Sapient interviewed by Laura Ingraham (Official thread - downloads - commentary)

Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Sapient interviewed by Laura Ingraham (Official thread - downloads - commentary)

Updated thread on Sapient vs Laura Ingraham

 

The best damn atheist radio show that has ever been made, Rational Response Squad disected the Laura Ingraham interview.  This was one of the best shows we did.  Laura gave me enough material to unload and we were all livid at her.  This show is full of raw emotion, but with tons of humor.  If you have a problem with Laura being referred to as a "retarded cunt" then you should not listen to this broadcast.

(right click save as)  Download the whole show for free now!  <-- this is the file you are looking for

Here is the download to my appearance on the Laura Ingraham show. I was muted during much of the interview, it started right off the get go.  It was not a result of being boisterous.  It definitely throws you off as you have to skip over 5 big topics, because you have to summarize everything into 5-15 second clips.  You can hear how my volume is being turned up and down.   

Two other noteworthy stories from the week I was interviewed with Laura Ingraham:

Here is a 4 minute segment on the Penn Jilette show in which he talks about the Blasphemy Challenge and the Rational Response Squad.  He basically recorded a commercial for us.

Christian Science Monitor did a story on the Blasphemy Challenge within a bigger story.  The portion she wrote about me was accurate.

 

Views about the Laura Ingraham interview from other threads on this site....

Laura Ingraham what a stupid bitch

Truatheist wrote:

My e-mail to Ms. Ingraham

Laura,

I will begin this letter by stating that I have never e-mailed any radio or T.V. program until now. After listening to your “interview” with Mr. Sapient, it was easy to see that you were out of your league. Your constant ad hominem attacks, in conjunction with the numerous strawman arguments you presented against atheism were appalling. Not to mention constantly cutting his mic and endlessly interrupting him, all the while he kept his cool. A person who holds a position of theism such as yours really has no choice but to resort to these tactics. A logical argument cannot be constructed that proves a supernatural being created the universe and then sacrificed itself to itself in order to save mankind from itself.

It was easy to discern that you were simply angry that many people do not believe in the fairytale that dictates your life. You are pathetic … I feel sorry for you, I truly do!

 

Laura Ingraham hypocrite

rab wrote:

I just listened to the podcast discussing Brian Sapient's guest appearance on The Laura Ingraham Show.

Morality are commandments? Laura hasn't really read the bible. God's commandments are retarded! We get along with each other for survival and empathy.

About Mother Teresa, Apparently, Ingraham she never read Christopher Hitchens's scathing tome about her. If Teresa had been a secularist working with them, the people she cared for would have had clean facilities, food, clean clothes, and sterile needles. Millions of dollars that poured in to the charity went to the church and other missions. In Ingrams world, missionaries are there for "a reason." Mother Teresa's reason was to glorify the poor's suffering because they were suffering for Jesus! One major reason we have missionaries, especially in Africa, is because people have been missplaced because of religious intollerance and genocide.

I remember listening to Ingraham's show the day Terri Shiavo died. She went on and on about how the liberals killed this poor woman and how conservatives are about "the culture of life." Of course, that "culture of life" doesn't include the poor children that fell victim to mortar shells that her conservative president chose to drop on them. I liked it when she asked Brian what bible he reads. Pssst,, Laura, he read the same one you claim to know! "What about the women's sufferage movement?" She actually used that as an argument for theists activism! She needs to do some research on Elizabeth Statton and Susan B. Antony and what their beliefs were.

 

My views on the Ingraham vs Sapient faceoff

God-Bane wrote:

Greetings,

Before I listened to your debate with Laura Ingraham I had never really heard of the woman, so I googled her. I must admit that I found her career resume quite impressive but she is obviously lacking when it comes to the art of argumentation. Here are just four of the diverting and idiotic tactics she used:

1 - She tried to use the work of Christian missionaries as proof that there is a god and as justification for the continuation of Christianity. In my opinion, Christian charity isn't altruistic since they're only doing it because a book tells them that they have to do it in order to make it into Heaven. If a million Christians do charity work based on what a book tells them it's still not as noble as the charity work of ten atheists who do charity work without being nudged by religiosity.

2 - She asked you if you were ever going to get a job, which was a low blow and indicative of the way that Christians will desperately lash out (I thought they weren't supposed to judge people?!) when they find themselves inevitably backed into a corner.

3 - She asked you why you're up at night thinking about Christians, which was another low blow. Christianity got where it is today because Christians WERE up at night thinking about what non-Christians were doing. Christianity is where it is today because they were persistently gaining converts and voicing their views, or when that didn't work, they just killed people. At least atheists aren't killing people wholesale because they won't agree with our view

4 - The name-game was the most pathetic in my opinion. It had absolutely no relevance to the argument at hand. Naming intelligent people who believed in God, or APPEAR to have believed in God does not establish a correlation between intelligence and religion. Laura named Galileo but also left out the part where the church banned his "heretic" works, allowed him to speak to no one at religious festivals, put him on house arrest, and denied him burial at the Basilica of Santa Croce (he wasn't allowed to be buried there until almost a hundred years after his death)! She named Leonardo da Vinci but fails to realize that he was also a man of science and did not believe in the Biblical flood based on his scientific observations. If anything, they've contributed to the atheist movement because they were two great men who successfully challenged the Bible (although they didn't live to see the fruits of their success). PS: Is it really any wonder that many intelligent people during the Italian Renaissance professed to believe in God when you could be jailed or burned at the stake for not agreeing?!!

