@@georgedoyle2487 Doesn't sound listen like you set the bar too high then Boyle was talking nonsense Respecting someone's spiritual beliefs is fine up to a point However belonging to a religious institution like say the Catholic Church which has been guilty of the cover up of child sex abuse by it's own Priests, and preaching dubious moralistic beliefs is not something to be respected You may not be directly hurting anyone But indirectly you're allowing a institution that has or does continue to thrive and exist
Noticed Diane Morgan looking a bit uncomfortable. She's worked with Charlie Brooker, and he's very nasty and sneery about religion. Suddenly got a lot more respect for Fankie Boyle though
But then religion can be very nasty about certain people Last time I looked they had been executing homosexuals in certain Muslim countries I think that is something to get rightfully sneery about
@@mhl8396 Well maybe he should Religion are like people None are infallible or above approach and beyond scrutiny Not to do so would be narrow and potentially cowardly.
@@robertmcelwaine7024 Except she wasn’t the one making the argument here nor did she contribute at any stage so we have no idea what her views are on the topic
But, Robert, it's not a movement. It's a complete absence of something. It's not anything to consider or a cause to espouse or a group to join, it's a totally disinterested viewpoint on something beneath consideration. It's as meaningless as asking a waterfall its shoe size. Denouncing atheism as a position or a faith or a religion is only something that God-fearing religious people do because it's the greatest possible insult they can imagine to something that denies a major part of their lives. It comforts them to think that they're not alone in their chosen mental asylum - if atheism can be dragged down to the level of a belief or a faith it must mean that everybody around them shares their delusion and is an asylum inmate, too. But atheists would merely shake their heads sadly, close the door, and walk away, thinking, "There's no need to lock the cell door - that's what they invented God to do." People of faith literally cannot comprehend that position. It does not compute because their BIOS and ROM was flashed at the age of 6 or 7 and no further upgrades are possible. When asked, "Well, which group do you belong to, Mr Dawkins/ Fry/ Gervais? What do you believe? You MUST believe something", the correct answer is:
@@EleanorPeterson I wasn't born in to a religious family. I came from an Electrical Engineering background and have been surrounded by science ALL my life. I was also in to Heavy Metal bands like Anthrax and W.A.S.P, watched foreign films, in to Art and music among other things. Don't pull that stunt saying that religious people were all indoctrinated as kids 🙄. Atheists tend more often than not to be rabbid atheists. People who genuinely don't care enough to think about God one way or another would be more closely associated with being agnostic. When was the last time you heard someone declaring themselves as being agnostic? Meanwhile, it's trendy for certain individuals to announce their atheism to the world wether anyone asks them or not 🙄. Yes it is a movement. If it wasn't, then why do atheist organisations exist? Organisations like the Atheist Foundation of Australia? Obviously I know more about this subject than you do.
@@robertmcmillan3638 *I wasn't born in to a religious family.* *I came from an Electrical Engineering background and have been surrounded by science ALL my life.* *I was also in to Heavy Metal bands like Anthrax and W.A.S.P, watched foreign films, in to Art and music among other things.* *Don't pull that stunt saying that religious people were all indoctrinated as kids 🙄.* True, not every person who is religious or a theist were born in to a religious family. However there's still a fairly overhelming number that still were. It's not pulling a stunt to say that that it's predominently the case. There are Atheists of course who were born in to religious famlies. A perfect example being Matt Dillahunty who actually trained as a minsiter before rejecting religion altogether. However, the point stands. *Atheists tend more often than not to be rabbid atheists* That's your perception, not the reality. *People who genuinely don't care enough to think about God one way or another would be more closely associated with being agnostic.* Depend on what you mean not caring about God. I as an Atheist don't necessarily care about God, so much as in people just believing in one if it gives them comfort and they're not hurting ayone or imposing their beliefs on anyone. Unfortunately that's not always the case. *When was the last time you heard someone declaring themselves as being agnostic?* I used to be agnostic before becoming Atheist and I used to tell people I was agnostic. *Meanwhile, it's trendy for certain individuals to announce their atheism to the world wether anyone asks them or not 🙄.* Trendy for "certain" indiviuals meaning not all. It's also trendy for "certain" Chrsitans in their group to announce they believe in Jesus and God whether someone likes it or not. Speaking personally I don't make a habit of sayig I'm an Atheist in public life although it has come up, and usually when the subject of relgion has just happened to come up in a conversation. By and large I tend to really discuss it on online media and even then where as here it's happens to be the topic of discussion ad people are openly volunteering to talk about it. Funny though how 200 years ago it was pretty musch the "trendy" thing to believe in God. Although in the U.S. for instance it can't be so trendy considering that the minority of the countries population is theist and follows some religion. *Yes it is a movement.* So is what happens with your bowels. So what? *If it wasn't, then why do atheist organisations exist?* *Organisations like the Atheist Foundation of Australia?* So what if they do? What's your point? That Atheism is a religion? Are you attempting to use the, well we know we are but what are you tactic of arguing? Do you know how childish that sounds if it is? *Obviously I know more about this subject than you do.* But not necessarily more than me.
