Thought-Provoking Billboards for Sam Harris Events Rejected in Australia

Sam Harris will be speaking in Australia this January for a group called Think Inc., and advertising has already begun. The group created billboards featuring lines from some of Harris’ books… only to have them rejected for being too discriminatory.
Here are the billboards. Good luck trying to figure out who’s being discriminated against.

Our recent posters promoting the upcoming tour of An Evening with Sam Harris appear to have garnered a shortage of favour from APN Outdoor, who have refused to advertise a series of these posters as billboards. APN’s justification for this has been based on the perception that Think Inc. has violated section 2.1 of the Outdoor Media Association’s (OMA) code of ethics: “Advertisements shall not portray or depict material in a way which discriminates against or vilifies a person or section of the community on account of race, ethnicity, nationality, sex, age, sexual preference, religion, disability or political belief.”
While the Think Inc. team wholeheartedly acknowledges, appreciates and respects this section of the code of ethics, and agrees that all prospective companies seeking to advertise publicly should adhere to this code, we strongly disagree that our series of posters is in breach of it. We would like to publicly state that with them it is not at all our intention nor our mission to promote what has been perceived by APN as any kind of vilification, discrimination or bigotry towards any specific social group; what we do promote, however, is a rational and critical discourse of ideas, and the opening up of an intellectual dialogue that must be had.
To reject these posters is to censor free speech — pure and simple. Especially when other advertising agencies, such as Facebook, Google and Rock Posters have done so with no issue whatsoever.

I couldn’t agree more. What Harris said about Jesus is what Catholics actually believe. His other comments are either legitimate comments or fair questions. There’s no discrimination taking place. People are just uncomfortable having their sacred cows challenged.
Harris himself was surprised by the rejections, telling me this via email:

“Although I didn’t play any part in designing those billboards, it is fairly alarming that APN Outdoor feels that the public must be protected from them. I suppose I’ll have to go down there and tell them why they are wrong about this. I recommend that everyone eat a healthy serving of Jesus crackers before the event.”

Remember: These are topics that need to be addressed precisely because so many people prefer to avoid them entirely.


http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/10/29/thought-provoking-billboards-for-sam-harris-events-rejected-in-australia/

You're super-obsessed with religion.

Sam Harris is a joke and laughed at all over the world.

I don't support his stuff here we don't need his voice down here, we have better voices of reason already.  One of the funnier ones is Safran an non-practicing Jew 



You will love his series didge
"John Safran Versus God"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFDkVEg-cK8&list=PLF963CE89487F1A96


Not directed at you but .....

People may laugh at Harris Sass but they shouldn't. Hos arguments are never properly rebuked and would-be intellectuals like Glenm Greenwald quote him out of context all the time.

Harris has worked with the Quilliam Foundation and wrote a book about extremism with former extremist turned activist Maajid Nawaz.

He is a brilliant speaker who sees himself as spiritual and an atheist. Those against him really know nothing a out him. And if some religious apologists laugh at him so what; better than the fear people have for Islamic extremism. People should start taking religious violence seriously before it is too late.

^Eds, what is wrong with discussing religion? If people are interested in the subject?

Sorry Les, but he is a total muppet with such a self inflated ego it's a wonder he can get through a door.  A legend in his own lifetime, so he thinks.

@les
the problem is he acts like atheism is a religion and should band together to defend itself and attack other organized religions.

Dr Karl is better too
http://www.meetup.com/sydneyatheists/events/17354675/

Australia has had openly atheist politicians since the 1930's

Donald Horne, one of Australia's well-known public intellectuals, believed rising prosperity in post-war Australia influenced the decline in church-going and general lack of interest in religion. "Churches no longer matter very much to most Australians. If there is a happy eternal life it's for everyone ... For many Australians the pleasures of this life are sufficiently satisfying that religion offers nothing of great appeal", said Horne in his landmark work The Lucky Country

I prefer Dave Allen myself. Sums it up for me and with a luagh as well

Irn Bru wrote:I prefer Dave Allen myself. Sums it up for me and with a luagh as well

Absolutely!  I loved Dave Allen, clever, witty, poked fun at everything, not to mention sexy lol

Just sat and watched it,  flippin brilliant!

Veya, there us a good cause to attack at least Abrahamic religions, intellectually of course not through suicide attacks and riots. I'll look into Dr Karl after work later.

