belief. Our principles are NOT a faith. We DO Not hold our convictions dogmatically. We believe with certainty that an ethical life can be lived without religion. And we know the corollary holds true-that religion has caused innumerable people not just to conduct themselves no better than others, but to award themselves permission to behave in ways that would make a brothel-keeper or an ethnic cleanser raise an eyebrow'. C. Hitchens

First life was a cchemical rection, there would have been an innital mass of this new life for it to survive in the first place so you might say the first successfull life was a chemical reaction... god created it? could be, not to likely though, coz here's our logic: Lifew on earth = chem reaction, chem eacction = natural and the only way we can think of that there might be a creator involved ould be at the big bang, but this would still not make sence because of the "what made god" questions...

anywho, life wasnt a single instance in the whole of time where it popped out of nowhere, no, the primortial soup as we call it was a turmoiling high pressured cooking pot where .... CHEMICAL reactions occured, not just one reaction, set to a recipe, but certain "mutations" of a design.... One mutation had an survival advantage over the other and got to go on... Mind you this prob. was happening quite a few times over and over, maybe life got whiped out completely a few times before the innertial mass was big enough to survive... i;d say 10.000 years or more from first life to first substainable life....

Now im not a scientist(dur) and this is just a theory, not even, but still, its more likely/logical than a creator with a masterplan and big old schoolplay to perform

Sounds like there has been a lot of chatter about religion or lack there of. I'd take all of that as seriously as you all do if you bothered to proof read what you planned to post. I am a godless animal but I attempt good grammar when I can.



Thanks

Violence is not a learned behavior. "Forms" of violence are learned but not violence itself, no way, no how. When we harvest a plant, do we not violently pull it from the ground thereby ending its otherwise peaceful life of blowing in the wind and drinking the water up from the rain? Really good sex can EASILY be considered violent. Surely sex is not a learned behavior. The term "violence" is much too broad a term to plug into the "Nature vs. Nurture equation and simply come down on either entirely. I mean who was there to teach violence to the first person to exhibit it? And who taught the teacher etc. et. al.? Is physically defending yourself a learned behavior? Hell no son! Defense of one's physical wellbeing is COMPLETLY instinctual just as getting out of the way of a falling tree is instinctual. However, letting someone beat you to death without raising a finger IS a learned behavior. Pacifism is learned and is by no means instinctual. Anybody can fight, but you have to LEARN how not to. Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to violently ride my bike to the store, buy some vegetables, come home and violently fry them up in a pan and violently wolf it down because I'm so violently hungry. Have a violent day!

BHUDDA BLESS YOU!!!!!!!!

There is one thing about Dawkins. I recently saw an interview with him and he made a veeeery good point. Have you ever noticed that to say to a christian or any other believer that their god doesnt exist, or that god sucks, or that religion is bullshit is a complete and utter NO NO? Why the hell is that? I really love my punk rock and occassionally when i get into a conversation with people about it.. quite a lot of people laugh in my face. Now, If I was to say that I believed in god.. no one would critisize me for it... wheres the sense in that? Good on you Dawkins for saying what millions of people have been too scared to say (damned pollitically correct rubbish) Hopefully people will wake up and not be afraid to critisize. Sorry Christians, but your little "safe" bubble has been popped.

THE CLASH ROCK!!!!!

The God Delusion explores the unproven beliefs that are treated as factual by many religions and the extremes to which some followers have ... all » taken them. Dawkins opens the programme by describing the "would-be murderers . . . who want to kill you and me, and themselves, because they're motivated by what they think is the highest ideal." Dawkins argues that "the process of non-thinking called faith" is not a way of understanding the world, but instead stands in fundamental opposition to modern science and the scientific method, and is divisive and dangerous.

The Root of All Evil? is a television documentary, written and presented by Richard Dawkins, in which he argues that the world would be better off without religion. The documentary was first broadcast in January 2006, in the form of two 45-minute episodes (excluding advertisement breaks), on Channel 4 in the UK.

Watch


In The Virus of Faith, Dawkins opines that the moral framework of religions is warped, and argues against the religious indoctrination of children. The title of this episode comes from The Selfish Gene, in which Dawkins discussed the concept of memes.

Watch 2

People who are religious are intellectually immature and consequentially they have, for thousands of years, plagued the world with violence, ignorance and arbitrary 'moral' standards. The idea that we should even accept something called religion is ridiculous, because to do so is to accept that what some people believe is part of their fundamental make up and not just an opinion of theirs. If you use a dictionary you'll find that the word 'cult' is a much more accurate description of what most people would define as religion. In most people, to even express this elementary fact is to cause a furious stream of internal dialogue to go through their heads. Perhaps it even evokes an arrogantly snort or provokes a contrived rhetorical question. But a religion is just an idea; it is something that you believe. Thus it is an opinion. Just as I dislike religious people for their beliefs many find no irony in disliking people like me for mine. As far as I'm concerned, people are entitled to their own opinion and they are allowed to believe what they like, but if their opinion is out of step with progressive modern values then they should not be allowed certain roles within society. Until the religious (cult members) provide some proof for their strange and damaging theories they should not be able to apply for jobs in the following areas: - teaching children or vulnerable people, politics, law or law enforcement and public relations and media. If somebody believed in goblins, unicorns, elves or a flat earth and kept on trying to persuade other people that they were right and everyone else would be tortured for eternity if they did not agree with them would they be allowed these jobs? In fact, would we even allow them to walk the streets?
The Nuremburg principals were international laws made to make what the Nazis did illegal. Therefore anyone who agrees that the Nazis got justly punished should also agree with the Nuremburg principals. I will now list the crimes against humanity that each religion has committed and explain the punishment its leaders would receive if the world wasn't full of ignorant hypocrites. The following were the crimes investigated at Nuremburg.
1. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of crime against peace.
2. Planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression and other crimes against peace
3. War crimes
4. Crimes against humanity