I initially sent this message via Youtube but I realized that nobody had visited the account in quite some time so I decided to send it here. Keep up the good work!

Sincerely,

God-Bane

 

A host of a business talk show decided to host me because he was disgusted with the way Laura Ingraham treated me on her show.

The story behind Brian Sapient with Saul Albom and downloads to the interview that connects atheism to the stock market... somehow.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Darth, that was the whole

Darth, that was the whole interview, not the whole show.  I followed Peggy Noonan and Christoper Hitchins.

Angelic_Atheist wrote:

Sapient, would you interview with her again if asked??

Yes.  We got 1,000 guests on the site within 30 minutes of the show, no less than 10 plugs for the site, I have a record day for email and video response, and we set a record tonight for site traffic of over 72 registered users.  It was great publicity.  I think the show I'd reject would be Rush Limbaugh, I'd actually do O'Reilly.

 

 

 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
What a crock! "so you can

What a crock!

"so you can be smart or something..."

Then, lets see if we can catch you scamming money out of the un-faithful...

Then, how do you get morals...

Then, trying to get you on your family being loving...

What a bunch of emotional claptrap.

You did great, Sapient.

Her argument that morals are commands... exceptionally weak.

When she had nothing else to get you on, she goes to "get a job."  Awesome.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Chase
Posts: 32
Joined: 2007-01-02
User is offlineOffline
YES BECAUSE HER "OPINIONS"

YES BECAUSE HER "OPINIONS" ARE ACTUAL FACT.

 

Just another thiest afraid of reason. 


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
To be quite honest, she let

To be quite honest, she let you talk more than I thought she would. I'd love to be the producer when she was the guest.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ChosenByPasta
ChosenByPasta's picture
Posts: 141
Joined: 2006-08-08
User is offlineOffline
What a bitch with a capital

What a bitch with a capital B.
She couldn't really back herself up so she had to start laughing at him and insulting him about "getting a real job." Her ramblings about missionaries and religious leaders of the past were nonsense as well. Do we really have to believe in outdated teachings and claims on insufficient evidence to do great things?
Stand strong sapient-Brett

"Every true faith is infallible -- It performs what the believing person hopes to find in it. But it does not offer the least support for the establishing of an objective truth. Here the ways of men divide. If you want to achieve peace of mind and happiness, have faith. If you want to be a disciple of truth, then search." - Nietzsche


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: Yes. We

Sapient wrote:

Yes. We got 1,000 guests on the site within 30 minutes of the show, no less than 10 plugs for the site, I have a record day for email and video response, and we set a record tonight for site traffic of over 72 registered users. It was great publicity. I think the show I'd reject would be Rush Limbaugh, I'd actually do O'Reilly.

As "they" say: all publicity is good publicity. :D 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ChosenByPasta wrote: What a

ChosenByPasta wrote:
What a bitch with a capital B.
She couldn't really back herself up so she had to start laughing at him and insulting him about "getting a real job."
That actually made me laugh. I have to wonder what she would have said if he did have a job, or to an atheist with a job. Probably they won't allow anyone on the show that they can't dig up some kind of dirt on.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Angelic_Atheist
Silver Member
Angelic_Atheist's picture
Posts: 264
Joined: 2006-04-06
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: What a

Hambydammit wrote:

What a crock!

"so you can be smart or something..."

Then, lets see if we can catch you scamming money out of the un-faithful...

Then, how do you get morals...

Then, trying to get you on your family being loving...

What a bunch of emotional claptrap.

You did great, Sapient.

Her argument that morals are commands... exceptionally weak.

When she had nothing else to get you on, she goes to "get a job." Awesome.

 I don't remember who, but someone said that she likes it when opponents resort to personal attacks. It means they don't have a leg to stand on.

We must favor verifiable evidence over private feeling. Otherwise we leave ourselves vulnerable to those who would obscure the truth.
~ Richard Dawkins


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
I could only watch part of

I could only watch part of her interview with Sam Harris...barf.  I'm glad some of you have cast-iron stomachs so you can listen to the Ingrahams, Limbaughs and Hannitys of this world.

Maybe my problem is I was forced to listen to Limbaugh when I lived at home and my dad played it LOUD every single morning--all three hours of it. Frown

If I do decide to get more involved, I'm probably going to have to stay in the background.  I'm not big into confrontation.  It's good some are.  Whew!

I haven't had television for about 2 and a half years, so I hadn't seen Laura Ingraham before.  She makes me nauseous.  Literally. 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
What a fucking bitch-ass

What a fucking bitch-ass hoe!


V1per41
V1per41's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2006-10-09
User is offlineOffline
Well done Brian!

Well done Brian!

I'm kinda surprised at how much you let her talk. She would interupt you and you would just say, "yea, go ahead."

