Given that there are Christians who think the KJV really *is* the Bible, not just a translation, this hardly surprises me. After all, Dianetics was written by pulp s-f writer (definitely a warning sign for me) and it's spawned a religion/cult that looks like it may have legs.

Mendalla

Does Dawkins think he's going to thwart the election with "one liners"? Surely he could take a more influential position using his celebrity?

This is supposed to be the Twitter election so Dawkins is taking to Twitter. Nothing wrong with that. Consider how much influence Lady Gaga wields and she does most of her communicating outside of her music through Twitter. I imagine he'll be writing more prosaic pieces, though. I can't see Dawkins settling for 140 characters.

Mendalla

One liners are all the public have the attention span to digest. The 2004 and 2008 elections showed that one liners can sink or raise a candidate, and it's something that the democrats got much better with between 2004 and 2008.

Besides, you don't need a lot of lines to show how absurd the Book of Mormon really is. It's not a monumental task.

Seems like easy pickings to go after the original stories of any religion, because they are all trying to explain the unexplainable in the most soaring language possible. It's even easier to go after the new religions, because their foundings are still part of the historical record. Just like in mainstream Christianity though, I bet there are lots of Mormons and Scientologists who understand their original myths in a more poetic sense (I hope so anyway).

It's easy to write off ancient writings as poetic because there's little or no other historical record of the people involved.  When they're recent, they're more often a matter of public record.  Like with Mormonism, and especially with Scientology.

Aaron, what would it take for you to consider a cult or religion to be false rather than just an attempt to "explain the uneplainable"?

Keep in mind that "the unexplainable" is a synonym for "nonsense".

He still has a sense of humour -- it's genetic :3

Just because something has the term 'religion' assigned to it does not make it automatically sacred for everyone...and it shouldn't...

The Jews are a dangerous people because they brought to the fore smashing lies and exposing the truth, finding the various G_desses and G_ds that we make up and exposing them...

Mormonism is a religion...to sombunall people, to those who think of it as a religion and nothing more.

There is just an advantage to Mormonism that we don't have with Christianity etc is that it is a modern religion with historical events that even the average Jane can find out...

Now, of course, since we're talking politics here and aboot the most powerful office in the world, there is also an aspect of 'talk negative toward Romney & Mormonism' = helping those who build attack ads vs. him, but...

So yes, Islam was created by a mass murderering pedophile bandit with the aim to generate money for free and from which depended the most powerful and longest-lasting empire in historical record...but from which some people gain purpose and meaning from, despite the horrific nature of its creator...similar with Christianity...

We have power structures built around these religions that for centuries have tried to force people to conform and not in the good sense...

And those forces have not died off...they are still here, waiting to sell the latest snake oil...

As I've said elsewhere, the US is where it's at in the human innovation department -- with Barack being voted in, anything truly is possible.

And the Jews, which are an idea, will never die off...their legacy lives on...the forces of ignorance (which also include automatically 'respecting' a religion) will always be challenged...

All of these forces that would so love believers to continue putting their faith in the way of sharing in the common human experience...those forces who program believers to automatically think of 'atheists' as evil, Iranians as evil, those who are not of their own faith as going to hell, to think that just because someone identifies as the same belief means that they are the same as you (all religious folk are religious...all atheist folk are atheist...all Christians are automatically part of the same tribe...and so forth)

The reign of ignorance is over.  The reign of model theism is over.

Thank universe!

The fact that it's so easy to discredit the stories of religions is not a point in favour of religion.

And I'd like to see you suggest to a Mormon that the idea that the Garden of Eden being in Missouri is a poetic myth. Certainly, the LDS church has spent a good deal of money on archaeologists to try to prove that Native Americans are decended from a lost tribe from Israel. All signs point to them actually believing this crap.

Now, Mitt was a missionary. it would have been unusual for him not to believe it. And this is the man who wants the most powerful job in the world.

I'm not defending anybody here, but just sayin'

*giggle*

((Aaron))  didn't mean to dogpile on ya, old hippie you :3

Really?  This is just a distraction that you have to deal with.... evolution vs creation and being the the person at bedside .... and I understand that completely because I lived it profesionlly and personally. 

I wouldn't want the job of defending it, either. But you did say that you hope that some Scientologists and Mormons understand their myths in a more poetic sense. The simple reply is, there remains no reason to believe there are some people who call themselves Mormons or Scientologists, yet take the words of Joseph Smith or L. Ron Hubbard as anything other than fact. If anybody knows of some, let me know.

Also, remember that when people stop believing as prescribed by these faiths, they tend to be shunned by their former friends. They are young faiths, heavily controlled by a centralized group and inhospitable to ideas or beliefs that don't conform. Christianity is an old faith that has undergone reformation and schisms and in many corners has been neutered to become a docile faith, yet it remains virulent and dangerous in other churches.

Not sure about about Scientologists, but I hear about progressive Mormons all the time. As Mormonism spreads, some of the younger folks are pushing the edges, as is how it goes with religion in North America. 

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/01/romney_boosts_liberal_mormons/

Yeah, that's true...

Aaron, you've backtracked quite a bit from your attempt to defend religions in general from criticism in general.  Was that your intent?

Hmm. I wasn't defending anything, just saying the orginal myths of any religion are easy pickings. What's your point?

From that article:

So, while there is some indication that the LDS church blocked and fired their pit bull to prevent an attack on a progressive LDS member, it was likely more about preventing bad PR and less about what they actually would want to do. Lovely.

And, end of the day, Dehlin's son can't be baptized.

Also, nowhere does this article say that Dehlin doesn't believe that the Garden of Eden wasn't in Missouri. It is entirely possible not to hate gays, and still be a gullible twit. It's just an uncommon combination.

"All the world's major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance, and forgiveness can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether."

~Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama

just the latest iteration in a long list...

I would have thought that my bolding of my point would make my point easy to point out.

Actually, I think Azdgari asks a really good question:

Three days later, and yep, it's still a good question.

Glad you think so, Chansen.  It seems as if all one has to do to be given a free pass of "explaining the unexplainable" is to paint your ideas as religious ones.

chansen & Adzgari,

be patient and be content with the fact that the both of you brought it up.

Who knows, maybe you gave him something to think aboot and now it is germinating, deep in your friend's unconscious...

Actually, it's got me thinking. If a religious text is "explaining the unexplainable", then the installation instructions for our new stove is actually a religious text, as is the entire Romney election platform. Lots of things that attempt to explain the unexplainable are now, as it turns out, holy.

Not only that, but if my stove is a religion, then why did I pay tax on it?

I do not think Dawkins is actually trying to thwart the elctions or influence it any way. 

It's not that he using his celebrity to influence, as opposed to using the election to increase his celrbity or to drive traffic to his web site.