Problem is people seem to go after Harris (including you and Sass in this case), based not on what he says in full, but on what other people (his intectually bankrupt opponents like Greenwald and Reza Aslan for example) say he says.

If he was so wrong and so bad then how could he have the support of a Muslim activist like Nawaz?

Sam could save himself a lot of bother by just showng Dave's video to the audience. Hit's the mark doesn't it?

Did you know he supported Bush and the Iraq war?

He did and so did Hitchens. They were wrong to do so imo and they incorrectly saw it as partly an attack on Islamic extremism. But one bad decision doesn't discount years of well reasoned and uncounterable arguments.

in The End of Faith, Harris argues that Vietnam illustrates the humanity of America because Americans were horrified by My Lai, a response that much of the world is incapable of. After describing the massacre in detail, he says:

    This is about as bad as human beings are capable of behaving. But what distinguishes us from many of our enemies is that this indiscriminate violence appalls us. The massacre at My Lai is remembered as a signature moment of shame for the American military. Even at the time, US soldiers were dumbstruck with horror by the behaviour of their comrades. One helicopter pilot who arrived on the scene ordered his subordinates to use their machine guns against their own troops if they did not stop killing villagers. As a culture we have clearly outgrown our tolerance for the deliberate torture and murder of innocents. We would do well to realize that much of the world has not.

    (The End of Faith, Page 144)

What kind of charlatan holds up a war that slaughtered two million Vietnamese civilians as an example of America’s compassion? The only thing wrong with Vietnam was My Lai, you appreciate. The use of Agent Orange and depleted uranium, the widespread torture, Nixon’s readiness to deploy nuclear weapons, the 150,000 children born with birth defects– these had no effect on the conscience of America. But My Lai, well, that was a freak aberration.

- See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/defends-silence-slaughter#sthash.dyB1n4vx.dpuf

Come on Sass you are better than that. He is clearly using one example to show how though Americans committed atrocities they recognized them as such. However bad extremist groups like IS get, none of their supporters are now looking at what they are doing and saying its too much.

The paragraph you post is making assumptions by including a load of other horrors of that war as though Harris deliberately disregarded them. He didn't, he was making a point with My Lai as he example.

As I said, this is his enemies misquoting, decontextualising and generally misrepresenting what he is about. He wasn't writing an essay on Vietnam when he wrote that- he was demonstrating the eventual views toward such actions by Americans as opposed to views of horrific actions by religious fundamentalists.

I disagree Les, he made the point that My Lai horrified Americans and therefore they did something about the war.  My Lai went on because the war had allowed atrocities to take place, some far worse than My Lai.  He simply couldn't see it, and thought it made America ok, because never mind all the other horrifying things they had done, getting upset about My Lai made it ok.

Next time I see Corbyn getting ridiculed on his views on WWI atrocities I'll quote Harris on this.

This is about as bad as human beings are capable of behaving. But what distinguishes us from many of our enemies is that this indiscriminate violence appalls us. The massacre at My Lai is remembered as a signature moment of shame for the American military. Even at the time, US soldiers were dumbstruck with horror by the behaviour of their comrades. One helicopter pilot who arrived on the scene ordered his subordinates to use their machine guns against their own troops if they did not stop killing villagers. As a culture we have clearly outgrown our tolerance for the deliberate torture and murder of innocents. We would do well to realize that much of the world has not.

Give me Carl Sagan any day:

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot.


He knows it's not all about religion, generals and emperors, politicians and despots are very rarely guided by religion.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.”

Carl Sagan - Cosmos



“Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.”

Carl Sagan - The Demon Haunted World - Science as a Candle in the Dark

I really can't be bothered that much on all the religous crap that is posted oin here. I don't believe there is a god buti if people want to believe there is a god and an after life and they take comfort from that in times of grief or otherwise then fine - just leave them alone to do that and just concentrate and tackle the extremists who are the real problem and the preachers of hate.

Could not agree more.

We all agree on tackling extremists. But pretending that religion is never to blame is delusional nonsense. The religion is the cause or the tool with leaders bring the masses on board to do their dirty work. In either case, the fact Abrahamic religion is evidently ridiculous made up BS means it should be neither.

Standing up for 'religious belief' gives a shield to the worse views and as such the actions they lead to. Since whatever you do to 'tackle' extremism will be thwarted by the self imposed handicap of not being able to say to them and their followers, 'your beliefs ARE WRONG.'

