Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,243
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 34:
Line 34: + + + + + + + + +
→Harris claims the label atheist is right next to child molester as a designation
What a load of utter codswollop. Sam Harris clearly and openly and unmistakably wrote that it MAY be ethical to kill people for believing dangerous beliefs. Not for doing anything, not for harming anyone, but for simply BELIEVING CERTAIN BELIEFS. His repeated "clarifications" and obfuscations don't change that established fact and he has never recanted his statement. Nor, I note, has he ever come right out and declared specifically WHAT beliefs are so dangerous that it is ethical to kill people for nothing more than holding them.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/10/sam-harris-is-still-genocidal-maniac.html Sam Harris: genocidal maniac or suicidal logician?] by [[Vox Day]], October 13, 2014</ref>}}
What a load of utter codswollop. Sam Harris clearly and openly and unmistakably wrote that it MAY be ethical to kill people for believing dangerous beliefs. Not for doing anything, not for harming anyone, but for simply BELIEVING CERTAIN BELIEFS. His repeated "clarifications" and obfuscations don't change that established fact and he has never recanted his statement. Nor, I note, has he ever come right out and declared specifically WHAT beliefs are so dangerous that it is ethical to kill people for nothing more than holding them.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/10/sam-harris-is-still-genocidal-maniac.html Sam Harris: genocidal maniac or suicidal logician?] by [[Vox Day]], October 13, 2014</ref>}}
== Sam Harris vs. William Lane Craig debate ==
=== Reviews of the debate ===
The New Zealand Christian apologetics ministry Thinking Matters said of the Sam Harris vs. William Lane Craig debate:
...Craig brought down the hammer and completely crushed Harris for the rest of the debate, by not only showing that Harris wasn’t engaging with the topic (he was equivocating between moral epistemology and ontology) but that his entire ethical system was necessarily false, by his own admission.<ref>[http://thinkingmatters.org.nz/2011/04/how-william-lane-craig-thrashed-sam-harris-like-a-naughty-puppy/ How William Lane Craig thrashed Sam Harris like a naughty puppy], Thinking Matters (New Zealand Christian Apologetics Ministry, April 9, 2011</ref>}}
The atheist Luke Muehlhauser said of the debate, "As usual, Craig’s superior framing, scholarship and debate skills ‘won’ the debate for him."<ref>[http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=15243 Sam Harris vs. William Lane Craig debate review (part 3)] by Luke Muehlhauser, Common Sense Atheism, oApril 17, 2011<?ref>
== Harris claims the label atheist is right next to child molester as a designation ==
== Harris claims the label atheist is right next to child molester as a designation ==