I would love it if you were to somehow get her on your show so that you could just turn around and talk over her the whole time Smiling.  Then you could actually have time to point out specific verses showing how bad the bible really is.  I would love to hear her response to verses like, Deut 21:18-21 and Lev 25:44-46.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
The way she kept

The way she kept interrupting, using sophisms and not letting you respond, you should have bitch-slapped her.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
V1per41 wrote: Well done

V1per41 wrote:

Well done Brian!

I'm kinda surprised at how much you let her talk. She would interupt you and you would just say, "yea, go ahead."

At one point I did do that, but there were also about 10 times that I she paused in between breaths and I tried to sneak in and I heard the producer talking to me going "Shhh, AH, AH, noo, muted"

 

I don't have the crafty muting system she does and wouldn't just talk over her, however I would allow her to make her case which by the sounds of it, isn't a very good one, especially if the best she has is that I should get a real job and that some religious people do good things. <barf>

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
I'm glad Brian's appearance

I'm glad Brian's appearance on the show garnered attention for the site. That's really the only point of him doing the show, so an attention to details is not really all that important. And, I saw little need to do an in-depth refutation of the host's arguments, as her arguments were of an exceptionally low grade, even for apologetics. In fact, if she were a poster on the site, she'd rank among the biggest theist-trolls.

Her arguments were not only bad, but old and predictable. The 'Was (insert name of famous theist here) smart?" argument was pretty inept... My first thought was that I would have asked her if Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were smart, just to see her refute her own argument. 

The flaws in the argument are numerous: being intelligent doesn't guarentee correctness. The fact that an intelligent person believes X doesn't guarantee that he came to hold to this belief due to rational processes... he might hold to theism for the same reason most people do: because it was inculcated in childhood.  It should also be pointed out that men living 2, 3, 4 centuries ago were more likely to be theists as a matter of course. Theism is the science of the ignorant, and there wasn't much of any understanding of cosmology or evolution at that time. And the bible was accepted as a historical document...

But what was truly galling about her 'argument' was her choice of Galileo - a man who was persecuted by the church for his scientific views. Galileo was a theist who questioned religious dogma.

Other than that, some of the callers for the show made her look like a Rhodes Scholar. One person called to say that 'all the evidence for evolution has been debunked." I don't even think Ken Hovind would make that claim....

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


sumra
Theist
Posts: 44
Joined: 2006-12-11
User is offlineOffline
Sapient, I listened to your

Sapient, I listened to your talk with Laura

 I am just writing some points which are my opinion please dont think that I am trying to be smarter or more intelligent

1)She says that where does morality comes from religion and believing in God?

My reply would have been, then what is the difference between human being and dog, dog starts mating with anyone on roadside but human being uses his brain.

Then I would have asked her question that you are moral, because you are afraid of God?, then I am sorry to say that you are a serious threat to society, otherwise you would have been doing all the inhumane activities.

2)She talked about missionary and charities?

I was born and brought up in India, all these missionaries are there for conversion.to convert people to christianity.

My answer would have been let them do charity work without telling people to convert to christianity.

Mother Teresa, did very good work, I appreciate it but it was for conversions.

In India a lot of cases have taken place where people are reconverted back to original religion by other fundamentalist.

A law is also under way to prohibit conversion.

Few years back a christian missionary was burnt alive in Orissa by Hindu religious leaders(I call them Hindu terrorists), Graham Staines in his Van with his small children. Google "Graham Staines" and find out

3)She talked about Gandhi?

Gandhi is called father of Nation, but he was the biggest racist, he believed in caste system of hindus.

was against every other religion.

There is a book written by Colonel of US Army G.B.Singh

Gandhi:Behind the Mask of Divinity

If you want I can post a review of that book.


MarthaSplatterhead (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
I think she represents the

I think she represents the level of ignorance in society right now. It's nice to know that I am a voice for reason for a reason. She kept asking if you, Sapient, had even read the bible. I thought this was telling of her own knowledge of the bible. Apparently she's not aware of the deaths god commanded.

I thought it was funny how she corrected your "him" to "he". I wished she could see all the great grammar skills xtians have on this site. Laughing out loud


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
@Todangst, the producer

@Todangst, the producer muted me when I debunked the argument from authority.

MarthaSplatterhead wrote:

I thought it was funny how she corrected your "him" to "he".

I thought it was funny too, considering the argument was about intelligence, I found genuine humor in it.  Funnier of course is that my usage of the word "him" was accurate, and alls her had left was attackin on I's grammar.  Eye-wink

As a result of the Ingraham show an internet TV broadcaster has decided to bring me on his show today.  Here are the details: http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/the_rational_response_squad_radio_show/3900

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Christen
Christen's picture
Posts: 75
Joined: 2006-02-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian, you did really well.

Brian, you did really well. I noticed that every time you made a great point (Ghandi and choosing the right god) she would cut to commercial or ask irrelevant questions, like what your girlfriend does for a living. I thought the whole "are you smarter than _____" was really pointless and immature.  


Wonderist
atheist
Wonderist's picture
Posts: 2479
Joined: 2006-03-19
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: ... I'd

Sapient wrote:
... I'd actually do O'Reilly.