Eilzel wrote:Veya, there us a good cause to attack at least Abrahamic religions, intellectually of course not through suicide attacks and riots. I'll look into Dr Karl after work later.

Problem is people seem to go after Harris (including you and Sass in this case), based not on what he says in full, but on what other people (his intectually bankrupt opponents like Greenwald and Reza Aslan for example) say he says.

If he was so wrong and so bad then how could he have the support of a Muslim activist like Nawaz?

Not down here so much as they are already bleeding out   it has been remarked that already in Australian politics declaring Christian, particularly church going, is seen as a negative, we have probably reached the tipping point already. (unlike the USA)


he is still wrong
I can see from his own quotes that he is not right either.
Not for the stuff he says about Islam but because he is still the same 'animal'

He preaches 'truth' then comes out with simplified Science that happily has nice clear answers and is not the cluster fuck of data that it ACTUALLY IS..
To me he comes across as saying "don't follow theists they don't have the answer but I do.. look Science " but then uses the simpleminded science that is meant for school kids to give them a grounding in the natural world and basic of Scientific thought.. If he  wants to take it to the next level and start offering 'answers' that is not good enough.

Another one to look up is Adam Spencer
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/sleekgeeks/stories/s2965189.htm

Science and irreligion do not need Sam, in my opinion for the 'fight' down here we don't want him either. He creates an climate in the Atheist camp that can too easily become the same 'fundamentalist' trap. Secularists should strive to be beyond that should try and rise above the tribal instincts and make decisions based on logic and reason.

Like this, it may be true in another nation but it is not true here 25% of people are irreligious.
 and the TRUE majority Don't give a fuck, More than double the amount of 'Christians' don't 'believe in the bible' than 'Attend church'

A 2013 survey by McCrindle Research, just 8% of Christians attend at least once per month. The survey also discovered that 47% of respondents do not go to church because it is "irrelevant to my life", 26% "don't accept how it's taught", while 19% "don't believe in the bible"

Aussies Irreligious are actually very merciful... we now think it is time to let it die in peace.

Again alll I see is people trying to create an invisible shield around beliefs.
No belief is beyond criticism and where beliefs effect the well being and equality of others they should always be criticised because there are hundreds of millions around the world that suffer because of such idiotic beliefs.

I mean if someone was going to have a talk against the belief racism, would any of the posters making the most feeble objections here, have any objections?

No, because fundementally all know that racism is a social constrict, in other words a made up belief.

So why is it everytime, when religious beliefs are shown to be poor and wrong, and very much effect the well being and equality of others, these same people then try to defend them, ignoring the fact these very same Abrahamic religions teach the worst discrimination possible. You can argue all day long about those who are literal believers or interpretations of a faith, but the fundemental fact is they all teach the worst forms of discrimination.

Thus people need to stop coming up with feeble excuses that deny people the right to challenge poor beliefs which do effect the well being and equality of others.

We don't need him HERE!! we already have among the lowest church attendance and the highest rates of people declaring themselves no organized religion. we are the one of  most anti authoritarian culture on the planet.
We don't need ANYONE coming here to promote hate. Especially not one coming to flog a dead horse, Australian Christianity is basically dead less than 5% of the population go to church. This is why when discussing spiritual stuff i get frustrated with you, this battle in won in my country. even of those that call themselves christian almost 80% pay no attention to the bible or church because they think it is archaic prejudice fairy tales (why the call themselves Christian at all I don't know... laziness i think)


the way he 'fights' Abrahamsim completely ruins DECADES of work by the Irreligious here. We have beat them not by bashing them on the head but by making miracles and pointing out that the WHOLE country, All the Art of the Aboriginals is Testament to the fact the bible is just imaginary a lie a fallacy.
You cant see rocks worn by a million years of wind and rain with cave art dating back 10,000's of years already on them and honestly say yeah the bible is right and NONE of this stuff, that makes our nation, exists even though I can see it with my own eyes.

REMEMBER this is not Europe or the Middle East, we have a long and proud history of irreligious here. and Science is treated as greater than god. Combined with the desire to right the wrongs done to aboriginals BY CHRISTIANS, and as we westerners learn more about the intricacies of the dreamtime philosophies the more we just "move beyond the old paradigm" found in Europe or the Middle East.

