Live webchat with Richard Dawkins, Wed 23 June, 10am-11am

[GeraldineMumsnet]

We're pleased to welcome Richard Dawkins for a webchat on Wednesday 23 June from 10am-11am. Richard is a celebrated evolutionary biologist and atheist, and author of the best-selling God Delusion.

He has presented programmes on Channel Four that range from enthusing about the Genius of Charles Darwin to arguing against religion in Root of All Evil?

His latest project is taking a long hard look at education and the role religion continues to play in it.

He wants to hear first-hand from Mumsnetters what faith and church schools are really like. How successful are they? Are they selection by another means? Are they divisive? And are they making hypocrites out of non-believing parents who go to church just to send their children to them?

If you can't make the discussion but want to contribute, please post your views here.

Thanks and hope you can join us.

POfaced - you did good You had the hypothesis that '[insert religion'] child' had not been used on this thread. You sought evidence to back up, or otherwise, your assertion. You found it. You explained your findings by publishing them for peer review, and referenced your thinking.

Excellent use of the scientific method!

What you cannot do is then say 'and this deonstrated this phrase is not used anywhere else in the world so yahboo sucks to Richard Dawkins'.

You are right, by the way - seeking evidence is not the same as 'constructing evidence'. So I am not sure what your point is, there.

I'd rather be misguided and not make a fool of myself by telling people I think an invisible bearded giant lives in the sky watching and controlling everyone and everything simultaneously than the alternative...

Religion breeds ignorance, illogicality, inequality, prejudice and mistrust of anyone different and frowns upon thinking for yourself - for those reasons alone, I could not and would not lower myself to that level in the name of belief. How can people not be ashamed of doing so just because they believe in someone imaginary?!

LOL at putting forward an idea being useless.

Better scrap the whole history of philosophy then. ROFL.

There is a lot of crap in the Bible. but none from christ. Theology looks at that kind of think you know.

My point tikok is that Christ was not trying to construct evidence.

Pofaced: "Druzhok - compassion, social justice, revolutionary power of forgiveness. "

He initiated those values? Do you really mean that? That without religion, there is/would be no compassion, social justice or redemptive forgiveness?

SomeGuy - It is an issue only in that it allows supporters of any group to exagerate the number of people who support their view. And it also presupposes that it is OK to impose whichever views on those children.

Naturally, we all DO impose positions on our children, but there is a difference between, 'hitting people is not nice' and 'we believe this therefore we are different to them'.

Well this is the heart of the issue isn't it, scorpette? You think that religious people believe in "an invisible bearded giant lives in the sky watching and controlling everyone". Amazingly, this is not what many religious people believe.

It's a bit like saying you don't like people who watch football because they are all hooligans.

I don't know if there would be Druzhok. there might. But he was pretty visionary at the time.

Christian views as interpreted by western liberals happen to be compatible with liberal western views.

It may be written that Christ put forward those ideals.

It is a real shame that Christians throughout history seem to have neither learnt nor upheld those values!
Crusades.
Spanish Inquisition.
Anglican church in Africa.
Catholic church in Ireland.
To name but a sorry few.

Rubbish Coalition. If you actually read what Christ said you might get the picture.

Totally agree ronshar. Shameful. And a perversion of Christ's teachings. The Devil [if there is one] works in many ways, through the church being one of them.

LOL Po. It could be argued that, since none of the Gospels is a contemporus account, that none of the Bible comes from Christ.

Po, Jesus just wanted everyone to be nice to each other. Great.

What that does not justify, is believeing that he was divine.

ZephirineDrouhin - I don't KNOW, but I think, "an invisible bearded giant lives in the sky watching and controlling everyone" might be a rhetorical device. Though I'm sure if you looked hard enough you could find SOMEONE who believed that.

If you restated is as God being male, omniscient and omnipotent you could find a lot more.

What religous people DO believe though, is that certain things are true despite there being no evidence for them, and that this point of view should be afforded equal consideration with rational beliefs. That does not seem to me to be a reasonable position.

Druzhok, what Po neglects to say is that this Christian forgiveness is contingent on believing.

It's not the process of religiously-based forgiveness that's new - pre-Christian religions had the concept, and the gods were appeased to overlook wrong-doing with sacrifice, gifts, offerings, ceremonies and so on. The human concept of forgiveness is harder to pin down, but one has to accept that as soon as humans started living in groups, forgiving wrong doing somehow would have been necessary to make life workable.

In Christianity, you are only forgiven if you accept Christianity - it's a bit circular, as you ask for forgiveneness from a deity, so if you don't believe in the deity, you'll not be wanting his/her/its forgiveness, I suppose.

Whatever.....God only forgives if you accept his existence, lock stock and barrel. The whole uncomfortable concept of atonement (Christ died on the cross as a punishment for humanity's sins, past and future - thereby absorbing God's wrath with Humanity) has to be believed in...Christ died 'for' our sins, so that all who believed in him should not perish.....etc etc.

It's not a concept of forgiveness I think is very forgiving

Oh god Stuck, read my post 100 year back

Atheists always say that, 'he wanted everyone to be nice to each other' Er, if everyone did actually follow what he said, life would be very difficult [no bankers, no capitalism, social justice and equality, unlimited compassion and even distribution of all the world's goods] but we might just make heaven on earth. Which was what he was interested in. Obviously no one wants to do that.

the bible is a minefield slug, certainly. But you know there are theologians out there, actually, studying it, and stuff.

Small boy has woken up and demands lunch.
A real one who throws things at me.
Must go.

Thank you ladies have had a brilliant couple of hours.
Pofaced, I admire your strength under fire

What does what is in the Bible have to do with the anything?

wrong tiktok. Absolutely WRONG. You really know nothing about what Christ actually said I'm afraid, though I don't blame you for believing a lot of church doctrine.

No, You DO NOT have to be Christian to be forgiven. BOLLOCKS.

Thanks ronshar. I am making a super droid out of cereal boxes AT SAME TIME.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying that Jesus didn't want everybody to be nice? Or that his teachings are unrealistic?

My point was about the argument that he is divine, which I obviously do not agree with.

I'm watching PMQT. Not quite as good!

Po - you would be very surprised if you knew me more and realised that this is stuff I know very well indeed.

I was reporting mainstream Christian doctrine there. I know there are weasly get-out clauses among more modern interpretations - like 'atonement is only symbolic, really' and 'that's only old fashioned RCs who believe that' and 'God forgives anyone who is sincere and well-intentioned - they don't have to believe in him'.

Pofacedagain - so there are no interpretations of Christianity that are incompatible with Western Liberal Values? I think there are quite a lot of people who would be surprised by that.

Yes, coalition, it is a rhetorical device designed to ridicule religious belief.

I agree with you in that I don't think that specific religious beliefs should influence government policy, particularly on this issue of faith schools and admissions. However, I certainly don't think that non-evidence based beliefs are exclusive to religious institutions.

Agree with po, tiktok. I think your interpretation of Christian forgiveness is somewhat unusual.