1. It's quite frankly such a weak set of steps that it isn't going to do any harm.
2. It's quite charming in an new testament, jesus loves you kind of a way.
3. It does at least treat Atheists with some degree of respect although not a lot.
4. I'm sure there are many many sites trying to achieve the reverse. In fact many Christians claim the whole secular movement (and thus the western world) is trying to turn Christians bad.
5. Atheism as a movement was first galvanized by the french and as an Englishmen I'll do support anything that even remotely undermines the french

So are all atheists angry?

As an adjunct to this, here is a REALLY scary picture

(It's from IT the movie and yes he is getting closer and if you look for too long he leaps out from the screen and persuades you to become a clown... Jesus christ!)

and a NOT so scary picture

(fear my automated build system... and my tiny penguin. Or maybe I have a normal sized penguin and a giant robot arm, calculator, mario mug, pens and desk... either way fear something or other... Jesus saves!)

After watching it there are two things that came to mind:

• O'Reilly is for once almost repsectful. He still interupts Dawkins but not as frequently as usual.
• Dawkins comes across as kind, considerate and a gentleman.

I've seen O'Reilly be rude many times. If a British journalist behaved in such a manner I would refuse to watch the channel and write to the broadcasting standards commission. However this interview is in contrast relatively calm and considered.

O'Reilly takes an interesting interview stance. Knowing that Dawkins is unable to prove there is no god but he can prove with 'less' doubt that there was a man called Jesus. He hangs his argument on this fact. It's a good starting point. However Dawkins choses not to argue with him on this point. I presume Dawkins knew there was no point. Even though the existence of Jesus can be doubted and is by many Atheists to argue on this point would not help Dawkins cause. Denying Jesus would play in to the hands of O'Reilly and alienate the Fox audience, most of whom are committed Christians. Because Dawkins doesn't bite O'Reilly seems flustered. He doesn't have a Plan B.

I think Dawkins sole aim was to come across as a nice, gentle man. A man that can be talked to, can be trusted. After all Atheists are the most distrusted group in America today. By choosing to not confront O'Reilly on his terms Dawkins wins the PR battle.

The European Parliament is currently dithering over just ratifying the rejected constitution or tweaking it, claiming they listened to people and then ratifying it. As a secularist I am very worried about the inclusion of religious references in the constitution. There seems to be an implicit statement that Europe and thus Europeans are Christians and democratic because of Christianity. I think they are confusing our history with with identity. It is true that the constitution refers to all religions but there are Christian overtones.

With this in mind secular organizations around Europe have joined forces to propose their own secular constitution. You should read it and if you agree with it you may want to sign it (link on the left, third from the top).

It is interesting to note that many religious organizations back the secular constitution. A secular constitution DOES NOT remove religion from European society but does remove it from decisions of the state. It guarantees that ALL religions are treated equally and allowed to coexist without giving special privilege to the few.

Read and Sign the Secular Constitution Here http://www.avisionforeurope.org/

I submitted the above site to digg to see if any one else is interested.

All hail the mighty Flying Spaghetti Monster. I hope to one day be touched by its noodley appendage.

At first I was not that impressed. It seemed to have low production values and the narrative was a little weak. However it does grow on you as you get further in to the documentary.

Check out the homepage for 'The God Movie'. Check out the directors blog here. The director, Brian Flemming, is an interesting character and his blog has a lot of good stuff in it.

If you like it, why not buy the video. If you are in Europe get it from the NSS Shop and support secularism in the Europe. If your outside the UK you can order it from 'The God Who Wasn't There' Homepage

I've even been asked with complete sincerity "what stops you from raping women". The young Muslim woman I was speaking too simply could not understand that I used other mechanisms than her to discern wrong from right. Nor could she see that on the whole MY idea's of wrong and right were remarkably similar to hers. Nor could she entertain the thought that that may be because there were cultural reasons that pre-date Mohammed and the Qur'an. Cultural reasons that influenced society and the religion's that have sprung from it for the last 10 thousand years or so.
My assertions that there was something BEFORE Mohammed that drove the desire for people to be good to one another and not rape each other were met with utter disgust. She asserted that before Mohammed people lived like animals and the world was in turmoil. It was Allah that had brought peace to the world and taught people how to behave.

Now I don't know what the Qur'an says about the 8 thousand years of civilisation that proceeded Islam but I offended her with my words and that is ALL that matters. She believed something rightly or wrongly. I as an atheist believed nothing and therefore can feel nothing. So her feeling were more important then my feelings. After all how can I feel, I have no morale compass.

Now here is the great dilemma for Atheists. I respectfully disagree with theists. But how far should I let good manners and respect stop me from stopping them in their tracks and saying enough is enough. At what point do I start to say "Your religious indoctrination of your children is tantamount to child abuse", "Your view on the creation of the world cannot be taught outside of a classical studies lesson" or "Your faith schools are divisive, separatist and dangerous to society".

Please don't think that because I cited an example with a Muslim that the dilemma only applies to Islam. It applies equally to Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Scientology, Flying Spaghetti Monster-ism and of course Teapot-ism.

hmm, maybe that should have been Dazza: Why I Am Hostile To Religion.

Anyway, here is some more Dawkins for ya . Dawkins clarifies why he is so hostile toward religion. He rebuts the accusation that he is a fundamentalist atheist and explains why how religion an faith dull the mind.

It shows a striking difference between the UK and the USA. In the UK it is acceptable to be an atheist where as in the USA it is still seen as a bad thing. At the UK meeting the statements Dawkins made were more matter of fact then matters for debate. Dawkins himself seems to address the audience with more care then in the UK. Despite his reputation for being out spoken I think Dawkins genuinely doesn't want to needlessly offend people. He tries to be direct and honest but refuses to tip toe around the issue at hand.

If you've seen Dawkins read from The God Delusion before it's still worth watching, just skip the first third of the video.