That's a great out of context quote. Eye-wink 


V1per41
V1per41's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2006-10-09
User is offlineOffline
Wow, I can't believe that

Wow, I can't believe that someone who claims to want to know the truth would ask you a questions only to mute you when you try to answer.  How are you supposed to gain any knowledge that way??

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan


D-cubed
Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
The conversation didn't

The conversation didn't sound that unusual.  Laura had to appeal to her audience as a reich-wing looney and Brian was brought on the show for the sole purpose of trying to humiliate him.  That's why ultraconservative media like Fox News and such will often invite Atheists more than your standard conservative media like CNN.

 The use of the mute button was probably more for Brian's sake than for Laura's.  Laura, like most nuts, will merely shout down a caller or guest.  The mute button serves as a means to shut her up and to control for the limited time that Brian was on the air.

Mission successful though.  The purpose was to get more publicity.  The worst thing that could happen would be to be completely ignored.  Brian was able to reach out to those few who listen to Laura for pure masochistic reasons. 


PutBoy
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Funny. Sweden is one of the

Funny. Sweden is one of the most secular country in the world, yet they donate the most money in the world. Missionaries are not the only good-doers in the world. Also, missionaries does good because they think that's what their god wants. Religion makes people to good things for bad reasons.

Anyways. I think you shouldn't have backed out of her game of smart people.

Faith is a plague, be gone already. 


D-cubed
Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
The missionaries is a weak

The missionaries is a weak argument.  In Canada missionaries were often killed as they were recognized as the spreaders of disease which wiped out entire Native villages.  In Alaska it was missionaries who stole children to other cities to "civilize" them with Christianity in an effort to destroy Native culture.  Natives were beaten if they practiced their own culture or spoke their own language.

 Catholic Charities is funded primarily from taxpayers.  Should they not get secular government support they would fold their tents and go on molesting children.

 Laura whines about how it's the missionaries who go to war torn countries.  She fails to mention that these wars are often caused by religion (the other cause being to open new markets for capitalistic expansion).  So why shouldn't we expect the religious to clean up their own messes.

Her argument that there are religious people who are smarter than Brian therefore Christianity is a good idea is the lamest argument short of anything Kent Hovind presented.  There would be no shortage of finding Atheists smarter than Laura (and judging by her radio show even I would qualify). What she fails to think of is that these great inventors and scientists weren't satisfied with their religion's excuses (goddidit) and sought naturalistic explanations through godless science.

No doubt people equally are dense and Laura found her arguments brilliant. Most Christians, and I'm speaking also of the entire Catholic church, would be dumfounded with her denial of evolution.  Has that caller presented his arguments against evolution yet?  I could always use a laugh. 


sumra
Theist
Posts: 44
Joined: 2006-12-11
User is offlineOffline
I agree with D-cubed, about

I agree with D-cubed, about missionaries.

 I can provide a lot of writings right from the hands of missionaries, that missionaries do it for conversions

why are they so obsessed with spreading christianity?

 


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
What I really don't

What I really don't understand is this: Would she have been so dismissive of someone whose work is supported by a significant other and spends 120 to 140 hours a week working for free in a ministry?

I think we should take a collection and send Laura a giant bottle of aspirin.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


ChosenByPasta
ChosenByPasta's picture
Posts: 141
Joined: 2006-08-08
User is offlineOffline
It's really unfortanete that

It's really unfortanete that so many people follow and buy into what laura ingraham has to say. I can read a basic intro to logic textbook and just point out fallacy after fallacy. You just can't trust people like that after learning the fundamental concepts of good reasoning. It's disgusting really.

"Every true faith is infallible -- It performs what the believing person hopes to find in it. But it does not offer the least support for the establishing of an objective truth. Here the ways of men divide. If you want to achieve peace of mind and happiness, have faith. If you want to be a disciple of truth, then search." - Nietzsche


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Susan wrote: What I really

Susan wrote:

What I really don't understand is this: Would she have been so dismissive of someone whose work is supported by a significant other and spends 120 to 140 hours a week working for free in a ministry?

And you win the award for pwnage of the week.  Amazing point Susan.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


KSMB
Scientist
KSMB's picture
Posts: 702
Joined: 2006-08-03
User is offlineOffline
I have yet to figure out why

I have yet to figure out why there is an implied equality between charity and missionary. Missionaries go to foreign countries to spread their faith. That is the point. The actual help given to people (charity) is an after thought, a byproduct of them realizing that if they don't do something useful to help people survive, less people will believe their crap.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: Susan

Sapient wrote:
Susan wrote:

What I really don't understand is this: Would she have been so dismissive of someone whose work is supported by a significant other and spends 120 to 140 hours a week working for free in a ministry?

And you win the award for pwnage of the week. Amazing point Susan.

Thank you. Does that make me a pwnette? Smiling

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
Susan wrote: What I really

Susan wrote:

What I really don't understand is this: Would she have been so dismissive of someone whose work is supported by a significant other and spends 120 to 140 hours a week working for free in a ministry?

Like a ministry that shelters the homeless or feeds the hungry or cares for Iraq war widows?

 No, I think Laura would have been nothing but grateful to someone who did such a service.  However, I don't feel as though Laura feels that the work done by Brian is of equal value.