We don't need him, we are already leaving 'his war', he can go and recruit somewhere else. the third biggest group here is Buddhists. we convert Muslims to Agnostics secularists with out much difficulty.. if he wants that battle, take it somewhere that wants that battle.

1) You do not represent or speak for all Australians, thus you do not get to decide who comes to speak, and to say he cannot is nothing short of denial of free speech

2) He does not present hate, to say he does clearly shows you have not read any of his works, if anything he speaks of peace and to work against the problems found in religion.

3) He has already been invited, this was more about the boards created being allowed to be used, so it may do you well to actually go and you might learn something because clearly you know little about Sam, who again to claim he promotes hate is nothing short of bullshit.

4) Every country needs to understand the problems of religion, including Australia, where as far as I understand they do not yet have gay marriage.

Didge wrote:1) You do not represent or speak for all Australians, thus you do not get to decide who comes to speak, and to say he cannot is nothing short of denial of free speech
The board that banned his ad DOES
2) He does not present hate, to say he does clearly shows you have not read any of his works, if anything he speaks of peace and to work against the problems found in religion.
The Board that represents what Australians consider to be hate speech did that is why the ads are banned
3) He has already been invited, this was more about the boards created being allowed to be used, so it may do you well to actually go and you might learn something because clearly you know little about Sam, who again to claim he promotes hate is nothing short of bullshit.
He promotes hate by talking about Abrahamism as if people take it literally when as statics clearly show that number is incredibly low in Australia under 5% attend church and only a fraction of that take it literally. All he does is isolate and fundamentalize the very small number of Abrahamists we have we already convert people faster than any other nation why do we need him to take us in another direction?
4) Every country needs to understand the problems of religion, including Australia, where as far as I understand they do not yet have gay marriage.
Cause we have almost destroyed the institution of marriage completely it has the equal legal footing as de facto relationship increasing numbers of heterosexual Australians are living and having children in de facto relationships

The legal definition of a "de facto" relationship. According to the Family law Act you are in a de facto relationship with another person if you are not legally married to each other, you are not related by family and you have a relationship as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis.

He is offensive to Indigenous Australians. He is offensive to free thinking Australians. He is not popular in Australia for good reason..
We are finally starting to value and appreciate the complex in-depth philosophies of the aboriginals peoples. the irreligious have been the ones to open this dialogue... we don't need someone turning half of our 'team' against them for the crimes of Abrahamsim and the history of the northern hemisphere

Here atheist, agnostics, secular religious all get along. We strive for Utopia and we are closer than people like Sam or you can imagine. we convert Muslims by the fact we are separate from that old bullshit. Religion is not taken very seriously here. he will not help our society, in our society what he says in not going to convert anyone...
this tour is a wankfest flogging a dead horse for fundamentalist Atheists...

We can better remove the last vestiges of Abrahamism in our culture through adoption of the older better more natural native philosophies and fable. (not the Abrahamist people that are also secular but the concepts and discrimination that goes with it)

the stories about roos and emus are not about roos and emus, they are like Aesop fables. the lessons are in the stories that are recorded in pictures not words. It is the polar opposite of Abrahamsim it re enforces the idea that man is NOT special, the world is NOT made for us. Our soul is no more than the soul of roo or emu for we are all just souls existing in this dimension in space and time.

IF we translate their tales honestly and fairly, put in the effort to add the embellishments of our language theirs is one of if not the best, most inclusive and 'real' there is, it's bible is the natural world (since there are so few corresponding words for 'Spiritual ideas' as Their language is so much more complex than our in that area, they have a dozen words for one of ours but really it is dozen words for a dozen different statements but only one of ours is close to any of them)
it is not only the oldest still followed religion it is the Oldest religion we know exists. white man has damaged it badly, I like many free thinking Australians want to protect what is left, thankfully the irreligious contains many freethinkers and the movement does that (but more needs to be done to protect their sacred sites) Even many that on the census put Christian feel the same.

