Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

General discussions
Alexis
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 12:45 am

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by Alexis » Sun May 17, 2009 9:30 pm

Why bother arguing with lunatics, aka infantilised adults? At the end of the day, its not what people say, its what they DO, that counts :lol:
FXR
Posts: 3176
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:44 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by FXR » Sun May 17, 2009 10:30 pm

Did anyone notice that Quinn and other CCL defenders have lately dropped Herr Hitler from the list of Atheist demons?

But never mind has anyone read Hitlers Pope by John Cornwell which is out at the moment?

Hold on.........there could'nt be a connection could there?
Human communication is a very rickety rope bridge between minds. Its too narrow to allow but a few thoughts to cross at a time. Many are lost in the chasms of noise, suspicion, misinterpretation and shooting the message through dislike of the messenger.
dj357
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 12:05 pm
Location: Limerick

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by dj357 » Mon May 18, 2009 1:44 am

just got done listening to the recording of it online, and i was fair disappointed that they almost completely ignored the discussion about Mr. Brady's comments. as usual the same old tired argument was had, old ground was dug up yet again, and nothing productive came out of it.

in response to mister brady's comments, the real clash of cultures, in this day and age, is between the Muslim/Islamic culture, of which different unique sub-sets exist, and EVERYONE else, i.e. the infidels. this was clear when I was listening to last week's Spirit Moves speaking about Doormat Ahern's idiotic blasphemy law. Nearly all of the panel and most of the public opinion-heads were opposed to the law, however the two Muslim-y panellists were in favour, one of them FAR more than the other, who was heralding the law as some way of protecting the majority of Muslims being tarnished by the actions of a minority. I find it odd that this law wasn't even mentioned once during tonight's show, but all over the world Muslim society is railing against western society, atheists, catholics, jews etc... alike, and the Muslim problem is merely a symptom of the larger issue of intolerance of everyone in religion, which is written, in stone, as it were, in the holy books of these religions. The Christian faiths urge believers to kill anyone who attempts to sway them from their belief in their Abrahamic tyrant, and almost 80% of the Qu'ran is simply verse after verse of permutations upon the basic premise of "unbelievers shall burn, and the true muslim will ensure this happens"

As I said, in our current world, the real clash of cultures is between that of Muslim/Islamic cultures and western society, however this is merely one head on the mythical hydra of organised religiousity.

One major issue I had during the program was also one of the panellists insistence that there is no moral imperative to be a good person without religious guidance. No offence to Michael, with whom I've had many a discussion and who I respect, but I feel he could have given a much more effective response to that issue. It's all well and good to go down the route of talking about evolutionary altruism, but, in a sense, that is simply a mirror of the religious condition i.e. a christian is good because god says he should be, an atheist is good because he evolved to favour such behaviour.

As beings with a higher consciousness, we can, thankfully, exceed the bounds of our evolutionary programming and we can think and reason for ourselves above and beyond simple instinctive reactions. As such, as Atheists, we are moral (in my sole opinion and not seeking to speak for anyone else) because we have seen the sheer positive benefits brought to a civil society by such behaviour, thanks to it's arising during our evolutionary path. Based on the objective, logical and rational thought processes to which we can, and do, subject such behaviours, we have, collectively, as a group of societies and as a race, humankind, despite the ridiculous interference and destructive and distracting force of organised religion, decided that these behaviours are acceptable to us, and are ones that we wish to adopt on a long term basis. This is why we are good, and why we care about other people.

In relation to the issue of relative levels of charity work done by religious and non-religious people, I would like to ask the question of any religious groups why exactly they are helping out people who they deem to be needy and deserving of charity when they, generally, believe in a deity who is directly responsible for their situations being as such? Do they feel that what their deity has chosen for them is not good enough? Do they feel that they can provide for such people better than their deity? Do they believe that their deity, in actual fact, is not directly responsible for their situations? If so, why do they do these works in the name of said deity?

To a religious person, an atheist doing charity work would seem entirely selfish, but what is there to actually be gained from doing charity work?

I'm sure there is lots more I could ramble on with, as it's been quite a while since I rambled online, and a good ramble is like a good cup of tea, you just need one after a while without one! :mrgreen: As such, I'll leave things there as I have an exam in the morning, but I applaud Michael for his presence on the program. It's always great to hear his voice arguing our case/position etc... on the public airwaves.

peace!
dj357
"In meinem Himmel gibt's keinen Gott!"
I'm An Atheist...
Midwest Humanists!! - http://midwesthumanists.wordpress.com
lostexpectation
Posts: 1993
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:28 pm

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by lostexpectation » Mon May 18, 2009 9:51 am

dermot aherns a muslim? when did that happen?
test
nozzferrahhtoo
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:17 am

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by nozzferrahhtoo » Mon May 18, 2009 10:01 am

Just listened to it now, I couldn't get to it this weekend.

They were pretty unfair to MG in a couple of ways.

The accusation of dismissing religion too easily as wish fulfillment I think MG was unfairly cornered on. He was straight ASKED the question "Presumably you dont WANT to live forever if you do not believe in god". He tried to show what an awful question this was by showing that wish fulfillment does not make it true. He was then accused of dismissing Religion too easily as wish fulfillment.

