Colbert v Dawkins

Given that (thanks to PZ Myers) 90% of my current visitors are atheists, I’m going to keep writing about atheism.

Here you go, a nice dialogue, between two people, about God… both are smug.

Everybody wants to claim Colbert as one of their own – either he’s a Christian satire, a conservative satire, an actual conservative, or a Christian… He’s probably a mix of all of those. He certainly has a track record of active involvement in church. And he looks like Will Bailey from the West Wing…

Anyway. This made me laugh. If only atheists were really like Richard Dawkins. Online, anyway.

The Colbert Report Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Richard Dawkins
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Michael Moore

The author

Nathan runs St Eutychus. He loves Jesus. His wife. His daughter. His son. His other daughter. His dog. Coffee. And the Internet. He is the campus pastor at Creek Road South Bank, a graduate of Queensland Theological College (M. Div) and the Queensland University of Technology (B. Journ). He spent a significant portion of his pre-ministry-as-a-full-time-job life working in Public Relations, and now loves promoting Jesus in Brisbane and online. He can't believe how great it is that people pay him to talk and think about Jesus.

11 thoughts on “Colbert v Dawkins”

  1. >Here you go, a nice dialogue, between two people, about God… both are smug.

    You really have a thing about “smug” and atheists don’t you? You’re not alone, I find a lot of theists backlash against the growth of atheism is manifested by attaching negative connotations when describing atheists. “Militant” is the usual one but arrogant and smug can also be used.

    This is of course a mild “ad hominem” defense, see by calling atheists names you suggest you don’t have to deal with what they’re saying because it all comes not from reason or logic but rather petty emotional or egotistical motivations.

    So when I say Christianity is patently ridiculous because it is a whole religion centered around the idea of a god sacrificing himself to himself so he wouldn’t be angry with the creation he created it’s easier to reply with an accusation that I’m “smug” rather than to explain why I’m wrong.

    But taking the easy way in life is a hallmark of theism and theists; you want a god to do the heavy lifting in your life so small surprise that you’re lazy about everything.

    >He’s probably a mix of all of those

    The Colbert Report is a satirical take on Bill O’Reilly and the media in general performed by a comedian who is a master of “tongue in cheek” comedy. He skewers “wingnut” America and if you can’t get that joke well that means that the joke is firmly on and about you.

  2. Thanks Nathan, that made me laugh too. (The above comment made me chuckle, but only because I actually know you, and can see how misguided those assumptions are!)

    Salvage obviously skipped the disclaimer- http://st-eutychus.com/disclaimer/ -or has flat batteries in his/her irony-meter. (or perhaps more likely, is American and can’t tell when Australians are being facetious)

  3. Never saw this disclaimed and even if I had it wouldn’t have changed my comments in the slightest.

    But what a neat little device the blog’s author uses to protect his ego it could be shortened up to “If he’s wrong about something it’s only because he means to be for his own art and entertainment”.

    Of course that means that everything he says is pretty much worthless.

    1. “Of course that means that everything he says is pretty much worthless.”

      Now we’re on the same page. If I had something of worth to say I’d have a much bigger audience don’t you think?

      Why are you here?

  4. “This is of course a mild “ad hominem” defense, see by calling atheists names you suggest you don’t have to deal with what they’re saying.”

    Not really, I’m happy to engage with you on your core assumptions and how you ascribe too much importance to evidence based empiricism. There are things that we can not observe (and I don’t mean air) that we rely on the interpretation of others. Like history. Science can not test historic human conduct.

    How do we know anything of history using your framework for understanding the world?

    “because it all comes not from reason or logic but rather petty emotional or egotistical motivations.”

    Or rather, it comes from experience. Every time I have conversations with atheists I don’t know personally it has descended into name calling and been thoroughly unproductive. And it’s not because I go in to a discussion and start calling people names…

    “The Colbert Report is a satirical take on Bill O’Reilly and the media in general performed by a comedian who is a master of “tongue in cheek” comedy. He skewers “wingnut” America and if you can’t get that joke well that means that the joke is firmly on and about you.”

    Yes, well Stephen Colbert is also a real person, a Sunday School teaching Catholic. Are you suggesting this has no bearing on the character he plays?

    I’m pretty sure I got the joke. Perhaps you’d like to lecture me on it further, since you have such a firm grasp on when people aren’t being serious and when they are.

  5. >Why are you so aggressive?

    Heh, this isn’t even close to me being aggressive.

    Tell me that The Watchman movie was good and then you’ll see some sparks.

  6. I watched on an Etihad flight… I think it was heavily edited somehow.. just re-read your review and felt I’d watched a completely different film!

  7. >I watched on an Etihad flight…

    I’m a big fan of the comic book from way back, they mangled it, if you liked the movie pick up the tradpaperback book and you’ll understand that it’s right to hate the film.

Comments are closed.