Slashdot Mirror


Oklahoma, Vatican Take Opposite Tacks On Evolution

nizcolas writes "Notable evolutionary biologist, author, and speaker Richard Dawkins was recently invited to speak on the campus of the University of Oklahoma as part of the school's celebration of Charles Darwin. However, Oklahoma lawmakers are working to silence Dawkins with the passage of House Bill 1015 (RTF), which reads in part: '... the University of Oklahoma ... has invited as a public speaker on campus, Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, whose published opinions, as represented in his 2006 book "The God Delusion," and public statements on the theory of evolution demonstrate an intolerance for cultural diversity and diversity of thinking and are views that are not shared and are not representative of the thinking of a majority of the citizens of Oklahoma ...'" Pending legal action, Dawkins is set to speak tonight at 7 pm. (Luckily, we no longer live in the era of Bertrand Russell's court-ordered dismissal on moral grounds from the College of the City of New York.) And reader thms sends word of the Vatican's Darwin conference (program): "The conference, marking the 150th anniversary of the publication of "The Origin of Species," has been criticized by advocates of Creationism or Intelligent Design for not inviting them. The Muslim creationist Harun Yahya, most famous for his Atlas of Creation, also complained about not being invited."

10 of 1,161 comments (clear)

  1. The forces of darkness by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 0, Troll

    The forces of darkness are conspiring to bring about a new dark age for the Humanity. Those people shall never be allowed to succeed; they shall be opposed by the mot vehement means possible. If religious people are so fond of discriminating against the non-religious, we, the enlightened atheists shall have no remorse in discriminating against the religious, and making it known publicly.

    1. Re:The forces of darkness by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 0, Troll

      And if you were so truly enlightened you recognize how two wrongs do not make a right

      Indeed, it usually takes three or four.

      More seriously, the "two wrongs do not make a right" sounds like religious or ideological (pretending that there is a distinction) dogma. Where is your proof?

  2. Awesome by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 0, Troll

    This is how it ideally should be in society. Scientists shouldn't be afraid of exploring faith, Theologians shouldn't be afraid of science. Banning Dawkins is horrible, but I understand why people don't like him.

    His science has become his religion, which ticks off people who's religion has become their science.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  3. Re:OU Student Here by cpotoso · · Score: 0, Troll

    Indeed! It seems that OK goes out of its way to become more backwards, more stupid, and more poor (by "inviting" smart people out) every time you look at it. What can I tell you... they seem to deserve their condition.

  4. Let the idiot speak by genner · · Score: 0, Troll

    He doesn't deserve all the free publicity your giving him.

  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0, Troll

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Re:Wow. Just wow. by bugi · · Score: 0, Troll

    we can not fathom how God accomplishes his goals. One is faith, the other science and neither need be exclusive.

    Good fathoming. Is it your conclusion that God's goal is war leading to extinction of humans? That seems the only way to interpret your assertion that God's means are "science" and "faith".

  7. Why I will never live in Oklahoma by hansamurai · · Score: 0, Troll

    1. They only allow Democrats and Republicans on their presidential ballots (I assume that trickles down to at least Senators, Congressmen, etc.).
    2. Crap like this where their House actually wastes time condemning people. I don't care if they're religious, atheists, or ax murderers, people can make up their own minds.

    Those two are pretty much enough for me, actually, number one is, but this doesn't help. Plus the weather probably sucks.

  8. Re:Oklahoma? by mcgrew · · Score: 0, Troll

    You know, if you actually read the bill under discussion, you'd notice that it doesn't squash anything, much less anyone's "free speech rights". All it says is that the legislature opposes his appearance.

    dawkins was IMO a piss-poor choice for someone to talk about evolution, as evolution is not his #1 concern. His #1 concern is his evangelical hatred of anyone who believes in God.

    There are two kinds of athiests like there are two kinds of Christians. There are the majority of Christians who aren't going to shove their religion in anyone's faces and most likely won't mention their religion at all unless the subject comes up in normal conversation, and then there are Jehova's Witnesses.

    Likewise there are athiests who have come to the logical conclusion that God doesn't exist based on the facts in front of them, and then there are athiests who are fanatical about making sure that NOBODY believes in God.

    Dawkins is a Jehova's Witness athiest. Unfortunately, like the Jehova's witnesses, this type of athiest, always being in one's face, gives people the impression that all athiests are like that. You see them quite often at slashdot.

    dawkins acts as if evolution is proof of God's nonexistance. It makes it really hard for me to respect his intelligence - even the Catholic Pope has acknowledged evolution.

    There are a lot of respectable scientists studying evolution. There's no reason they had to invite an offensively obnoxious blowhard like Dawkins, no matter that his credentials are stellar.

    Nobody likes an asshole.

  9. Re:Oklahoma? by amilo100 · · Score: 1, Troll

    Full disclosure: I am an ex-Christian now agnostic.

    In my recent experience atheists have gone a lot further than religious people. Take for example this: every evangelical religious person that came up to me was friendly and sincere (usually from the USA or S. Korea funny enough). With most of those people you could have a nice civilized chat. I get the idea no matter how misguided their beliefs were that they at least that they care deeply about people and do so out of love. The one group actually just made a quick stop at the university â" they were helping out at a state hospital over the holidays.

    Now switch back to the atheists (most of which study with me). When they speak about religion they have an inexplicable hate for Christians. They go so far as to say that religious people are less intelligent than atheists. It is a level of bigotry that is worse than the classic white-black racism. They will nag you to watch stupid films such as Zeitgeist or read Dawkins' books â" and when you point out the inaccuracies they will get angry without any reason. Every angry atheist I met thinks he is smarter than everyone and that he is special in some way. I sincerely don't know who or what made them so angry and full of hate.
    They have this aura of superiority â" yet not one of the atheists I met spend his holiday slaving away in a state hospital.