 

Susan wrote:

I think we should take a collection and send Laura a giant bottle of aspirin.

 

I think Laura has all the aspirin she needs, perhaps you could instead donate it to a shelter. 


Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
KSMB wrote: I have yet to

KSMB wrote:
I have yet to figure out why there is an implied equality between charity and missionary. Missionaries go to foreign countries to spread their faith. That is the point. The actual help given to people (charity) is an after thought, a byproduct of them realizing that if they don't do something useful to help people survive, less people will believe their crap.

 

You could be right in many cases, but the point you overlooked is that missionaries GO, others do not.  The mere fact that they go is testament to their faith.

And there are many fine missionaries I know rather well who have been on mission trips where they've built schools, helped with clean drinking water systems, helped people to be better farmers, all without mentioning Christianity. 

 


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Trout wrote:the point you

Trout wrote:

the point you overlooked is that missionaries GO, others do not.  The mere fact that they go is testament to their faith.

And that is a point she was lying about.  As I said in the interview non theists go, they simply don't do it in the name of non theism or try to convert when they do so.  She then strawmanned by saying that I was wrong that the majority of missionaries are atheists, I never said that. 

 

sam harris wrote:

Countries with high levels of atheism also are the most charitable in terms of giving foreign aid to the developing world. The dubious link between Christian literalism and Christian values is also belied by other indices of charity. Consider the ratio in salaries between top-tier CEOs and their average employee: in Britain it is 24 to 1; France 15 to 1; Sweden 13 to 1; in the United States, where 83% of the population believes that Jesus literally rose from the dead, it is 475 to 1. Many a camel, it would seem, expects to squeeze easily through the eye of a needle.


 

Quote:
And there are many fine missionaries I know rather well who have been on mission trips where they've built schools, helped with clean drinking water systems, helped people to be better farmers, all without mentioning Christianity.

Good for them, there might've been some non theists in that group to, the thought that both you and Laura think that no one goes there other than Christians is appaling.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
And Brian, IMO the people in

And Brian, IMO the people in the cave would kill each other before they loved and depended on one another.


GlamourKat
GlamourKat's picture
Posts: 461
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
Trout wrote: And Brian, IMO

Trout wrote:
And Brian, IMO the people in the cave would kill each other before they loved and depended on one another.

No offense, but I hope I never end up in a cave with you


Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: Good for

Sapient wrote:

Good for them, there might've been some non theists in that group to, the thought that both you and Laura think that no one goes there other than Christians is appaling.

 

I didn't say or imply that, Brian.  I'm quite sure there are many atheists/agnostics who are currently engaged in charity work at every level.  

To imply as you did in the Laura interview that there are more atheists involved in charity worldwide than there are theists, seems to be a stretch of the truth. 

 


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Trout I didn't say or imply

Trout

I didn't say or imply that, Brian.[/quote wrote:

"the point you overlooked is that missionaries GO, others do not." 

Quote:
  I'm quite sure there are many atheists/agnostics who are currently engaged in charity work at every level.  

Well that clears that up.

 

Quote:
To imply as you did in the Laura interview that there are more atheists involved in charity worldwide 

Not only did I not say it, I didn't even imply it.  Lauras point was that only Christians go in to those areas, I said some atheists go, she said I say the majority of the people that go are Christian.  I didn't say it, and Laura is a liar.

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


KSMB
Scientist
KSMB's picture
Posts: 702
Joined: 2006-08-03
User is offlineOffline
Trout wrote: KSMB wrote: I

Trout wrote:

KSMB wrote:
I have yet to figure out why there is an implied equality between charity and missionary. Missionaries go to foreign countries to spread their faith. That is the point. The actual help given to people (charity) is an after thought, a byproduct of them realizing that if they don't do something useful to help people survive, less people will believe their crap.

 

You could be right in many cases, but the point you overlooked is that missionaries GO, others do not. The mere fact that they go is testament to their faith.

If you read my post, you might notice that I specifically stated that missionaries do go. To state that others do not go to help people in foreign countries in need is a lie. My point remains, they go to spread their faith, when they could go just to help people.

Trout wrote:
And there are many fine missionaries I know rather well who have been on mission trips where they've built schools, helped with clean drinking water systems, helped people to be better farmers, all without mentioning Christianity.

If true, that is good. It would also defeat the purpose of the missionary. Most likely cause: everybody in the area was already christian, then they wouldn't need to mention christianity would they?

I met mormon missionaries when I lived in Sweden. As you might know, Sweden is more developed than Utah, in most respects. It was purely about spreading their silly faith (which is an excellent testament to their faith, btw), not helping people in need.

 


Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: Trout I

Sapient wrote:
Trout

I didn't say or imply that, Brian.[/quote wrote:

"the point you overlooked is that missionaries GO, others do not."

Quote:
I'm quite sure there are many atheists/agnostics who are currently engaged in charity work at every level.

Well that clears that up.

 

I'm sorry, my statement was misleading.

 My statement was in respnse to a criticism of missionaries, only interested in conversions and not the welfare of those they serve.  My point was simply that their presence there was testament to their faith. 