us new white aussies (even the convicts are only here for 9 generations max) are finally giving respect to the religion, culture and peoples that are the First Australians. Multiculturalism means that deferral to a British/European history is not really palatable for many... so we look to our lands history it's peoples... no surprise it is the irreligious that actually LISTEN to what the Aboriginals have to say.. but what is a surprise is how much it matches the ideals of environmentally conscious, multicultural, inclusive society ... maybe it shouldn't be ...  but lets face early white Aussie were racists.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:1) You do not represent or speak for all Australians, thus you do not get to decide who comes to speak, and to say he cannot is nothing short of denial of free speech
The board that banned his ad DOES
2) He does not present hate, to say he does clearly shows you have not read any of his works, if anything he speaks of peace and to work against the problems found in religion.
The Board that represents what Australians consider to be hate speech did that is why the ads are banned
3) He has already been invited, this was more about the boards created being allowed to be used, so it may do you well to actually go and you might learn something because clearly you know little about Sam, who again to claim he promotes hate is nothing short of bullshit.
He promotes hate by talking about Abrahamism as if people take it literally when as statics clearly show that number is incredibly low in Australia under 5% attend church and only a fraction of that take it literally. All he does is isolate and fundamentalize the very small number of Abrahamists we have we already convert people faster than any other nation why do we need him to take us in another direction?
4) Every country needs to understand the problems of religion, including Australia, where as far as I understand they do not yet have gay marriage.
Cause we have almost destroyed the institution of marriage completely it has the equal legal footing as de facto relationship increasing numbers of heterosexual Australians are living and having children in de facto relationships  

The legal definition of a "de facto" relationship. According to the Family law Act you are in a de facto relationship with another person if you are not legally married to each other, you are not related by family and you have a relationship as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis.

He is offensive to Indigenous Australians. He is offensive to free thinking Australians. He is not popular in Australia for good reason..
We are finally starting to value and appreciate the complex in-depth philosophies of the aboriginals peoples. the irreligious have been the ones to open this dialogue... we don't need someone turning half of our 'team' against them for the crimes of Abrahamsim and the history of the northern hemisphere        

Here atheist, agnostics, secular religious all get along.  We strive for Utopia and we are closer than people like Sam or you can imagine. we convert Muslims by the fact we are separate from that old bullshit. Religion is not taken very seriously here. he will not help our society, in our society what he says in not going to convert anyone...
this tour is a wankfest flogging a dead horse for fundamentalist Atheists...

1) Then the board that considered it hate speech is full of left wing idiots who have no comprehension of hate speech

2) People do take Abrahamic faiths literally and to deny this shows you have no comprehension that they actually do and are denying that they do. To cllaim this is hate speech is a pure invention and agaimn actually defending religious beliefs that go against the well being and equality of groups of people. The last I checked in all 3 faiths they are against homosexuality for example and it is left wing stupidity that seeks to protect this discrimination by claiming to criticise this is hate speech. I think you will find that promoting that homosexuality is a crime and to punish people being in love is hate speech

3) Australia does not have marriage equality based off religious bullshit and no matter what claptrap and left wing bullshit you promote to protect religious beliefs they discriminate or do I take the view of a left wing person who claims to speak for Australia when he does not. There is nothinjg worse when  people claim to stand for being against discrimination when they stand with discriminatioin beliefs, of which the Abrahamic faiths are. Not only do they discriminate against women, homosexuals etc, but they teach a discriminated belief against non-believers.

4) To claim he is discriminating against Indegeneous Australians and you offer no examples, shows you are just inventing bullshit now. At no point has he made any such accusations nor has he made any hate speech against any group but being able to show the problems found within relkigious, and there is nothing worse than left wing idiots that seek to protect such beliefs that have no evidence but are the views of man made myths. Your bullshit strive for utopia fails to understand there is extremism in Australia and all you are doing is inventing bollocks against an individual who in reality has far more intelligence and underdstanding than you will ever hope to achieve in a thousand life times.


There is nothing worse than left wing idiots who seeks to defend beliefs that are against the well being and equality of others, because they wish to protect the religious insensitivities of religions.
Sorry that is horseshit and its time we stop pandering to beliefs that are discriminating against others.
Nobody is denying them their beliefs, but these beliefs are in fact born from a belief of superiority over others, which is where racism stems from. The fact is the views he stated are not hate speech but fundementally what is wrong within these religions.

Beliefs are beliefs and have no right to any protection  when they effect the well being and equality of others and its now got to the stage we are telling you left wing idiots, you are part of the problem, not the solution, because you invent nonsense claiming hate speech whilst protecting the hate from these beliefs.