Leaders of Christianity are guilty under Nuremburg principles 1 and 4. Crimes against humanity because of their policy of non-involvement during the Holocaust, their discrimination against homosexuals (homosexuality is not an idea or a belief) and their stance against contraception. (They are also guilty of numerous other domestic laws relating to their handling of paedophile priests but I won't go into it here.) A comparable case in Nuremburg was Julius Streicher who was convicted for much smaller crimes against humanity and was sentenced to death. I'm not in favour of the death penalty so I think Christian leaders, who are alive today that led their faith during the Holocaust, should be given the much more lenient sentence of life imprisonment. The same is true of influential church leaders and Christian politicians across the world guilty of perpetrating views that can be demonstrably proven to harm homosexual or women.
Leaders of Islam are guilty under Nuremburg principals under the Nuremburg principals 1, 2 and 4. For their treatment of women and homosexuals and for the murder of adulterous women and homosexuals. Also for the continued use of slaves in Saudi Arabia until the year of 1962. These are just off the top of my head; a thorough investigation would no doubt find more crimes. A comparable Nuremburg case was Baldur Benedikt von Schirach who was found guilty on principals 1 and 4 but not 2. (He was the closest I could find and I thought I'd give Islamic leaders the benefit of the doubt). He was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment but only because he repented. If the Islamic leaders are prepared to apologise and offer reparations to the families they ruined then I think they should be given similar sentences. If not then the rest of their lives should be spent in prison.
The leaders of the Jewish cult have a long and well documented history of war crimes and crimes against humanity that have been committed in the middle east. In fact looking at it purely from a legal perspective, Jewish leaders are the most guilty under Nuremberg, being guilty of charges 1, 2, 3, and 4, which have been committed almost exclusively in the middle east and are remembered (although the legality is rarely appreciated) widely in the form of different events from the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps to the human rights abuses in the occupied territories. Their Nazi equivalent is Herman Goering who was sentenced to death but committed suicide before reaching the gallows.
I consider Buddhism and Taoism as philosophies and not religions, as their belief in the supernatural is not compulsory and their existence is benign.

Interesting videos, hope its not a repost.

Richard Dawkins is astounded that religious faith is gaining ground in the face of rational, scientific truth based on hard evidence. In this two-part Channel 4 series, Professor Richard Dawkins challenges what he describes as 'a process of non-thinking called ‘faith'. Truth lies and faith He describes his astonishment that, at the start of the 21st century, religious faith is gaining ground in the face of rational, scientific truth. Science, based on scepticism, investigation and evidence, must continuously test its own concepts and claims. Faith, by definition, defies evidence: it is untested and unshakeable, and is therefore in direct contradiction with science. In addition, though religions preach morality, peace and hope, in fact, says Dawkins, they bring intolerance, violence and destruction. The growth of extreme fundamentalism in so many religions across the world not only endangers humanity but, he argues, is in conflict with the trend over thousands of years of history for humanity to progress – to become more enlightened and more tolerant. At the extremes He explores the state of the three Abrahamic religions in the world today, from the political influence of rich and powerful Christian fundamentalist institutions in America to the deadly clash of Judaism, Christianity and Islam in the Middle East. He describes the Holy Land as the least enlightened place in the world, a microcosm of the threat to rational values and civilisation posed by religion, whose irrational roots, he says, are nourishing intolerance and murder. There are plenty of characters to illustrate his thesis. There are fanatics, like the former West Bank settler who has taken the small step of converting from Jewish fundamentalist to Muslim fundamentalist, transferring his hatred from one side of the looking glass to the other. And the frighteningly charismatic leader of America's National Association of Evangelicals, who believes he has been chosen by God to convert Americans through religious gatherings that resemble rock concerts – though to Dawkins they feel more reminiscent of Nuremberg rallies. - google video

Uncut Interview with Ian McEwan added.

Jill Mytton - Uncut Interview added.

All spiritual sytems are in some way the promulgation of creation myths coming out of Sumeria. The repeated stories of immaculate conceptions and martyrdom have, as Dawkins points out, gone through an evolution of their own and come out of it as accepted truth. The behavior of individuals heavily influenced by these narratives has historically been the cause of conflict and holocost. It is not essential that human beings find acceptance and consent in the midst of the mob. It is essential that they establish physical, sentient and intellectual behaviors that further the cause of unmolested existence and harmony with their planetary environment. That environment includes fellow beings as well as drinkable water and breatheable air. For the most part, these behaviors can be achieved through deep introspection and observation of the natural order. In time, and through experience one finds out what works and what does not. Unfortunately, the machinery fails, injury occurs or mental faculties go awry...the animal gets in the way or the biology evidences corruption. Above all, it is the individual who inevitably confronts death alone and brings to that confrontation their singular life's experience and behaviors, not the individual and the mob.

Much of what Dawkins discusses is being keenly felt and pondered in the west as of late. As spiritual systems progressively become more confining, aggressive and inhumane, so their ranks will thin. Oppression begs rebellion and the championing of free thought. A system that addresses the science of the mind, the sentient self and a progressive attitude toward evolving understandings of both is a reasonable path.

I expect that system of thought will be Tibetan Buddhism.

thank you. very informative and thought provoking. (and a little scary)