Why debate dogma?

Submit your video and begin subtitling.

Welcome to dotSUB!

Any Video Any Language

On dotSUB you can view, upload, transcribe, and translate any video into and from any language.

To get started and create your own subtitles, click on the yellow "get started" button below!

Other videos from patcondell

The crooked judges of Amsterdam

Thank God for Andy Choudary

Aggressive atheism

Duration: 6 minutes and 34 seconds

Country: UK

Language: English

License: CC Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike

Genre: Video Blog

Producer: www.patcondell.net

Director: Pat Condell

Views: 2,346 (223 embedded)

Posted by: patcondell on Nov 27, 2007

A reply to my atheist critics. You can download an audio version of this video at http://patcondell.libsyn.com

Report this video as offensive

Embed this player (420x347)
Embed a smaller player (320x272)
Advanced Embedding Options
Embedding Options

Size:

Language:

Embed Code
Invite a user to dotSUB

Your invitation to join dotSUB was successful

There was an error inviting that user to dotSUB

Video Transcription

Show in new window

Well, I've had quite a large response to my video about the Islamo-Nazis who are attempting to drive
a fundamentalist wedge into British society with the connivance of our corrupt dhimmi politicians,
and some of the most positive messages I got were actually from Muslims who are themselves embarrassed
by the activities of these people, so that was very gratifying, and thank you very much indeed for all those.
Inevitably there was plenty of negative feedback as well from the usual religious nutjobs, but also from some atheists
who have told me that they think I'm giving atheism a bad name. Yeah right. Like it ever had a good name.
I've been told things like my arguments are too crude, I'm damaging the atheist cause, I'm not contributing to the debate,
and my personal favourite: "You won't convert anyone to atheism by insulting people."
Well, OK. First of all, as regards being crude, we are talking here about religion, in case you hadn't noticed,
and it doesn't come any cruder than monotheistic dogma. I can only aspire to that level of crudity,
but just for your sake I promise to do my very best. Obviously I'd like to show more respect to people's sincerely held beliefs,
of course I would. But unfortunately that would violate my own sincerely held belief that religion is a filthy lie
and a threat to civilisation, so you can see the problem I've got with that. Besides, I don't think I'm insulting anyone who
doesn't deserve it a thousand times over. I also think that if we did a bit more insulting and a bit less pointless debating
then religion might not have such a falsely inflated idea of its own importance, and there might not be so many people on this
planet who want us all to live our lives according to ideas and stories that would embarrass a second rate fantasy novelist.
I think to engage dogma in debate is to legitimise it and to confer on it a status that it simply doesn't deserve.
With its arrogant intrusiveness I think it long ago forfeited any claim it may have had to be treated with respect.
Too many liberties have already been taken. Religious dogma has been allowed to encroach on ground it has no right
to occupy, and to claim authority where it has no authority to claim anything. And I don't think this is a matter
for polite debate, especially when all you're going to get is the usual raft of glibly held but unexamined certainties
hammered home like coffin nails at every opportunity. Because dogma is blind and deaf to anything that reason has to offer.
Faith is non-negotiable, so where exactly is the debate? You obey the rules of reason; religion ignores them,
and neutralises your argument before you've even opened your mouth. It's not interested in anything you've got to say.
It's just waiting for you to draw breath so it can say: "Yes, that's all very well, but you've still got to submit because it's written
in this book." Right now in the UK some Christian fanatics are attempting to take out a prosecution for blasphemy
against the producers of a popular comic opera. Now, the very idea of blasphemy, the idea that blasphemy even exists
as a concept says it all for me about religion, because what this really means is that some human beings have taken it upon
themselves to feel insulted on God's behalf. They don't trust God to decide for himself whether to be insulted, and to
deal with the matter in the appropriate way on judgment day. No, they want to see punishment dished out right here on earth
for their own satisfaction. Because it's not really about God, is it? It's really about them and their personal mental illness,
as it so often is when religion is exploited and misused by pig-ignorant narrow-minded zealots.
This is the same mentality that wants to compel us all to live in the past. Now, the past has plenty to teach us,
but I don't think it should be allowed to detain us against our will. Freedom from religion, from other people's
unprovable beliefs, is our basic human right, at least I think it is. And some very determined people would like to take
that right away from us, and if we don't do anything about that they're going to be allowed to succeed.
Maybe you think the way to deal with this is to engage it in polite debate, and to make all your little points and
counterpoints, and show us all what a clever dick you are. And that'll be great fun for you. And the good news is
you don't even have to worry about somebody like me coming along and damaging your cause,
because you haven't got a cause. What you've got is a hobby.
If God existed, and if I had any reason to ask him for anything, I think I'd probably ask him to save me from the curse
of polite and deferential atheists. Religion is out of control right now precisely because too many people have been
too diplomatic for too long. If we'd had the balls to do some straight talking years ago when we should have
and put this insulting nonsense in its rightful place with astrology and palmistry, we wouldn't even be talking about
this now. We'd be doing something more useful with our time. What a waste of an enlightenment.
So my position is pretty clear. Believe whatever you want, but if you want me to believe it, then provide evidence
or expect mockery and ridicule. Do not expect polite debate. I'm not trying to convert anyone to anything.
I don't give a damn what anyone believes, as long as I don't have to keep hearing about it.
And by the way, that would include condescending atheists, just for future reference.
I'm not interested in arguing about whether God exists or not. I couldn't give a shit. If he does, he can go and
suck eggs for all I care. In fact, he can "know himself" in the biblical sense, because I want nothing to do with
any god who would encourage murder on his behalf, which the god of the desert repeatedly does.
In fact I'm ashamed and embarrassed to have been created by somebody with such moronic values,
which is why you'll never hear me bragging about it. So I'll carry on giving his so-called religion the verbal finger,
and you can carry on with your polite discourse, and who knows, maybe you'll come to some kind of amicable
compromise where you only have to spend half your life on your knees. That might work for you. And if not,
well at least you'll have something to keep you occupied, which is the main thing really, isn't it?
OK, that's enough, I'm out of here. Peace and love to one and all.

Welcome to dotSUB - Any Video Any Language

Welcome to dotSUB!

Any Video Any Language

Other videos from patcondell

Why debate dogma?

Share

Video Transcription