Anyway the event is going ahead and thank goodness for free speech as its clear some Aussies are in need of a good dose of common sense and a reality check.

You are Wrong for down here.
As Australians it Should be treated as A National Duty to defend the Spiritual beliefs of the Aboriginals and their sacred sites. this sentiment is becoming increasingly popular.
it is a small step toward reparation for taking paradise off them and living here now.
I don't care if it is an Abrahamist or Atheist...
The Aboriginals may not have matched others for technology and construction but they are up there in philosophy, theirs is as wise as the wisest ancient Greek and can stand in it's own right along side Chinese zen (2 that I consider to be the best of Eurasia)


...And Australia doesn't have marriage equality because it isn't an election winning issue because not even gay people care enough about it. we will soon anyway, now Abbott is gone and that was one of the reasons he got tossed, he was letting his religion override secular ideals even the secular Christians turned off him...

So why do we need Sam we didn't even wait until an election to get rid of a PM that had become too openly Abrahamist.... like I said coming to Australia is pointless.. we are what he preaches..

but we have seen there are innocents we would hurt by being as hard line as him. Namely the indigenous that are finally getting a hand from White Australia to protect some of their Spiritual philosophies.

His message is for Europe and the Middle East.
The USA needs a 'irreligious messiah' but it isn't Sam.... not sure who is though...

that's my opinion and i don't not support him having a show but Like 'the festival of dangerous ideas', he should not be taken as 'good' or an authoritative voice. his statements should be judged along with his philosophies along side others, compare him to the roo for he is but an man and man is but an animal. just like the dreamtime stories teach. And in case you don't get that it is like in the last religious thread, human's instinctual reaction to a perceived threat is often aggression... Atheist are as guilty of that as anyone else, if you could look at from a Neutral position you could see that Sam is the atheist voice that is most guilty of that, he is worse than Dawkins by far. Dawkins when in proper debate and not atheist/abrahamsit wankfests at least concedes most points as soon as it reaches the agreement that Abrahamism/Literalism is wrong.



And you are really struggling if you are saying the religion with brother roo and sister emu thinks some of it's people are arbitrarily better than some other people... they literally call themselves equal with other animals, they don't discriminate by limiting it to homo sapiens

They missed this quote:

"If I could wave a magic wand and get rid of either rape or religion, I would not hesitate to get rid of religion."

- Sam Harris

It seems white mans burden has transformed in the 21st century by men such as Dawkins, Harris and his sheep like Didge and Les.

Sam Harris is coming to civilise the Aborignies and you, Veya.

Well no surprise the village idiot stuck in the 7th century fails to grasp the talsk are on the abrahamic faiths, which he himself follows such discrminating beliefs. The very same beliefs that deny the well being and euality of others.
Hey ho, some people seem to think some minor warlord that heard voices in his head, would be speaking to something of such intelligence, which would have the same emotions as humans.
Of course most rational people would understand something of such intelligence would never be controlled or ruled by such emotions. But then people who fear need something to believe and this fear drives them into irrational beliefs.

Hence why people like Sam and Dawkins, who make Zack look like the inane daft idiot that he is, will always be vocal against discriminating beliefs.

Notice how even Didge doesn't have a response to Sam Harris's preferrence to rape over religion.

Sheep cannot think for themselves. They can only attack. HA HA!

Didge wrote:Well no surprise the village idiot stuck in the 7th century fails to grasp the talsk are on the abrahamic faiths, which he himself follows such discrminating beliefs. The very same beliefs that deny the well being and euality of others.
Hey ho, some people seem to think some minor warlord that heard voices in his head, would be speaking to something of such intelligence, which would have the same emotions as humans.
Of course most rational people would understand something of such intelligence would never be controlled or ruled by such emotions. But then people who fear need something to believe and this fear drives them into irrational beliefs.

Hence why people like Sam and Dawkins, who make Zack look like the inane daft idiot that he is, will always be vocal against discriminating beliefs.

Can't believe you compared me with the intellects of Dawkims and Harris.

I'm actually flattered.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Notice how even Didge doesn't have a response to Sam Harris's preferrence to rape over religion.

Sheep cannot think for themselves. They can only attack. HA HA!

