Why does Richard Dawkins sing Christmas carols?

I don't go out of my way to use these words. They have become necessary to communicate in a standard way.Someone who avoided these words on the grounds of pagan origin could clearly be said to be more concerned than I am about what they say and do. It's all relative. I didn't say they should be concerned. I only observed that some are not concerned with the significance.

why? it's not going to produce anything. he's a great scientist when he has his science hat on. all else, he's a jerk. why do i say this when i don't know him? because all the evidence he's presented to the public demonstrates that he's unnecessarily judgmental of everyone who disagrees with him. discussing him won't convert anyone. it also won't result in any substantial addition to knowledge. it won't result in anything but more accusations about what awful people the religious are (there's enough of that) and more accusations about what assholes atheists are (there's also enough of that). and in the mean time, we reasonable people who just wish people would stop attacking each other about every damned thing get stepped on most of all. i'm somehow enabling murderers, but i can't be, because they don't recognize that i'm a christian. i'm a fucking dirty heathen to everyone. i get it. gret. you've made your point. go find a new hobby.it's not productive in any way.

Good. Dr. Dawkins is unconcerned that xmas is currently given a xian gloss and you are unconcerned that you use words that have a pagan origin.As it should be.

Good. We can stop discussing the Dr.-Dawkins-is-a-jerk thing then.

no. because that is productive. it's very productive to discuss what methods do and do not work to prevent fundamentalism and extremism. one of those things that does not work is being a jerk and alienating moderates, especially those who actively work to reduce extremism.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

Oh for the love of pete, Brenna.I said another Dawkins thread would be more appropriate!Why don't you start a "Dr. Dawkins is a moderate-alienating jerk" thread?

He is also unconcerned that he is celebrating a pagan festival and going out of his way to make utterances in which he does not believe.

I denounce all superstition ie ghosts, talking with the dead, lucky numbers, bad luck, magic, astrology, spiritualism, parapsychology etc. no matter from where the source.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other

You're just not going to let this go, are you, Sin?OK. Let's have at it then.How do you suppose Dr. Dawkins is "going out of his way" to celebrate a holiday?

Unless he is possessed, his Christmas carolling is intentional.He could avoid it effortlessly, unless he is fighting internal spirits.

Exactly. The people in the middle end up looking like extremists to both sides, and get blasted by both just for saying maybe we shouldn't be so mean to one another.

---

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard

Intentional is different from "going out of one's way".You intentionally use pagan words like Wednesday and Thursday. However, you made the point that you "don't go out of your way" to use them. So. The question isn't, "Does Dr. Dawkins intentionally celebrate a pagan holiday?". The question is:How does Dr. Dawkins "go out of his way" to celebrate a pagan holiday?

He is going out of his way.The difference is that he would not be inconvenienced by not singing Christmas carols.I, on the other hand, would be inconvenienced by not using the standard words for the days of the week.Edited by sinequanon, : No reason given.

Remarkable. So you are intimately familiar with the particulars of Dr. Dawkins personal life.Perhaps you'd like to enlighten the rest of us.Is his wife an atheist?Does his wife celebrate xmas?

I doubt that you have the courage to denounce Alfred Russel Wallace, co-discoverer of natural selection. Wallace has carefully documented, using the scientific method, the existence of a spirit world. His papers on this subject are remarkable to say the least and extremely convincing. Since I am a supernaturalist I already know that a spirit world exists. Wallace was not delusional or tricked in any way since he spent many years investigating paranormal activity. Since, like I said, he co-discovered natural selection, the dismissal of Wallace's documentation of a spirit world by fellow evolutionists goes to show that they are not interested in evidence that harms the Atheist worldview.Ray