@@robertmcelwaine7024 Where did I use the term *"predominently"* when describing my religious views as being that of others or the mainstream religious? (FYI, it's *predominantly* NOT *predominently* 🙄). I speak according to what I know. I know a LOT of stuff religious and secular. Noticed that you didn't have a problem with atheist organisations existing. What do they exist for? You lot profess that you are a lack of belief lot so why have organisations in order to promote atheism then? Are you Mark H with a different user name? Wouldn't matter is you were or weren't as you lot all sound like the same old broken record.
@@robertmcmillan3638 *Where did I use the term "predominently" when describing my religious views as being that of others or the mainstream religious? (FYI, it's predominantly NOT predominently 🙄).* ALERT! ALERT! WE HAVE THE ENGLISH SPELLING POLICE IN THE AREA! I REPEAT WE HAVE THE ENGLISH SPELLING POLICE IN THE AREA! Thankyou for concentrating on most insignificant and triflig part of my post. And I never said you used the word predomently. The fact is you said that you weren't born in to a religious family as if to say that not all religious people were. However people who are relgious have predominently been bee raised in religious households irrespective of that. *Noticed that you didn't have a problem with atheist organisations existing. What do they exist for?* *You lot profess that you are a lack of belief lot so why have organisations in order to promote atheism then?* So what? I notice you don't have a problem with Christian organizations existing? And to answer your question; they're to promote the view that moral standards should be based solely on naturalistic considerations. Not based off without any appeals to supernatural concepts (such as God or an afterlife), any desire to do good for a reward after death, or any fear of punishment for not believing in life after death. Bascly basing moral beliefs on spiritual or religious beliefs ie. Abortion is wrong becaue God sad so. And without being saracastic, you're sincerly coming over as overly defensive and hostile. *Are you Mark H with a different user name?* Sorry, but I sincerely haven't got a clue who you're talking about so that would be a no. *Wouldn't matter is you were or weren't as you lot all sound like the same old broken record.* As opposed to many Christians who spout the same defensive clichés. You're not saying anything I or other Atheists haven't heard a million times before. And if it didn't matter if I was Mr. H or not then why did you bother asking?! 🤨🙄
Humanism is effectively a synonym for empiricism. If you can't quantify something, it doesn't exist. On the other hand, Faith is belief despite overwhelmingly contradictory evidence. Neither are especially convincing.
It's not a stance of intelligence and logic though. It's just another blind faith which devolves minds. Look, Stephen Fry, one of the most respectiable and intelligent minds of our time. And look at 3:07, that quote is akin to something of a belligerent child. If all your arguments against the existence of god are based on criticizing the concept of an abrahamic god, then you are not an atheist, you're just an anti-christian, or antichrist for short. Logic doesn't come from blind faith based on an assumption with no proof, Atheism is just as faith-based and as much of a religion as anything else. I respect anyone's decision to take on Atheism, and old philosophical atheism which wasn't so much disbelief in God as it was counter to the concept of theism itself is definitely more logic-based and philosophical in nature. But these days people take on the mantle thinking the point is to ridicule the judeo-christian God and people that have faith in him, it's not REALLY atheism.
