If you haven't, you should read the comments in response to my recent debate with philosopher Daniel Dennett both here as well as on the atheist site richarddawkins.net. From the atheists you hear statements like this: "D'Souza is a goddamned idiot." "Odious little toad." "D'Souza is full of shit." "A smug, joyless twit." "Total moron." "Little turd." "Two-faced liar." Etc, etc. Now admittedly the topic of God v. atheism can be an emotional one, but you will find no comparable invective on the Christian side. Why then are so many atheists so angry? One reason I think is that they are God-haters. Atheists often like to portray themselves as "unbelievers" but this is not strictly accurate. If they were mere unbelievers they would simply live their lives as if God did not exist.
I don't believe in unicorns, but then I haven't written any books called The End of Unicorns, Unicorns are Not Great, or The Unicorn Delusion. Clearly the atheists go beyond disbelief; they are on the warpath against God. And you can hear their bitterness not only in their book titles but also in their mean-spirited invective.
Here is a second reason the atheists sound so angry. They are not used to having their sophistries exposed. For the past three years the new atheists have had a virtually free ride. Dawkins and Hitchens make outrageous claims ("religion poisons everything") and media pundits like Lou Dobbs and Tim Russert fawn all over them.
But in the past few months I've been meeting the leading atheist spokesmen in open debate, and challenging them on the basis of the same reason and science and evidence that they say vindicates their claims. After my first debate with Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic magazine, several atheists on Dawkins' site said, "Well, D'Souza won that debate, but wait till he meets Hitchens. Hitchens will wipe the floor with him. D'Souza RIP." Then after I debated Hitchens the atheists said, "Oh no, this one didn't go as planned. Hitchens didn't do so well." Another commented that atheists could not afford to lose two in a row. Even so, one atheist hopefully noted that Hitchens was not the right guy to debate me; rather, Daniel Dennett has the scholarly weight to do the job.
Now after my Dennett debate, what's the verdict? Well, the audience was full of Dennett supporters who began with enthusiastic applause for him but, as the debate went on, fell largely silent. Several came up to me afterward and told me that I had won. Dennett himself seemed dispirited after the event. Even so, when I posted the debate on my blog, the atheists went into damage control mode. The debate was instantly posted on atheist sites, and atheists rushed to this blog to vote Dennett the winner. This effort gave atheists an early lead, but when the votes were tallied I was the victor. Interestingly my margin of victory was even bigger than that for the resolution, suggesting that several people voted that "God Is a Man-Made Invention" and still thought I won the debate.
A good way to assess a debate is to see what the partisans on each side say. Among Christians the verdict is unanimous. Sample comment from Townhall.com: "My heart went out to Professor Dennett because he was so totally over-matched in this debate You totally demolished him as you have the other atheists you have debated." But all you have to do is to go to atheist sites to see that many atheists also think that I won, although this is sometimes very grudgingly admitted. Here is a sampling of comments that I've taken from richarddawkins.net. "I was at the debate and thought Dennett did not prove his point." "I'm so tired of these D'Souza debates. The more people we send his way the larger his smile grows." "I feel such debates should stop." "I love Dennett's ideas about atheism but I do think he handled this debate poorly against Dinesh." "Ok, Dennett sucked...Dennett's type of responses just made him look like an ass." "Dinesh is an amazingly talented orator, considering how hopeless a case he is arguing." "Hitchens has had a shot, as has Dennett, and neither has succeeded in demolishing D'Souza. D'Souza has a very effective debating technique. Not only did a lot of atheists get up and fire straw-man arguments at D'Souza that he was easily able to counter and make them look foolish, but Dennett...lost his composure and his train of thought." "Let's face it, this guy has taken our best shots and still come out looking good. Maddening."
So where does this leave the atheists? These guys now seem to be 0-3. Some of the blog posters on Dawkins' site are calling on Sam Harris and Dawkins himself to step into the ring. Harris seems willing, although he has approached me about doing a written rather than an oral debate. Dawkins continues to avoid my invitation to debate on a secular West Coast campus, leading one atheist to dub him Richard the Chickenhearted. I really hope that Dawkins proves he has the courage of his convictions. (How brave is it to beat up on former televangelist Ted Haggard?) Otherwise the self-styled "brights" are going to face the empirical fact that when it comes to defending their views, atheists are basically losers. Remarkably, the "party of reason" is simply incompetent to vindicate those claims against an advocate of the "party of faith." Now what could be more embarrassing than that?
Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...
Mo's Blog Roll
Resources
Why Atheists Are So Angry
Posted Dec 4th 2007 8:36PM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Christianity, Controversy, Atheism
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Mo's Video
The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...
Most Popular Stories
- Don't Like Goodbyes...
- Pittsburgh Steelers: Is it Time to get some Cheerleaders?
- How NOT to give an Oscar Acceptance Speech
- Could Jim Belushi Win the Nobel Peace Prize?
- Spring Break Sexy T-Shirt Removal Training!
- Quest for the Crown 5: Plastic Wrap to Make you Less Fat!
- Quest for the Crown 4: Work Those Heels!
Most Commented On
-
Coming Soon
Recent Comments
Mo's Bio
Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.
