Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Evidence that there are a lot of things you don’t need to be smart about to be a physicist

arroba Email

From retired phyicist and promoter of atheism, Victor Stenger:

It’s time for secularists to stop sucking up to Christians—and Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and any others who claim they have some sacred right to decide what kind of society the rest of us must live in or what a human being can do with her (or his) own body. The good news is that young people are joining the rising atheist movement in increasing numbers. I have not met one yet who is an accommodationist. I have great hope that in perhaps another generation, America will have joined Europe and the rest of the developed world in shucking off the rusty chains of ancient superstition.

– “Why Religion Must Be Confronted,” Council for Secular Humanism,

So, if all these people are citizens and taxpayers, they still don’t have “some sacred right to decide what kind of society the rest of us must live in” … ?

Actually, they do have “some sacred right.” It is called “representative government.” Held by most to be a benefit.

About the young atheists, of whom he says, “I have not met one yet who is an accommodationist”: The correct word for them is thugs. In Britain, yobs. And, whether they like it or not, they will accommodate others’ civil rights – or face the consequences.

File with: “Darwinist fascism

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Locke was a skeptic who believed in Nature or "Nature's God" to provide the bedrock of operating principles. He argued that because no man knows the mind of God that our judgments over each other are flawed and he relied on God to sort it out. This is the basis of our theory of liberty that one man does not necessarily know the better for another man, but also that it is an affront against the nature of this system that men should presume too much upon another man. Thus there is a difference between "Freedom of conscience" and libertarian nihilism. The politicization of Science as authority is an argument toward the erasure of civil rights and representative government, and an invitation to be governed "for one's own good". Thus, the argument to rule by "best consensus of experts" is actually an appeal to remove representative government, as the trends in the courts clearly show. jjcassidy
Sad, I must hang my head in shame for my profession on this one. kairosfocus

Leave a Reply