Gervais appears to be getting madder by the day-- boy do we Christians enrage him! And egregiously offensive, too: witness his grotesque parody of Christ's crucifixion last year, and for those who DIDN'T GET IT he'd scrawled "atheist" across his chest. Never one for SUBTLETY, Ricky. I love Frank's quip about Stephen Fry. Frank published a very good book on his faith two years ago, 'A Comedian's Prayer Book'. I sent him a four-page letter about how much I enjoyed it and after several weeks got a reply. From someone in his office. He couldn't even have been arsed to write something himself. Oh, well. I forgive him--it's what we pesky Christians do, or try to. It's all in the trying. Read his book, especially if you are suffering from atheism.
That is just plain wrong. He said nothing at all about ignoring the bad effects of religion. He criticised the pillorying of theists by people with a greater access to the mass media, and the hypocrisy of doing so without also critically examining your own world view.
I wouldn’t describe Richard Dawkins as a celebrity atheist. He wasn’t a famous person who decided to take a cool stance on religion anyway. Stephen fry is more about the gay thing I guess. Ricky Gervais is kind of out of the blue though. Who else though? This is just another personal attack on Ricky Gervais. Haha.
Well all Rocky Gervais does is hurl personal attacks at other people under the flimsy guise of “comedy” so I’d just call it karma. If you’re gonna be an insult comic you could at-least be funny. 🤷🏻♂️
Some people don't believe in live organ transplants even though it can save a person's life because their God is opposed to it. I suppose that's perfectly acceptable for them to believe that according to Frank and Frankie. After all they're just following their beliefs.
"Some people don't believe in live organ transplants even though it can save a persons life because their God is apposed to it" You think that because Danny Boyle has recognized that atheists are not immune to religious fanaticism he automatically believes organ transplants are evil?? Interesting logic. The fact is your cherry picking the most controversial aspects of one particular religion in order to tar all theists with the same brush and even "atheists" who challenge your bigotry. This type of intellectual dishonesty is easily refuted using the same type of confirmation bias. Here's a good example. 90 million men, women and children were murdered and purposely starved to death in Russia because Atheist Communist Russia's anti religious policy was apposed to freedom of expression. This is a fact so by your logic all atheism is evil and should be mocked for its lack of evidence and rationality. Did you actually listen to what Danny Boyle said about the good that Liberation theology had done?. Equally, atheists\The humanists society support a lot of charities such as Oxfam. Which is ironic because Oxfam is actually a religious organization. The fact is both atheism and theism are diverse and have shared values. Many theists are actually atheists when it comes to the literal god that bigoted atheists presuppose theists believe in. Some atheists are actually more literal when it comes to interpreting the bible than evangelical, right wing flat earthers. Equally, the evidence suggests that many atheists such as Danny Boyle are sick of bigoted atheists and do not share your narrow world view with regards to religious expression. They believe that people should be allowed to follow any belief system they feel gives them joy, happiness, meaning and purpose without having a nihilist world view rammed down their throats. As long as that belief system does not infringe on other people's human rights. “There are fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics” (Albert Einstein)
Stevos 999 you stated.... "So it's better to teach the child that a moth is a fairy, Interesting logic" So its better to stop children using their imagination in order to teach them the brute facts of life forcing your own nihilist world view on them instead of allowing them the freedom to choose when they are ready and mature enough??, Interesting logic. Your comment is a perfect illustration of Danny Boyles very funny but also very logical observation of the presumption and arrogance of atheists who hide behind scientific authority in order to force their own subjective and monistic world view on everyone else. No honest and intelligent person could be that naive and ignorant of early child development and the importance of imagination, fun and play to a young childs emotional wellbeing, progress and speed of learning. I think your comment is articulate enough to suggest you are being intellectually dishonest possibly due to your own intolerance and ignorance of the importance of religious and cultural diversity. How do you think humans learn and conceptualize science and abstract concepts such as maths, energy and mass etc. Its impossible with out imagination and creativity. Primary school walls are covered with children's art work and their creative writing for good reason. Equally, school libraries are full of books about myths and legends for fun and also practical reasons. "I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world" (Albert Einstein).