Top News Headlines
Political Machine Blog
- Sean Hannity: 'Jon Stewart Was Right' About Swapped Demonstration Footage
- Dede Scozzafava: No Regrets and a Mission to Promote Independent Thinking Within GOP
- Physicians Group Pushes Government To Reconsider Marijuana For Medical Use
- Opinion About Michelle Obama In The South Breaks On Party Lines
- Growing Up at 16 -- Ready or Not
- Students Lost Maine Gay Marriage Battle, But Not the War
- Obama Gets Lower Marks in the South Than Nationally
Reader Comments ( Page 80 of 80)
1186. God's wrath will be poured out in Hell for eternity on all who refuse to worship Him now. Sinners in Hell will never repent - therefore, they will be angry at God for eternity. Angry atheists are warming up, literally, for the anger-filled eternity that awaits them - unless of course, God is gracious and allows them to repent.
theajane at 5:31PM on Dec 12th 2007
1187. someone please tell me they have died, met their god,and tell me what he looks like. when someone can tell me that, then maybe i will believe in a god or an afterlife. i think most people are afraid of dying and conjured up a "heaven" or "hell" to provide themselves some comfort than to just think they will die and just be worm food. to me dead is dead. i don't need a god or an after-life. being worm food isn't a bad thing. in this day and age of trying to live green, what's so wrong with dying green? i'm certainly not an angry athiest, and personally don't give a rat's patootie what anyone's religious or non- religious beliefs are. we should all be able to express our beliefs without being critisised for them. i make no apology for being an athiest. i don't need to. i exist because i do. that's good enough for me.
rose at 11:38PM on Dec 12th 2007
1188. observant>
Why haven't you answered my question about christmas and easter?
I am glad I have given you a reason to die. I just love your charitable christian view, it is so inclusive.
PS please answer other questions about baptists.
JefFlyingV at 12:45AM on Dec 13th 2007
1189. Fly V,
Why haven't you answered my question about christmas and easter?
I am glad I have given you a reason to die. I just love your charitable christian view, it is so inclusive.
PS please answer other questions about baptists.
JefFlyingV
--------------------------------------
You have not given me a reason to die. That is just one of the problems with most atheist as yourself.
You over analyze comments, you twist words and sentences as to change there true intent.
As to your questions concerning christmas and easter ,those are national holidays that most people enjoy together with their familys.
You no doubt have a job in which you get holiday pay for being off. why dont you tell your company that you do not believe in christmass or easter, and you do not wish to be compensated for those national observed holidays, you hypocrite.
You and your atheistic comrades could not begin to understand the teaching of Gods word , you prove that with stupid remarks as this when you said, "I JUST LOVE YOUR CHARITABLE CHRISTIAN VIEW".
It seems to me you can put it out, but you cant take it. What is it, to much reality and truth for you?
Why dont you share your intellect with us all today buy telling us , How a bang could develop without matter?
Please tell how life on earth could begin from non-life.
Please explain how the laws that govern the universe and nature, can exist by way of a blast.
Explain The power that regulates the order of which the systematic universe obeys.
Evolution is nothing more than an change that takes place thru process of time.
That is seen in life ,thru birth of a child until it expires in death from old age, as well as nature.
Time it self is a law of regulated order.But to suggest that life originated from a chemical pool is nothing more than mans rejection of his creator, and his quest to abolish the moral dictate of God.
Observant at 9:21AM on Dec 13th 2007
1190. d'souza says athiests are basically losers because they don't believe in christianity? i can not believe a semi-bright person could write a statement and generalize a whole segment of a population. have you met all athiests, d'souza? who's sitting in judgement now with this opinion? your speaking for your god? we are to take your views as truth because why? you wrote a book and now everyone who has doubts or doesn't agree with your opinion is a loser? if this is how christians judge others no wonder there are wars over religion. if you need to believe in a god to find peace in your life, or a reason for living, fine. but you shouldn't sit in judgement of others who don't. you really sound like one angry christian.
rose at 10:06PM on Dec 13th 2007
1191. whoa, christopher...no need for violence...aren't you taking this a bit...seriously?
hyllaeria at 7:06PM on Dec 14th 2007
1192. sherri the problem with your logic is this: athiests do not have consequences for a disbelief of any religion. consequences implies a belief system. since there is no god there can not be any consequences. i have a belief system in the human race. i believe my actions towards a person has consequences. there are no consequences towards a god or a diety that does not exist. i have no hate towards anyone. i do not hate christians or anyone of any faith. i do not expound on my beliefs to people of faith. i do not need to. i am so tired of hearing the same tirade from peoples of faith that i will burn in a hell, or be turned away from a gods love. i just don't understand why people of faith demand i believe in their views and condemn athests as "losers." as i've stated before the bible is simply a book written and interperted by man. interesting reading, but truth? when has man ever told the truth. truth is subjective.
rose at 10:49PM on Dec 15th 2007
1193. Or none of what you mention Randy.
I live in a "christian society". Where does god come from? Does it have brothers and sisters? I contend that the idea and belief of god is a man made invention. If the god of christianity is so good and powerful, why doesn't every person on this planet adhere to a christian god?
Christianity has changed over the years, the christianity of today is nothing like the christianity of 200 A.D.
The bible is old science.
JefFlyingV at 8:42PM on Dec 17th 2007
1194. to jefflyingv:
the bible isn't science. nothing in the bible is scientific. it's just a book, written and translated over and over again by men. and a god is a man made invention. maybe to instill fear, provide relief or whatever it is some people feel they're missing in their life. i don't understand thier need, but that's cool.
rose at 10:00PM on Dec 17th 2007
1195. Rose, I call it old science because this is what was created at its time to explain life and death, mans place in the environment. I believe science has advanced past this early stage.
JefFlyingV at 10:32PM on Dec 17th 2007