And I think Laura's point was something like, Do you Brian, think the world would be a better place if  Catholic charities pulled out of the places where they currently offer their services. 

I believe she asked this question with the presupposition in mind that theism, according to Brian, was actually harmful to humanity. 

Her point being that their God belief lead them to serve humanity. 

 

 



Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
KSMB wrote: My point

KSMB wrote:

My point remains, they go to spread their faith, when they could go just to help people.

Many do go just to help people, and those who share their faith do so to help people.  If a missionary goes to a place where there is horrible poverty and helps establish a mission and school, the missionary hopes that others find Christ and will go out and help others who are poor.

 It's win win.

 

KSMB wrote:

If true, that is good. It would also defeat the purpose of the missionary. Most likely cause: everybody in the area was already christian, then they wouldn't need to mention christianity would they?

 No, the people I know who served missions and didn't talk about Christianity don't speak the language of the people they are there to help.  

 

KSMB wrote:

I met mormon missionaries when I lived in Sweden. As you might know, Sweden is more developed than Utah, in most respects. It was purely about spreading their silly faith (which is an excellent testament to their faith, btw), not helping people in need.

The LDS church is pretty heavily involved in charity, probably much more so than yourself.  LDS missionaries serve to preach the LDS gospel, there are others in the LDS church that supply benevolence.

Tell me, how have your atheistic convictions (assuming you are an atheist) compelled you to help the poor? 

Brian has said that his mission is to defeat theism in order to make the world a better place, how would the world be a better place without theism? 

 

 

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Trout wrote:Sapient

Trout wrote:
Sapient wrote:
Trout

I didn't say or imply that, Brian.[/quote wrote:

"the point you overlooked is that missionaries GO, others do not."

Quote:
I'm quite sure there are many atheists/agnostics who are currently engaged in charity work at every level.

Well that clears that up.

I'm sorry, my statement was misleading.

 My statement was in respnse to a criticism of missionaries, only interested in conversions and not the welfare of those they serve.  My point was simply that their presence there was testament to their faith. 

And I think Laura's point was something like, Do you Brian, think the world would be a better place if  Catholic charities pulled out of the places where they currently offer their services. 

I believe she asked this question with the presupposition in mind that theism, according to Brian, was actually harmful to humanity. 

Her point being that their God belief lead them to serve humanity. 

And yet it is conclusively proven that missionary work is more often harmful than good. Aids in africa and multiple issues with native north americans are two perfect examples.

Quote:

Many do go just to help people, and those who share their faith do so to help people.  If a missionary goes to a place where there is horrible poverty and helps establish a mission and school, the missionary hopes that others find Christ and will go out and help others who are poor.

 It's win win.

No, it's lose lose. The church is damaging a culture by trying to force it's views on people who have no concept of them. When the church succeeds, which is not always the case, it creates a new branch that will one day find itself at odds with the central church over a moral issue and break away from it. That's why there are more versions of christianity than any other single religion.

Quote:

The LDS church is pretty heavily involved in charity, probably much more so than yourself. 

That's an incredibly ignorant thing to say. Shame on you.

Quote:

LDS missionaries serve to preach the LDS gospel, there are others in the LDS church that supply benevolence.

Tell me, how have your atheistic convictions (assuming you are an atheist) compelled you to help the poor?

Human compassion.

Quote:

Brian has said that his mission is to defeat theism in order to make the world a better place, how would the world be a better place without theism? 

Theism itself isn't so much the problem. If you really want to believe there's a god, and need it to explain things for you, fine. It's the viral influence of religion and the tendancy to cause extreme cases of harm in the name of a god that's the problem. The only way to bring about a theism free society would be through Orwellian tactics. Extinguishing imagination. There's a difference however between spreading lies and keeping them to yourself. I should be able to walk around my whole life without any religious influence should I desire to. But I can't. Religion by it's very nature seeks to invade. So I fight it.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:

Vastet wrote:

And yet it is conclusively proven that missionary work is more often harmful than good. Aids in africa and multiple issues with native north americans are two perfect examples.

I'm a native American, please explain how missionaries did more harm than good.

Vastet wrote:

That's an incredibly ignorant thing to say. Shame on you.

Why? You seem to be against the missionary who does humanitarian work. The LDS church has done a great deal of charity work, more than you I'm sure. Yet you sit around and bad mouth them while people starve, it's you who should feel shame.

Tell me, what have you done to end hunger or prevent AIDS? Do you think that by angrily typing away at your keyboard you're actually making the world a better place?


Vastet wrote:

Human compassion.

What has your human compassion lead you to do?

Vastet wrote:

Theism itself isn't so much the problem. If you really want to believe there's a god, and need it to explain things for you, fine. It's the viral influence of religion and the tendancy to cause extreme cases of harm in the name of a god that's the problem.

What ignorance. Tell me, how much harm did Moa cause? Pol Pot? Stalin?

Vastet wrote:

The only way to bring about a theism free society would be through Orwellian tactics. Extinguishing imagination. There's a difference however between spreading lies and keeping them to yourself. I should be able to walk around my whole life without any religious influence should I desire to. But I can't. Religion by it's very nature seeks to invade. So I fight it.