@@georgedoyle2487 Stalin was an Athiest but more importantly he was Psychopath and turned a system that was supposed to give everyone equal pay and rights into a an Old Testament landscape where HE was God. Feared, Narcissistic and obsessed with control.
@@georgedoyle2487 I wasn't tarring all of the religious with one brush. I was merely giving an example of where faith has been known to be harmful. I did after all say, some not all. Learn to read! Christ, you can't even get Frankie's name right! Unless I'm coming out and saying specifically that I believe that all Christians for instance believe this then I'd suggest you choose your words carefully and not make bullshit accusations. Furthermore, you look at practically any religion whether it be Christianity, Judaism or Islam and you'll find some pernicious beliefs. That doesn't mean that all of the people who belong to each faith necessarily believes or condones them but there to me right there is the folly in belong to an organized religion. Believing in God is all very well and good and in of itself does not harm but with it can come the baggage it can on the world as a whole. I only need bring up Islamic terrorism for example to hammer that home. And Atheists are bigots? Last time I looked I didn't see Christians in the U.S. for example being discriminated against for their beliefs. Atheists on the other hand...type the words atheist and discrimination and see what comes up. I don't know of any Atheists that hate anyone of faith unless they have good reason to and with some of the wackadoo's, that are out there there would be good reason to. I'm an Atheist and I have friends and work colleagues who are religious and I can tell you that they are good people and no, I don't hate them. However the fact of the matter is bad ideas should be mocked and that doesn't simply mean a belief in God. It's the shit that comes with it. It's not merely a case of saying oh you believe in God, you're an idiot. If you want to believe that and you're not hurting anyone then go right ahead. Organized religion on the other hand, that's a different matter! And if you want to excuse people funding the Catholic Church for example that's been known for covering up many of their priests buggering then go right ahead! Let's just all keep our mouths shut and show respect to them because we have to respect the beliefs of their followers in the name of misguided "tolerance". "Religion is just mind control" (George Carlin)
@J J Ricky Gervais works his atheist agenda in to his standup comedy shows as can be seen by anyone who watches any of his seemingly multiple DVDS (usually going 2nd hand for 50p alongside the Jimmy Carr DVD'S in CEX).
Yeah, but fact is that if nobody wants to watch Gervais satirize religion in his stand up then no one has to watch it. And to be honest, it's not as if he's doing anything that a million other comics including Frankie haven't done themselves.
@@robertmcelwaine7024 You could say that about anything though. When you put an opinion out there, publicly (and yes that includes a standup show), you open yourself up to criticism.
I never thought much of Frankie until I saw this. Really went up in my estimations.
I totally agree with you and feel exactly the same. Danny Boyle is very honest.
@@georgedoyle2487 Danny?
@@Frellyouall
Oh Danny boy the pipes the pipes are calling. From Glen to Glen and down the mountain side!! ❤️
@@georgedoyle2487 Doesn't sound listen like you set the bar too high then Boyle was talking nonsense Respecting someone's spiritual beliefs is fine up to a point However belonging to a religious institution like say the Catholic Church which has been guilty of the cover up of child sex abuse by it's own Priests, and preaching dubious moralistic beliefs is not something to be respected You may not be directly hurting anyone But indirectly you're allowing a institution that has or does continue to thrive and exist
Took me a minute to understand the "Stephen Fry... he certainly will"
It's been 9 months i still don't get it, what does it mean?
@@karoma7898 He's changing "Fry" into "fry", as in Hell.
