The American Spectator

Reader Mail

When the Going Gets Rough

12.11.06 @ 12:01AM

(Page 3 of 5)

Those who love and hate religion are alike in that they are passionate about it, while a logical atheist would be coolly indifferent thereto. Whence Dawkins' passion? What searing childhood deprivation did he endure? Or is it merely in his selfish genes?
-- David Govett
Davis, California

For people of faith, Richard Dawkins is a test of that very same faith. For people without faith, Dawkins is their Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. As a zoologist, obscure would best characterize Dawkins' standing among practicing scientists, but this very enterprising individual found a way to parlay science and faith into a lucrative business.

The key to Dawkins' success was a shrewd analysis of atheists noting that they needed the psychological comfort of faith in something beyond themselves, but something that everyone else didn't believe. Sociologists suspect that atheism is an ancient belief rather than a recent phenomena coinciding with the rise of science. Even in the religiously dominated Dark Ages where every hamlet had its village idiot, there was also a village atheist in residence. With the rise of science advancing in lockstep with a rise in the world's population, the increase in atheists wasn't surprising. But, science could now provide the foundation for a belief in something beyond themselves.

Dawkins freely admits that evolution theory is the Book of Genesis for non-believers; it answers the universal questions of "how did we get here?" and "where are we going?". Where faith provides comfort, hope and love, evolution is a cold, stark philosophy offering a vision of humanity as a cosmic accident, but a provable accident according to science. Ardent believers in the religion of science proudly point out how they readily accept a harsh picture of reality, unafraid and unashamed, unlike those weak individuals who need the emotional support of an imaginary being.

Other scientists have found Dawkins both an embarrassment and a source of inspiration. Eugenie Scott of the NCSE once testified before legislators that Dawkins was wrong, science couldn't prove the non-existence of God, but she still defended Dawkins' contribution to the advancement of science. Dawkins can say the things some scientists would like to say, but fear to say. He's their unacknowledged champion, one who holds the reactionary forces of religion at bay. His teachings help perpetuate the monetary grants flowing to science from government coffers and provide the scathing rebuttals to those who question the validity of evolution.

Dawkins may not rank among the intellectual giants, but then prophets are often humble individuals who lack intellectual rigor and rely on commonality of belief to advance their arguments. In the future, the Church of Science will gratefully admit its debt to Richard Dawkins.
-- Patrick Skurka
San Ramon, California

Richard Dawkins has nothing but contempt for God.

Conversely, God has nothing but love for Richard Dawkins.

For Mr. Dawkins's sake, I hope that he'll understand this critical concept before it's too late to change his very closed mind.
-- Gavin Valle
Peapack, New Jersey

If, as Dawkins believes, there is no Authority (God) and thus no certifiable right and wrong, how can Christian parents be "evil" and why all the zeal to stomp it out? Maybe there's a biological/hormonal explanation for his inclinations, hmm?
-- Laurey Boyd

Regarding your phrase, "the enormity of the universe." Really? I rather like the place.

Merry Christmas,
-- John McGuinness

But how shall Dawkins explain himself, a horse's ass that somehow reads, writes and speaks?

It's a miracle, isn't it ?
-- Paul Kotik
Plantation, Florida

REPUBLICAN DEFUSION
Re: W. James Antle III's Last Rights:

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, Education, Trade, Television, Business, Federal Budget, Religion, Islam, Law, Military, Iraq, Russia, United Nations, NATO, Alaska, Oil