Are you for real? Let me see if these changes will help you understand how goofy your above statement was:

The only way to bring about an atheism free society would be through Orwellian tactics. Extinguishing imagination. There's a difference however between spreading lies and keeping them to yourself. I should be able to walk around my whole life without any atheistic influence should I desire to. But I can't. Atheism by it's very nature seeks to invade. So I fight it.

Remember what the purpose of Brian's website is:

Fighting to free humanity from the mind disorder known as theism.

 

 

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13660
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Trout wrote:

Trout wrote:
Vastet wrote:

And yet it is conclusively proven that missionary work is more often harmful than good. Aids in africa and multiple issues with native north americans are two perfect examples.

I'm a native American, please explain how missionaries did more harm than good.

Vastet wrote:

That's an incredibly ignorant thing to say. Shame on you.

Brian37 wrote:
You are a Native American and you especially should know what was done by people claiming to do the work of their god. If you cant understand the harm done to Native Americans then you are as much a part of the problem as any other lable.

How in good concious you'd burry the truth and make all Christians saints, especially cheerleading for your own label says alot about your own ability to blind yourself.

You dont get a pass simply because by race you are a minority.

The logic you miss which is typical of all sects of all religions is that claiming someone isnt a "true this" or "true that" does not change the fact that holy books get picked up, read and people base their actions on those words.

TWO ISSUSES WHEN THIS IS DONE THAT MOST DONT GET

1. Is what we wish people would do.

2. What they actually do

PEOPLE HAVE READ HOLY BOOKS AND JUSTIFIED HARM TO OTHERS, ALL RELIGIONS HAVE DONE THIS! Like it or not, that is a fact! AND FOR YOU TO SAY THAT NO ONE IN THE PAST SAID, "MY DEITY TOLD ME TO TAKE THIS LAND FROM THE HEATHEN NATIVES'

WRIGHT OR WRONG DOESNT CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT HAPPENED. And you have the gaull to claim to care about what happened to Native Americans?

My point is as long as people are blind to the harm they cause others religion will always be a weapon and will always be capable of distructive actions.

"We are charitable"

So what. So are we. You arnt capable of seeing that people can be good without deity belief. Insted you attack us and play victim which makes us want to raise our voices more.

"Orwellian tactics" Is the same indoctrinated garbage as "you love Hitler and Stalin".

NOW HERE IS THE FIRST MYTH TO BE DISPELLED!

We are not going to burn down your churches or take your bibles from you. But, if we can convince you that there is a better way of looking at life rather than through magical claims and divisive cheerleading clubs, you should have the intelectually integreaty to challeng yourself to think about your own claims"

Blindly loyalty is what Sadamn, Hitler, Stalin and the Churches of the dark ages expected. Blind Cheerleading is how Bin Ladin got 19 hijackers to slam planes into buildings.

DO NOT equate us to those sick puppetmasters. We see religion as divisive and if it gets YOU to challeng your own club to knock it off, GREAT! But do not accuse us of things we are not doing.

Keep "fighting" us, show your inibility to challenge yourself to think.

"Question with boldness even the existance of god, for IF there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear". I bet you dont even know who said that. Go look it up.

WE dont want you to fear us dumbass! But if you think we are kitten eaters out to stick you in an oven, GO SUCK AN EGG!

It isnt our fault someone made outragous claims and wrote them down as fiction and passed it of as truth. Over 1,000 years and 40 authors with magical claims of dirt "poof" instantaniously turning into flesh, dead bodies surviving rigor mortis, gosts getting girls pregnant. DONT BLAME US FOR WHAT WE DIDNT WRITE. We are merely pointing out the illogical nature of those claims.

But for you to accuse or imply that we of want any goverment force of the end of religion is patantly false and we as atheists are sick of that bigoted ignorant crap!

WE fight these claims, not as a goverment action like you have so falsely baught, but as a matter of open media and diolouge to GET YOU TO THINK!

So, what is it going to be? Are you going to challenge yourself, or you going to be a baby and say, "He's gonna give me cooties, goverment make the puppy eaters stop criticising Jebus".

GROW UP. No one is out to get you and no one should ever on either side use goverment to silence dissent or dissagreement!

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13660
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Maybe this will help you

Maybe this will help you understand.

YOU PICK UP A BOOK, you read it, you interpret it and based on that interpretation, you are willing to take up arms against us.

YOU are doing the same thing to us that was done by people picking up that book and saying to themselves, "Native Americans bad, take their land from them"

Arguing over wiether they were wright or wrong misses the fact that IT HAPPEND!

Somewhere in the world there is a Muslim reading the Quran interpreting it to mean fight the Christians and atheists.

TRY TO SEE THE PARALLELL 

Again, how we as humans wish our neighbor would behaive is not the same as what they actually do.

Untill you accept what was done in the name of deities throughout human history you will not be a spokesperson for the suffering that Native Americans wrongly suffered through.

I have the same attitude toward blacks who shout, "How dare you pick on Jesus" knowing that many of them were told by other people that they were subhuman because their narrow view of the bible told them they were.

HUMANITY DEPENDS ON EVERYONE not ignoring the dark side of what is done in the name of deities. 9/11 is a perfect example but for you to claim Christianity is immune to that same behaivor is to set it up to do the same thing in the future.