Noticed Diane Morgan looking a bit uncomfortable. She's worked with Charlie Brooker, and he's very nasty and sneery about religion. Suddenly got a lot more respect for Fankie Boyle though
She’s in afterlife with Ricky gervais
But then religion can be very nasty about certain people Last time I looked they had been executing homosexuals in certain Muslim countries I think that is something to get rightfully sneery about
@@robertmcelwaine7024 Charlie Brooker is NEVER sneery about Muslims. Only Christians
@@mhl8396 Well maybe he should Religion are like people None are infallible or above approach and beyond scrutiny Not to do so would be narrow and potentially cowardly.
She's good mates with Gervais too
The woman in the middle laughing, ended up going on Afterlife.
Oh the irony. How quickly some people forget when it comes to collecting their next paycheque.
@@robertmcelwaine7024 Except she wasn’t the one making the argument here nor did she contribute at any stage so we have no idea what her views are on the topic
@@johnd1464 But she did laugh. I think that just speaks for itself.
@@robertmcelwaine7024 Or she was just being polite. Or open to multiple views.
@@regan3873 Being open to other views is one thing. Laughing when someone is mocking someone you've worked with is another.
Must be bad for their movement when atheists are getting fed up of other atheists 😂😂.
But, Robert, it's not a movement. It's a complete absence of something. It's not anything to consider or a cause to espouse or a group to join, it's a totally disinterested viewpoint on something beneath consideration.
It's as meaningless as asking a waterfall its shoe size.
Denouncing atheism as a position or a faith or a religion is only something that God-fearing religious people do because it's the greatest possible insult they can imagine to something that denies a major part of their lives.
It comforts them to think that they're not alone in their chosen mental asylum - if atheism can be dragged down to the level of a belief or a faith it must mean that everybody around them shares their delusion and is an asylum inmate, too.
But atheists would merely shake their heads sadly, close the door, and walk away, thinking, "There's no need to lock the cell door - that's what they invented God to do."
People of faith literally cannot comprehend that position. It does not compute because their BIOS and ROM was flashed at the age of 6 or 7 and no further upgrades are possible.
When asked, "Well, which group do you belong to, Mr Dawkins/ Fry/ Gervais? What do you believe? You MUST believe something", the correct answer is:
@@EleanorPeterson I wasn't born in to a religious family.
I came from an Electrical Engineering background and have been surrounded by science ALL my life.
I was also in to Heavy Metal bands like Anthrax and W.A.S.P, watched foreign films, in to Art and music among other things.
Don't pull that stunt saying that religious people were all indoctrinated as kids 🙄.
Atheists tend more often than not to be rabbid atheists.
People who genuinely don't care enough to think about God one way or another would be more closely associated with being agnostic.
When was the last time you heard someone declaring themselves as being agnostic?
Meanwhile, it's trendy for certain individuals to announce their atheism to the world wether anyone asks them or not 🙄.
Yes it is a movement.
If it wasn't, then why do atheist organisations exist?
Organisations like the Atheist Foundation of Australia?
Obviously I know more about this subject than you do.
@@robertmcmillan3638 *I wasn't born in to a religious family.*
*I came from an Electrical Engineering background and have been surrounded by science ALL my life.*
*I was also in to Heavy Metal bands like Anthrax and W.A.S.P, watched foreign films, in to Art and music among other things.*
*Don't pull that stunt saying that religious people were all indoctrinated as kids 🙄.*
True, not every person who is religious or a theist were born in to a religious family. However there's still a fairly overhelming number that still were. It's not pulling a stunt to say that that it's predominently the case. There are Atheists of course who were born in to religious famlies. A perfect example being Matt Dillahunty who actually trained as a minsiter before rejecting religion altogether. However, the point stands.
*Atheists tend more often than not to be rabbid atheists*
That's your perception, not the reality.
*People who genuinely don't care enough to think about God one way or another would be more closely associated with being agnostic.*
Depend on what you mean not caring about God. I as an Atheist don't necessarily care about God, so much as in people just believing in one if it gives them comfort and they're not hurting ayone or imposing their beliefs on anyone. Unfortunately that's not always the case.