Well considering all the abrahamic faiths endorse rape, marital rape and discrimination against women, you would go a long way to resolving the problem of rape.
But then a dumbass has not the comprehension to think that through I guess

You are the sheep, my boy ha ha ha

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:Well no surprise the village idiot stuck in the 7th century fails to grasp the talsk are on the abrahamic faiths, which he himself follows such discrminating beliefs. The very same beliefs that deny the well being and euality of others.
Hey ho, some people seem to think some minor warlord that heard voices in his head, would be speaking to something of such intelligence, which would have the same emotions as humans.
Of course most rational people would understand something of such intelligence would never be controlled or ruled by such emotions. But then people who fear need something to believe and this fear drives them into irrational beliefs.

Hence why people like Sam and Dawkins, who make Zack look like the inane daft idiot that he is, will always be vocal against discriminating beliefs.

Can't believe you compared me with the intellects of Dawkims and Harris.

I'm actually flattered.

Compare, you are not even worth their consideration, mainly as you think something written centuries ago is the views of something of supreme intelligence.
What that shows is you lack any intelligence.

To prove why Zack is the village idiot

Still no response or explanation of:

"If I could wave a magic wand and get rid of either rape or religion, I would not hesitate to get rid of religion."

- Sam Harris

Well how many people would have not been raped, murdered, persecuted, child abuse, child rap,  child marriage, forced marriage, honour killings, exploited, enslaved etc over the centuries due to religion?


I shall let the village idiot work that out for himself, but I guess such a pea brain is incapable.

I cannot believe a Muslim; someome who follows a millenia old book written by desert dwelling warrior people; is calling anyone else a sheep lol

Eilzel wrote:I cannot believe a Muslim; someome who follows a millenia old book written by desert dwelling warrior people; is calling anyone else a sheep lol

Then let's see if you can explain Sam Harris's quote on rape.

Which one would you prefer to "get rid" (not reduce but eliminate): rape or religion.

Even Didge is not so stupid to think that all rape is caused by religion. So getting rid of religion, even by the most conservative metrics, will not eliminate rape.

So Les, how would you use your magic wand?

1. No religion but some rape
2. No rape but some religion
3. Just go BAH! I'm a sheep.

Didge wrote:Well how many people would have not been raped, murdered, persecuted, child abuse, child rap,  child marriage, forced marriage, honour killings, exploited, enslaved etc over the centuries due to religion?


I shall let the village idiot work that out for himself, but I guess such a pea brain is incapable.

I see the village idiot cannot answer the points at hand and say how many billions would not have suffered from all these problems with religion.

One last chance for the village idiot

Didge wrote:

Didge wrote:Well how many people would have not been raped, murdered, persecuted, child abuse, child rap,  child marriage, forced marriage, honour killings, exploited, enslaved etc over the centuries due to religion?


I shall let the village idiot work that out for himself, but I guess such a pea brain is incapable.

I see the village idiot cannot answer the points at hand and say how many billions would not have suffered from all these problems with religion.

One last chance for the village idiot

You really should have had a wank this morning. You're getting cranky again

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:


I see the village idiot cannot answer the points at hand and say how many billions would not have suffered from all these problems with religion.

One last chance for the village idiot

You really should have had a wank this morning. You're getting cranky again

So no intelliegnt answer from the village idiot, who cannot comprehend that billions would not have suffered without religion.
This clearly did not compute with that pea brain of yours.
Just think, without religion.
No Holocaust.
No slave trade both western and Islamic.
No Crusades.
No islamic butchery of India.
No genocide of the indegeneous South American indians.

Do you wish me to continue dummy?

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

You really should have had a wank this morning. You're getting cranky again

So no intelliegnt answer from the village idiot, who cannot comprehend that billions would not have suffered without religion.
This clearly did not compute with that pea brain of yours.
Just think, without religion.
No Holocaust.
No slave trade both western and Islamic.
No Crusades.
No islamic butchery of India.
No genocide of the indegeneous South American indians.

Do you wish me to continue dummy?

Lol! Stop being hysterical and read my post to Les.

You really are slow.

Rape is horrific Zack, but murder is worse.

Religion causes murder, and has done so for thousands of years.

If murder is worse than rape.
And religion causes a lot of murder.
Then I would get rid if religion before rape.

And as for sheep slurs. Be aware I did already made it clear I disagreed with Hitchens and Harris on Iraq. I disagree with both on other things too.

I bet there is NOTHING you would disagree with Muhammed on, nothing.