Bigotry: Yes or No? Dawkins and Voting for a Mormon

[Apex]

There is no such thing as a moderate mormon and if there is Romney is not one. That is precisely the issue.

No such thing as a moderate Mormon? Are you sure you want to stand behind that statement?

And from what I have seen, Romney has pretty much left his religious views out of the race. The people make the biggest fuss about his religion, are his critics.

 

[Apex]

THE IRONY! how many americans think all the unchristian world diserves hell because they are voting (or not voting) for the wrong deity! :areyoucra

He didn`t "condemn", he is thinking low of them. I would guess (without knowing of politics, very less northamerican politics) he is talking about the "mormon" bit because many of his laws or proposals are inspired on his religious beliefs? I would still think it would have been a bad way to put it, but if that wasn`t even the case, it gets beyond semantics.

Could you post some examples of his laws and proposals that are based on his religious beliefs?

 

[Apex]

I agree that Dawkins is a bigot against the religious. He is pretty open about it. However, the bolded phrase here is equally prejudicial. Be careful what you say when leveling the accusatory finger at someone.

Could you explain that more? I do not understand how you are taking the bolded section as prejudicial.

Dawkins doesn't get a vote in the USA last time I checked. Its not that his opinion doesn't count... its that we won't be counting it because he isn't a citizen of this country. He's allowed to voice his opinion no matter how stupid and inflammatory it is. So is everyone else. When I need to make a judgment about Romney, I'll listen to Romney's opinions and judge him on those.

No one said he cannot have an opinion.

As it was said, there are plenty of reasons for me not to vote for the guy and they have nothing to do with his religious affiliation.

True. But notice Dawkins' statement was based upon judging Romney solely on his Mormonism, and nothing else.

 

[Alceste]

Eh, I'd agree the anti-science perspective warrants upset, but I have to admit the quote sure comes across as bigoted because of how it was said.

Luckily Dawkins isn't a politician, so he can say exactly what he's thinking. I'm glad he does, just as I appreciate it when ANYBODY says exactly what they're thinking rather than *****-footing around the issue and trying not to offend anyone.

Dawkins IS prejudiced against religious belief. That's his calling. I, for one, am gratified that he just says so rather than pretending to be otherwise.

 

[Apex]

Luckily Dawkins isn't a politician, so he can say exactly what he's thinking. I'm glad he does, just as I appreciate it when ANYBODY says exactly what they're thinking rather than *****-footing around the issue and trying not to offend anyone.

Dawkins IS prejudiced against religious belief. That's his calling. I, for one, am gratified that he just says so rather than pretending to be otherwise.

Are you also grateful for people who are against homosexuals and gay marriage for voicing their opinions? What about Westboro Baptist Church? They definitely don't *****-foot around. Should we just ignore their prejudice as well?

 

[gnomon]

A recent quote from Richard Dawkins and his twitter in reference to the Curiosity landing:



So, is it bigotry, or not, to claim that half of Americans are worthy of condemnation simply because they are considering voting for a Mormon?

I think it's definitely dumb.

 

[PolyHedral]

Are you also grateful for people who are against homosexuals and gay marriage for voicing their opinions? What about Westboro Baptist Church? They definitely don't *****-foot around. Should we just ignore their prejudice as well?

Being prejudiced against belief is fundamentally different from being prejudiced against biology.

 

[idav]

A recent quote from Richard Dawkins and his twitter in reference to the Curiosity landing:



So, is it bigotry, or not, to claim that half of Americans are worthy of condemnation simply because they are considering voting for a Mormon?

Not to sound bigoted but I can't vote for someone with those sort of beliefs. I'd feel the same way about voting for Tom Cruise, no offense to them as people, just something about their beliefs thats rather off putting especially for the position of presidency.

If the mormons all get their own planets I will kick myself later in the afterlife.

 

[lunamoth]

Apparently Dawkins has decide to take the approach of saying outrageous things and letting his minions do the 'splainin'.

 

[Curious George]

Is it bigoted? Yes

Dawkins assumes to know Romney's beliefs and how he will act in accordance with those beliefs based on Romney's affiliation with a group.

Any argument stemming from Dawkins could offer to rationalize this statement would be invalid. However, invalid does not necessarily mean untrue. Rather, it just means that his argument does not logically follow. Thus, his statement is bigoted.

It is important to note that words carry baggage. Bigot is certainly a word which carries much weight. Is this statement narrow minded? Does this statement depict an "utter intolerance?" Moreover, when we think of bigotry, what comes to mind?

Look at the remarks that were made about Dawkins on this thread and others. Is this bigotry? How many in the United States would oppose a president who believed No God exists? Is this bigotry?

For me, this thread serves more to highlight more than just Dawkins' intolerance. I think a more interesting concept questioning what role core beliefs play in our decision making? what core beliefs do we want in a president? and why?

If we agree that core beliefs do play a role in decision making, then we would me remiss to not take those core beliefs into account when electing anyone to an office.

 

[Apex]

Being prejudiced against belief is fundamentally different from being prejudiced against biology.

So you are saying that prejudice is acceptable so long as it is directed towards non-biological traits? So it would be ok to be prejudiced towards atheists, democrats, republicans, hippies, and so on?

Imagine an atheist came up for president, would it also be ok to call half of America degenerates just for considering to vote for the atheist?