*When was the last time you heard someone declaring themselves as being agnostic?*
I used to be agnostic before becoming Atheist and I used to tell people I was agnostic.
*Meanwhile, it's trendy for certain individuals to announce their atheism to the world wether anyone asks them or not 🙄.*
Trendy for "certain" indiviuals meaning not all. It's also trendy for "certain" Chrsitans in their group to announce they believe in Jesus and God whether someone likes it or not. Speaking personally I don't make a habit of sayig I'm an Atheist in public life although it has come up, and usually when the subject of relgion has just happened to come up in a conversation. By and large I tend to really discuss it on online media and even then where as here it's happens to be the topic of discussion ad people are openly volunteering to talk about it. Funny though how 200 years ago it was pretty musch the "trendy" thing to believe in God. Although in the U.S. for instance it can't be so trendy considering that the minority of the countries population is theist and follows some religion.
*Yes it is a movement.*
So is what happens with your bowels. So what?
*If it wasn't, then why do atheist organisations exist?*
*Organisations like the Atheist Foundation of Australia?*
So what if they do? What's your point? That Atheism is a religion? Are you attempting to use the, well we know we are but what are you tactic of arguing? Do you know how childish that sounds if it is?
*Obviously I know more about this subject than you do.*
But not necessarily more than me.
@@robertmcelwaine7024 Where did I use the term *"predominently"* when describing my religious views as being that of others or the mainstream religious? (FYI, it's *predominantly* NOT *predominently* 🙄).
I speak according to what I know. I know a LOT of stuff religious and secular.
Noticed that you didn't have a problem with atheist organisations existing.
What do they exist for?
You lot profess that you are a lack of belief lot so why have organisations in order to promote atheism then?
Are you Mark H with a different user name?
Wouldn't matter is you were or weren't as you lot all sound like the same old broken record.
@@robertmcmillan3638 *Where did I use the term "predominently" when describing my religious views as being that of others or the mainstream religious? (FYI, it's predominantly NOT predominently 🙄).*
ALERT! ALERT! WE HAVE THE ENGLISH SPELLING POLICE IN THE AREA! I REPEAT WE HAVE THE ENGLISH SPELLING POLICE IN THE AREA!
Thankyou for concentrating on most insignificant and triflig part of my post. And I never said you used the word predomently. The fact is you said that you weren't born in to a religious family as if to say that not all religious people were. However people who are relgious have predominently been bee raised in religious households irrespective of that.
*Noticed that you didn't have a problem with atheist organisations existing.
What do they exist for?*
*You lot profess that you are a lack of belief lot so why have organisations in order to promote atheism then?*
So what? I notice you don't have a problem with Christian organizations existing? And to answer your question; they're to promote the view that moral standards should be based solely on naturalistic considerations. Not based off without any appeals to supernatural concepts (such as God or an afterlife), any desire to do good for a reward after death, or any fear of punishment for not believing in life after death. Bascly basing moral beliefs on spiritual or religious beliefs ie. Abortion is wrong becaue God sad so. And without being saracastic, you're sincerly coming over as overly defensive and hostile.
*Are you Mark H with a different user name?*
Sorry, but I sincerely haven't got a clue who you're talking about so that would be a no.
*Wouldn't matter is you were or weren't as you lot all sound like the same old broken record.*
As opposed to many Christians who spout the same defensive clichés. You're not saying anything I or other Atheists haven't heard a million times before. And if it didn't matter if I was Mr. H or not then why did you bother asking?! 🤨🙄
Humanism is effectively a synonym for empiricism. If you can't quantify something, it doesn't exist. On the other hand, Faith is belief despite overwhelmingly contradictory evidence. Neither are especially convincing.
It's not a stance of intelligence and logic though. It's just another blind faith which devolves minds. Look, Stephen Fry, one of the most respectiable and intelligent minds of our time. And look at 3:07, that quote is akin to something of a belligerent child.
If all your arguments against the existence of god are based on criticizing the concept of an abrahamic god, then you are not an atheist, you're just an anti-christian, or antichrist for short. Logic doesn't come from blind faith based on an assumption with no proof, Atheism is just as faith-based and as much of a religion as anything else.
