Revenge of the Godless Geeks

Perhaps Cardinal Pell may have learned something about leading a caring, purposeful, meaningful life had he attended The Amazing Meeting last weekend. He may also have learned something about actually embracing the universal ethics and morals advanced in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Chrys Stevenson, “Revenge of the Godless Geeks“, Online Opinion, 8/12/10

 

I had a wonderful time attending James Randi’s The Amazing Meeting in Sydney and was outraged to hear Cardinal Pell’s comments on the same weekend that the faithless were

coarse,uncaring and led lives without purpose – particularly when our actions at TAM proved just the opposite!
I wrote an article, “Revenge of the Godless Geeks”, refuting Pell’s statement and it’s been published on Australia’s Online Opinion – an e-journal for social and political debate. It’s the first time I’ve been published by Online Opinion and I’m hoping that, if my article proves popular, they may let me publish again on issues of importance to the atheist/skepticalcommunities. (NB: I wasn’t paid for the article so I’m not raising funds here!)
So, I’m asking my readers and subscribers to please visit the link below, read the article and, if you think it’s interesting, ‘like’ it, tweet it, maybe make a comment and pass the link on through your own networks.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=11333

Chrys Stevenson

Related Articles

Cardinal Pell – Atheist Bible Forum

 

 

 

3 thoughts on “Revenge of the Godless Geeks

  1. AndrewFinden

    Hi Chrys…

    I’m no fan of Pell, but I think he is simply echoing the sentiments of Dawkins – without God, there is no objective purpose. Now that is not to say that most Atheists don’t have any purpose or lead lives without it; Cardinal Pell’s point is that if there is no objective purpose, such purpose is a subjective construct.

    Do you think meaning and purpose is objective or subjective?

    Invoking Hitler is never a good idea, but I think it’s quite a stretch, and perhaps a case of over-sensitivity, to suggest that he was comparing the sceptics at TAMOZ to Nazis. It seems to me that his point is that education alone, and the marginalisation of faith from public discourse will not necessarily lead to a better society. It’s almost certainly a poor choice of illustration, but I hardly think he is ‘vilifying’ anybody here.

    Likewise, using the word ‘apartheid’ when talking about an ideological segregation is perhaps unwise, but I see his point, and I think it’s a valid one. We should not segregate faith and reason.

    I find it very odd for Mr Taylor to argue for empathy and then turn around and basically say ‘Your beliefs are stupid’. Is that tolerance? And further, I don’t see how Cardinal Pell was promoting intolerance in what he is reported to have said. In fact, it appears to me that he was arguing against intolerance of faith discourse in the public arena. At absolutely no point did he say anything at all about sceptics or atheists being unwelcome, rather, he was criticising the view that faith is unwelcome in public life.

    Your article does a good job of showing how most Atheists are good, loving people who do live lives of purpose and meaning. I think Michael Nazir-Ali put it well when he once wrote:

    The question is not whether atheists can be moral but from where the moral codes come to which we seek to adhere.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s