The Un”reason”able, Irrational Aspect of Richard Dawkins’ Reason Rally – Says A Secularist
March 24th, in Washington D.C. there will be held a Reason Rally. The point of the rally, however, has not so much to do with reason, but rather is another vain show of contempt for religion and religious values, and another opportunity for atheists, non-believers and people who otherwise disregard, hate and oppose religion, who find religion to be an obstacle to enlightenment, to further ridicule those who find comfort and value in religion.
Richard Dawkins, noted atheist, author, commentator and agitator of all things “unreasonable”, who will be among the guest speakers at the rally, asks the question, “Who would rally against reason”? The problem with that question is that Dawkins asks the question from an emotional point of view rather than the rational point of view he is attempting to advocate. And although his audience is, and will already be, persuaded, the groups of people Dawkins is directing his message towards (they probably will not be at the rally) will undoubtedly be unchanged and disinclined to accept anything he has to say on matters of reason. There is a “reason” for that.
Dawkins, in everything he has done, and written about, has been to discredit and debunk religion and the supernatural, and man’s need for it. What Dawkins fails to take into account, what most non-believers fail to understand, is that Christians, and all believers, will not be persuaded to accept his, Dawkins, idea of “reason” if it is only done in a manner, and in the same manner religion employed for centuries, which forces it down their throats. Whether fact or opinion, anyone who has an idea forced down their throat they don’t accept, or which makes them uncomfortable, will naturally vomit it back up. Until Dawkins, and all non-believers, understand that, and find other ways to disseminate reason, this back and forth tug-of-war will go on without much loosening of slack in the rope. In other words – a stale mate.
As the basis for this rally, Dawkins asks:
How have we come to the point where reason needs a rally to defend it?”
The answer? Because “reason” has been co-opted and commandeered by people who have ulterior motives, sinister and devious, for America and for the world. The reigns of secular reason have been taken hold of by people, like Barry Lynn and Americans United for Separation of Church and State; like American Atheists; like the ACLU; like the American Humanist Association, etc., who want to see America transformed into a society devoid of the kind morality and ethics Christians and other religious believers ascribe to and use as a basis for living their lives, and for which America was founded on.
Well, none of these secular organizations have, or have ever had America’s best intentions, or that of the American people, in their hearts and minds. And all of these secular organizations have one common thread running deep through their veins – liberalism. And it is for liberalism, and those values and morals, (not reason or rationality) that Dawkins and other humanists, atheists and secularists are fighting to replace conservative morals and values with. How is that “reasonable”?
A case in point – one “special” speaker will be Jessica Ahlquist, who is the young woman from Rhode Island who fought, and won, her case to have a religious banner removed from her public school. A banner which apparently only she was bothered with. And it begs the question, how much power are we willing to grant to one person, regardless of the opinion and rights of the majority? There was nothing unconstitutional with having that banner in the school, yet a liberal judge sided with Ahlquist against an entire, or at least a majority, of her own community. There is an eminent danger in allowing a minority to usurp a majority.
What is going to happen when America – or even when a particular community in America – becomes predominately atheist, and a Christian, now in the minority, sues to have a religious display in the public school they attend because they feel uncomfortable without some form of religious representation included in a sea of secularism and secularist ideas? How is a court going to decide that? In other words, if a court has already decided a minority has more rights than a majority, doesn’t it stand to “reason” a court must side again with the minority, in this case a Christian? Or will there always remain in effect a double standard and bias against religious people, whether they are in the majority or in the minority, and only the non-religious will have the right to be represented? That appears to be the type of “reason” Dawkins, and other liberal secularists, want in, and for, America. Is that “reasonable”?
Dawkins justifies his position by writing:
We now know the age of our universe (13-14 billion years), the age of the Earth (4-5 billion years), what we and all other objects are made of (atoms), where we come from (evolved from other species), why all species are so well adapted to their environments (natural selection of their DNA).
In other words, Dawkins takes the position that religious people, those millions of Americans who yet reject evolution, who hold to James Ussher’s version of the world, are the threat to America and to reason itself. Dawkins would like to say, and does, that the Bible is entirely made up; that it was written long ago by unknown authors, writing in their time, with only the limited understanding of the world in their time, and all that science has accomplished since that time to show, and to prove, some of which these authors have written about, and for which millions of Christians still hold true, is a dangerous impediment to reason.
However, not everything is equally dangerous, or equally a danger. There are varying levels of danger, in other words. And that someone believes in creationism, and that the Earth was literally created six thousand years ago, is far less dangerous and far less a threat to America and to “reason” than someone who believes we all ought to reject the real history of America, America’s founding and of America’s greatness and importance in, and to, this world. Believing in, and teaching our children, that Adam and Eve were literal human beings, and literally created by God as the first man and woman, is far less dangerous than teaching our children the liberal, politically correct version of America which blames and holds America – and more often than not religion, Christianity in particular – accountable, for every moral “wrong” committed by Americans throughout its history with regards to our treatment of Indians, for slavery, racism, poverty, class warfare, women’s rights, etc.
Well, where is their reason” in falsifying and degrading American history in order to eradicate these moral wrongs? Where is their reason” in condemning the religious hostility and bigotry of the past by replacing it with the humanist and secularist (liberal) hostility and bigotry of today? Where is the “reason” in rejecting many known and established facts in the Bible, because a portion of that Bible is based on supernatural events? And that some of the Bible is, and based upon, facts, doesn’t stop Dawkins and others from continuing to reject it. How is that “reason”able?
In the end, the Reason Rally will draw a crowd of however many thousands of people in support of belittling and ridiculing religion and religious values; which will rally support for a more liberal-minded outlook, for liberalism itself, and its own forms of, its own pathways for, that liberal indoctrination. What the Reason Rally will not do is answer the question – how do we, as “reasonable” and rational, intelligent, thinking human beings, use our sapiens “wise” abilities to the best of our abilities without becoming overwrought in emotions, and without becoming the kind of un”reason”able. irrational people Dawkins, and others, finds to be contemptible? In other words, the Reason Rally will showcase everything but reason itself. How is that reasonable, and how does that help the secularist cause?
Related articles
- Atheists marching on the National Mall – Richard Dawkins to be main speaker (rodiagnusdei.wordpress.com)
- Richard Dawkins is good for the Reason Rally (skepticalseeker.com)
- Who Would Rally against Reason? (str.typepad.com)
- American Atheists’ Reason Rally : eradicating Christianity, fleeing dialogue and debate (winteryknight.wordpress.com)
- Chritians Respond to the Extreme Claims of the Reason Rally (josiahconcept.org)
- Now Melvyn Bragg goes after Dawkins (whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com)
- Plan Your Own Reason Rally and Then Tell Me How It Goes (patheos.com)
- The Reason Rally and “Standards” For The Atheist/Secular Movement (aafwaterloo.wordpress.com)
- Secular Rally Doesn’t Exactly Welcome All Secularists (duanegraham.wordpress.com)
- Coming Saturday to the National Mall: “Woodstock for nonbelievers” (Hotair.com)
- Atheist rally billed as ‘coming out’ moment for nonbelievers (religion.blogs.cnn.com)
- The moment approaches: Atheist Woodstock just 12 hours away (Hotair.com)