I respect anyone's decision to take on Atheism, and old philosophical atheism which wasn't so much disbelief in God as it was counter to the concept of theism itself is definitely more logic-based and philosophical in nature. But these days people take on the mantle thinking the point is to ridicule the judeo-christian God and people that have faith in him, it's not REALLY atheism.
Gervais appears to be getting madder by the day-- boy do we Christians enrage him! And egregiously offensive, too: witness his grotesque parody of Christ's crucifixion last year, and for those who DIDN'T GET IT he'd scrawled "atheist" across his chest. Never one for SUBTLETY, Ricky. I love Frank's quip about Stephen Fry. Frank published a very good book on his faith two years ago, 'A Comedian's Prayer Book'. I sent him a four-page letter about how much I enjoyed it and after several weeks got a reply. From someone in his office. He couldn't even have been arsed to write something himself. Oh, well. I forgive him--it's what we pesky Christians do, or try to. It's all in the trying. Read his book, especially if you are suffering from atheism.
"they've done some good things so we've got to ignore the bad" is essentially what he's said
No, he’s saying picking on religious people for being religious is a dick move and kind of unnecessary and unasked for.
That is just plain wrong. He said nothing at all about ignoring the bad effects of religion. He criticised the pillorying of theists by people with a greater access to the mass media, and the hypocrisy of doing so without also critically examining your own world view.
Not at all what he said
I wouldn’t describe Richard Dawkins as a celebrity atheist. He wasn’t a famous person who decided to take a cool stance on religion anyway. Stephen fry is more about the gay thing I guess. Ricky Gervais is kind of out of the blue though. Who else though? This is just another personal attack on Ricky Gervais. Haha.
Found the Ricky Gervais fanboy
@@regan3873 haha. Yea I am I suppose. What about you? Not a fan?
Out the blue?
He’s always banging on about how much he hates religion
Well all Rocky Gervais does is hurl personal attacks at other people under the flimsy guise of “comedy” so I’d just call it karma. If you’re gonna be an insult comic you could at-least be funny. 🤷🏻♂️
@@samuel5916 I suppose you're talking about the golden globes? So you didn't find him funny as a host? You'd be in the minority.
So, it's better to teach the child that a moth is a fairy? Interesting logic.
Some people don't believe in live organ transplants even though it can save a person's life because their God is opposed to it. I suppose that's perfectly acceptable for them to believe that according to Frank and Frankie. After all they're just following their beliefs.
"Some people don't believe in live organ transplants even though it can save a persons life because their God is apposed to it"
You think that because Danny Boyle has recognized that atheists are not immune to religious fanaticism he automatically believes organ transplants are evil?? Interesting logic. The fact is your cherry picking the most controversial aspects of one particular religion in order to tar all theists with the same brush and even "atheists" who challenge your bigotry. This type of intellectual dishonesty is easily refuted using the same type of confirmation bias. Here's a good example.
90 million men, women and children were murdered and purposely starved to death in Russia because Atheist Communist Russia's anti religious policy was apposed to freedom of expression. This is a fact so by your logic all atheism is evil and should be mocked for its lack of evidence and rationality. Did you actually listen to what Danny Boyle said about the good that Liberation theology had done?. Equally, atheists\The humanists society support a lot of charities such as Oxfam. Which is ironic because Oxfam is actually a religious organization. The fact is both atheism and theism are diverse and have shared values. Many theists are actually atheists when it comes to the literal god that bigoted atheists presuppose theists believe in. Some atheists are actually more literal when it comes to interpreting the bible than evangelical, right wing flat earthers. Equally, the evidence suggests that many atheists such as Danny Boyle are sick of bigoted atheists and do not share your narrow world view with regards to religious expression. They believe that people should be allowed to follow any belief system they feel gives them joy, happiness, meaning and purpose without having a nihilist world view rammed down their throats. As long as that belief system does not infringe on other people's human rights.