 

[Apex]

Not to sound bigoted but I can't vote for someone with those sort of beliefs. I'd feel the same way about voting for Tom Cruise, no offense to them as people, just something about their beliefs thats rather off putting especially for the position of presidency.

If the mormons all get their own planets I will kick myself later in the afterlife.

First off, I have yet to meet a YEC Mormon (since Dawkins referenced the 6000 year old Earth). The Church has no official stance on the age of the Earth or even evolution. Also, the whole "get your own planet" thing is more of a shock tactic used by our detractors. It is not true. But some people enjoy lying about those who they oppose.

 

[Father Heathen]

First off, I have yet to meet a YEC Mormon (since Dawkins referenced the 6000 year old Earth). The Church has no official stance on the age of the Earth or even evolution. Also, the whole "get your own planet" thing is more of a shock tactic used by our detractors. It is not true. But some people enjoy lying about those who they oppose.

Apparently Romney is an "evolutionist" according to what I'm reading. Something I'm sure he tries to downplay considering most of his voter base will be creationists.

 

[Alceste]

Are you also grateful for people who are against homosexuals and gay marriage for voicing their opinions? What about Westboro Baptist Church? They definitely don't *****-foot around. Should we just ignore their prejudice as well?

I wish people would ignore the WBC. What is the alternative? Trolls of every stripe feed on negative attention. Should we give them what they crave?

 

[idav]

First off, I have yet to meet a YEC Mormon (since Dawkins referenced the 6000 year old Earth). The Church has no official stance on the age of the Earth or even evolution. Also, the whole "get your own planet" thing is more of a shock tactic used by our detractors. It is not true. But some people enjoy lying about those who they oppose.

I know, well I think , that most mormons are not YECs but it is the "extra" teachings that get a little wild. Which is why I mentioned scientology, there are some decent philosophies but some of the stuff that starts sounding sci-fi-ish is a little off puting, I'm sure it is a little off putting for members as well. I would try not to judge scientology by it's "higher" teachings about other planets but it's hard to ignore.

 

[Alceste]

I know, well I think , that most mormons are not YECs but it is the "extra" teachings that get a little wild. Which is why I mentioned scientology, there are some decent philosophies but some of the stuff that starts sounding sci-fi-ish is a little off puting, I'm sure it is a little off putting for members as well. I would try not to judge scientology by it's "higher" teachings about other planets but it's hard to ignore.

I think to some extent Dawkins subscribes rather liberally to the "slippery slope" fallacy in his comments on religion. He doesn't see the difference between a little bit of BS and a LOT of BS, or he assumes one must necessarily lead to the other, or he assumes that in order to strike a blow at major falsehoods he must lump minor falsehoods into the same category and attack them just as relentlessly.

I think Romney is the most electable candidate the Republicans put forward (which is something like saying poutine is the healthiest dish associated with Quebec) because he's the least dedicated to campaigning on a religious platform. If Dawkins gave a toss about American politics, he'd pat Romney on the back for his healthy Mormon moderation and quietly anticipate another Obama victory in the hope that the wacko fundies who put Bush in power (TWICE!) will not vote for a Mormon.

 

[Sir Doom]

Could you explain that more? I do not understand how you are taking the bolded section as prejudicial.

You said, "Especially when LDS tend to be far less anti-science, and much more highly educated, than other religious groups."

You are making a blanket statement about the LDS and about 'other religious groups' calling the LDS superior in both science and education in general. Blatantly prejudicial. You can't honestly believe this is grounded in hard data? The fact that you happen to be LDS yourself tells me this is nothing more than a personal bias.

No one said he cannot have an opinion.

I know that. His opinion is bigoted. I agree with you. My point is, who cares? He doesn't even get to vote for Romney or Obama. His opinion means nothing to our presidential election. Let him bump his self-superior gums.

True. But notice Dawkins' statement was based upon judging Romney solely on his Mormonism, and nothing else.

I think he was judging America more than anything else. Still, prejudicial and bigoted no matter how you cut it. He thinks we're all idiots for even considering a Mormon as a candidate. It shows how detached he is from American politics (rightly so) and further how detached he is from the tenants of the LDS church (despite his convictions otherwise).

What's most hilarious to me is that the only Republican candidate I would have considered voting for was Jon Huntsman. Another Mormon. I wonder what Dawkins might have said about him considering this:
[youtube]tkJJQQM17_s[/youtube]
Huntsman - Republican party is the anti-science party - YouTube

 

[jasonwill2]

A recent quote from Richard Dawkins and his twitter in reference to the Curiosity landing:



So, is it bigotry, or not, to claim that half of Americans are worthy of condemnation simply because they are considering voting for a Mormon?

Of course that is bigotry, his religious position has nothing to do with his policies, and he actually had to become "more conservative" in a number of ways I hear to appease the demo-graphs.

Most people are aware that Dawkins is a raving anti-theist and bigot, though while smart, doesn't get a single idea what religion is supposed to be about.

 

[Katzpur]

Are you claiming that Romney won't get his own planet, if he's been a good Mormon?

I suspect that if Mitt Romney becomes a god, he won't "get his own planet"; if he's a god, he'll be able to create all of the planets he wants.

 

[Katzpur]

What the hell are you talking about?!!

I was just about to ask you the same question.

There is no such thing as a moderate mormon...

Not particularly well-informed are you?