It was plainly obvious to me he was not doing this, but was answering the really awful question that had been put to him. How he can be accused of dismissing it as wish fulfillment when the asker of the question was not accused of building it UP as wish fulfillment, I will never know. It was a shame MG did not get a chance to point that out.

MG was also asked about Nietzsche saying that as atheists we should extract the most from life for ourselves and anyone who gets in the way of that is just that, in the way. MG was asked why an atheist should not subscribe to that. Alas he did not get a good answer out nor was he given much time to. I probably would have personally hit back with much of what I said in the "The immorality of claiming morality" blog entry.

Other than that I think it mostly went well for us and MG. As usual he did very well.
FXR
Posts: 3176
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:44 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by FXR » Mon May 18, 2009 11:51 am

Mr. Quinn is very effective. He knows how to argue and he knows how to win. That he's talking through the butt end of his arse makes no difference to the audience. That's not obvious in a sound byte culture, given the weight of religious indoctrination in society, to the neutral or casual listener. To any of the religious believers who might be interested in hearing both sides he’s just positively triumphant. He even pulled the same stroke using the same tactics against Richard Dawkins on the Turbidy show.

You can learn a lot from Mr. Quinn. To win a war, even a war of ideas, you have to know how to use all the arsenal of blows: the high and the low.

He puts people on the defensive by coming in at an angle they were not expecting and pinning them against the ropes. When a Quinn pushes you don’t push back: you pull him flat onto his face. No matter what tactics he uses he could easily be put in his place. He's all for religion in society according to the Iona website. Even that's a lie. It's telling that he's not so proud of the CCL as to openly advocate it to the exclusion of other religions. If he's all for religion in society he need only be pinned down by asking is he all for any religion. For example is he in favour of the mutilation of childerns genitals or does he think we'd be better off with Sharia Law or the return of the Inquisition. To debate anyone like him you need to study him beforehand. He's like an old circus performer still plying his trade with the same bag of tried and true tricks.

"Where does matter come from?"

"What about free will"?

"And what of the “Godless” regimes Stalin, Pol Pot etc?"

"Bad religious people don't make religion bad?"

"So and so philosopher/scientist was an believer so there"
Human communication is a very rickety rope bridge between minds. Its too narrow to allow but a few thoughts to cross at a time. Many are lost in the chasms of noise, suspicion, misinterpretation and shooting the message through dislike of the messenger.
MichaelNugent
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:50 am
Location: Dublin
Contact:

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by MichaelNugent » Mon May 18, 2009 1:03 pm

Thanks for the feedback and the emails and texts to the show.

I will listen back to the show sometime today and see what I can learn from it in light of the feedback here.

Thanks again,

Michael
FXR
Posts: 3176
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:44 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by FXR » Mon May 18, 2009 4:05 pm

Human communication is a very rickety rope bridge between minds. Its too narrow to allow but a few thoughts to cross at a time. Many are lost in the chasms of noise, suspicion, misinterpretation and shooting the message through dislike of the messenger.
Irish Shaman
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 4:14 am
Location: Dundalk/Newry area - Up Ravensdale Forest
Contact:

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by Irish Shaman » Tue May 19, 2009 12:47 pm

For anyone who cannot figure out how to work those streams or RealPlayer in general (I know quite a few that do not), I have taken the liberty of downloading it and cutting out the ad-breaks as well as the two or three minute starting point before the show actually began.

Please check out and/or forward this playlist from my Tube account to those who cannot or do not have access to RealPlayer. Plus you can favourite it and easily continue from parts you do not have time to listen to, which is awkward using RealPlayer streams to say the least...

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p ... DC0519D0B7

One thing I have never been able to get my head around though, is when religious followers or leaders say "this would or society would be worse off, or have less morality, would it not be for religion".

Do these people really have that much of a distrust in the human species? If so, then they shouldn't be given the ability to create such "moral dictations" as they do.
It's nearly as rediculous as the statements I encountered during a debate I was in a few weeks ago in the Newry college library -

Religious apologist - "Homosexuality is a sin. It is not natural in any way"

Moi- "Yes it is natural and occurs in all species in this world that we can observe properly"

Religious apologist - "No it is not"

Moi - "My laptop is here, I can pull up the conflicting studies and information if you are interested?"

Religious apologist - "I do not trust any of those studies in question. They are obviously misleading and ignorant of the fact that the human species are above every other species"

Moi - " ... ... ... "

- Paul M.
*COUGH* SHAMELESSPLUG *COUGH*
http://www.youtube.com/1rishShaman

Atheism, Atheist Ireland, Gaming, The Atheist Experience... what more could you want?
lostexpectation
Posts: 1993
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:28 pm

Re: Cardinal Brady on "the real clash of cultures"

Post by lostexpectation » Tue May 26, 2009 2:29 pm

well michael did start off being satirical and absurd about religion, which he has been criticised for here and twice on the show, but each time when questioned he had solid serious response ready.
Last edited by lostexpectation on Tue May 26, 2009 8:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
test
Post Reply