“There are fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics”
(Albert Einstein)
Stevos 999 you stated....
"So it's better to teach the child that a moth is a fairy, Interesting logic"
So its better to stop children using their imagination in order to teach them the brute facts of life forcing your own nihilist world view on them instead of allowing them the freedom to choose when they are ready and mature enough??, Interesting logic.
Your comment is a perfect illustration of Danny Boyles very funny but also very logical observation of the presumption and arrogance of atheists who hide behind scientific authority in order to force their own subjective and monistic world view on everyone else. No honest and intelligent person could be that naive and ignorant of early child development and the importance of imagination, fun and play to a young childs emotional wellbeing, progress and speed of learning. I think your comment is articulate enough to suggest you are being intellectually dishonest possibly due to your own intolerance and ignorance of the importance of religious and cultural diversity. How do you think humans learn and conceptualize science and abstract concepts such as maths, energy and mass etc. Its impossible with out imagination and creativity. Primary school walls are covered with children's art work and their creative writing for good reason. Equally, school libraries are full of books about myths and legends for fun and also practical reasons.
"I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world"
(Albert Einstein).
@@georgedoyle2487 Stalin was an Athiest but more importantly he was Psychopath and turned a system that was supposed to give everyone equal pay and rights into a an Old Testament landscape where HE was God. Feared, Narcissistic and obsessed with control.
@@georgedoyle2487 I wasn't tarring all of the religious with one brush. I was merely giving an example of where faith has been known to be harmful. I did after all say, some not all. Learn to read! Christ, you can't even get Frankie's name right! Unless I'm coming out and saying specifically that I believe that all Christians for instance believe this then I'd suggest you choose your words carefully and not make bullshit accusations. Furthermore, you look at practically any religion whether it be Christianity, Judaism or Islam and you'll find some pernicious beliefs. That doesn't mean that all of the people who belong to each faith necessarily believes or condones them but there to me right there is the folly in belong to an organized religion. Believing in God is all very well and good and in of itself does not harm but with it can come the baggage it can on the world as a whole. I only need bring up Islamic terrorism for example to hammer that home.
And Atheists are bigots? Last time I looked I didn't see Christians in the U.S. for example being discriminated against for their beliefs. Atheists on the other hand...type the words atheist and discrimination and see what comes up. I don't know of any Atheists that hate anyone of faith unless they have good reason to and with some of the wackadoo's, that are out there there would be good reason to. I'm an Atheist and I have friends and work colleagues who are religious and I can tell you that they are good people and no, I don't hate them. However the fact of the matter is bad ideas should be mocked and that doesn't simply mean a belief in God. It's the shit that comes with it. It's not merely a case of saying oh you believe in God, you're an idiot. If you want to believe that and you're not hurting anyone then go right ahead. Organized religion on the other hand, that's a different matter! And if you want to excuse people funding the Catholic Church for example that's been known for covering up many of their priests buggering then go right ahead! Let's just all keep our mouths shut and show respect to them because we have to respect the beliefs of their followers in the name of misguided "tolerance".
"Religion is just mind control"
(George Carlin)
Who says Stephen Fry is intelligent?
HIs whole schtick relies on the assumption that class is related to intelligence.
Gervais only gives his opinion on religion when he’s asked he doesn’t randomly pop up talking about how stupid and ridiculous religion is
@J J Ricky Gervais works his atheist agenda in to his standup comedy shows as can be seen by anyone who watches any of his seemingly multiple DVDS (usually going 2nd hand for 50p alongside the Jimmy Carr DVD'S in CEX).
Yeah, but fact is that if nobody wants to watch Gervais satirize religion in his stand up then no one has to watch it. And to be honest, it's not as if he's doing anything that a million other comics including Frankie haven't done themselves.
@@ERobbs101 Oh, but then no one has to go on or read anything on someone's Twitter account, do they.
@@robertmcelwaine7024 You could say that about anything though. When you put an opinion out there, publicly (and yes that includes a standup show), you open yourself up to criticism.
have you not seen any of his standup???? He does it consistently.