#rsrh Shorter Richard Dawkins.

“The question asked me was, Should Martin Gaskell have been discriminated against for his religious beliefs?  Given that the answer is, unfortunately from my perspective, clearly “no” – it would have been very useful if Gaskell had been a young-Earth creationist, rather than a person who just sees the hand of God in the Big Bang – I will instead ignore the actual conditions of the case and instead construct reducto ad absurdiam straw man arguments about how flat-earthers should not teach geography and ‘stork theory’ medical doctors should not teach medicine.  Yes, I made up a pseudo-scientific movement that has no known adherents just to make a theological rebuttal.

“And if I ever read this summation – highly unlikely, to be sure – I will be quite put out at the suggestion that I am as guilty of faith-based thinking as are my putative opponents.”

Moe Lane

PS: Shorter Moe Lane: No, Martin Gaskell should not have been discriminated against because of his religious beliefs. See how easy that is, Dawkins? ‘Course, then all the cool* kids would have been ticked at you for standing up for the Christian.  At this stage of your life and career, I imagine that rocking the boat like that would be a bit of an issue…

*For given values of ‘cool.’


  • A Z R says:

    Didnt get it until I read Dawkins. And now I have to take a shower.

    Thanks, Moe!

  • Carolyn Wolthusen says:

    Dawkins has a whole circle reserved for him and him alone. Gore does it for money. Dawkins does it for pure viciousness.

  • Finrod says:

    For all their claims of rationality, every prominent atheist that I’ve ever ran across turns into a gibbering ball of excuses and bad-faith arguments every time they get into an argument where logic favors the Christian.

    This is why I have no respect for Richard Dawkins, Penn Jillette, or any of them.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com