YOU SHOULD value the suffering that Native Americans went through. I know I do, but I dont suger coat reality and pretend that people didnt kill them in the name of Jesus. 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: You are a

Brian37 wrote:

You are a Native American and you especially should know what was done by people claiming to do the work of their god. If you cant understand the harm done to Native Americans then you are as much a part of the problem as any other lable.

How in good concious you'd burry the truth and make all Christians saints, especially cheerleading for your own label says alot about your own ability to blind yourself.

You dont get a pass simply because by race you are a minority.

The logic you miss which is typical of all sects of all religions is that claiming someone isnt a "true this" or "true that" does not change the fact that holy books get picked up, read and people base their actions on those words.

TWO ISSUSES WHEN THIS IS DONE THAT MOST DONT GET

1. Is what we wish people would do.

2. What they actually do

PEOPLE HAVE READ HOLY BOOKS AND JUSTIFIED HARM TO OTHERS, ALL RELIGIONS HAVE DONE THIS! Like it or not, that is a fact! AND FOR YOU TO SAY THAT NO ONE IN THE PAST SAID, "MY DEITY TOLD ME TO TAKE THIS LAND FROM THE HEATHEN NATIVES'

WRIGHT OR WRONG DOESNT CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT HAPPENED. And you have the gaull to claim to care about what happened to Native Americans?

My point is as long as people are blind to the harm they cause others religion will always be a weapon and will always be capable of distructive actions.

HEY BRIAN, PEOPLE LIKE STALIN AND MAO HAVE CAUSED UNTOLD SUFFERING IN THE NAME OF NO GOD, don't pretend the problem is only based in theism and wave your bony finger my way.  Take a look at the death and destruction caused by those who hold your worldview have done. 

The native culture here was heavily into human sacrifice and cannibalism.  I guess according to your thinking human sacrifice and canniblism are just fine and we shouldn't force our contrary views on those who practice such things.  I guess you think the Indians were just a big friendly hippie commune, peace love dope.  Open your eyes, Brian.

What have you done to improve the lives of native Americans, Brian?  Type sanctimonious words into your keyboard?  What a hypocrite. 

Brian37 wrote:

But for you to accuse or imply that we of want any goverment force of the end of religion is patantly false and we as atheists are sick of that bigoted ignorant crap!

 And for your ilk to claim that theists want the government to rid our country of any contrary thought is ludicris, I'm sick of being painted as the enemy by short sighted idiots like yourself. 

 


Trout
Trout's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2006-11-29
User is offlineOffline
Brian wrote:   Untill you

Brian wrote:
 

Untill you accept what was done in the name of deities throughout human history you will not be a spokesperson for the suffering that Native Americans wrongly suffered through.

Oh what irony, how in the world do you look yourself in the mirror, There was more suffering done in the name of no god last century than in all other centuries combined.

And in your haste to condemn me, you seem to be conflating what the government did to the Indians and what the Christian missionaries did. 

 

 


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: @Todangst,

Sapient wrote:

@Todangst, the producer muted me when I debunked the argument from authority.

I figured as much. So she knows she's wrong, and she censors the refutations.

As I said earlier, if she were a poster on this site, she'd rank amongst the worst trolls, and the easiest to refute as well.... 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
GlamourKat wrote: Trout

GlamourKat wrote:

Trout wrote:
And Brian, IMO the people in the cave would kill each other before they loved and depended on one another.

No offense, but I hope I never end up in a cave with you.

You probably could add the whole board to that list.  

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Trout wrote:  What

Trout wrote:
 What ignorance. Tell me, how much harm did Moa cause? Pol Pot? Stalin?

Amount of harm they caused in the name of atheism: NONE

 

trout wrote:
Vastet wrote:

The only way to bring about a theism free society would be through Orwellian tactics. Extinguishing imagination. There's a difference however between spreading lies and keeping them to yourself. I should be able to walk around my whole life without any religious influence should I desire to. But I can't. Religion by it's very nature seeks to invade. So I fight it.

Are you for real? Let me see if these changes will help you understand how goofy your above statement was:

The only way to bring about an atheism free society would be through Orwellian tactics. Extinguishing imagination.

It takes imagination to make pretend invisible men in the sky.  Extinguising imagination is not what you need to rid the world of atheism.  You'd need to rid the world of personal honesty, logic, and reason.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Trout wrote: HEY BRIAN,

Trout wrote:
HEY BRIAN, PEOPLE LIKE STALIN AND MAO HAVE CAUSED UNTOLD SUFFERING IN THE NAME OF NO GOD

You're playing tricks with language, they didn't believe in a god, but they never committed their acts of attrocity in the name of atheism, you're simply lying.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Trout wrote: There was

Trout wrote:

There was more suffering done in the name of no god last century than in all other centuries combined.

 Feel free to prove that claim, it sounds like a lie to me.  Let's see the stats, bring it all out.  Just make sure to put Hitler, Bush, and Bin Laden into the God category.  And Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, never committed a crime in the name of atheism, so prove that claim as well before you put them in the name of no god category.

 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.