And besides atheism is ugly and stupid and old and fat
What was that I was murmuring about cherished beliefs and their not so healthy effect on people’s ability to think and argue? Hardly were the words out of my mouth, it seems, when Theo Hobson was inspired to give a truly showy demonstration of that very thing.
First, by way of warming up, he threw himself down on the floor and gave a really good loud scream. ‘Atheism is pretentious and cowardly,’ he howled, spit flying, ‘and I hate it really really hard!’ Then he got up and took up the serious business of making his case.
How odd that there seems to be an endless appetite for militant atheism. How odd that anyone over 17 admires these angry ageing men, scowling at us indignantly, and competing with each other in tough-talking God knocking. How odd that they get such an easy press, that their (usually female) interviewers are so fawning. Now it is Christopher “Hitch” Hitchens’ turn. Behold the jowly prophet…
Behold the ill-mannered petulant whiner, with his factual errors and his hyperbole and his frank and frankly irrelevant insults. What ‘endless appetite’? Five books, after a period of decades when such books could not find a publisher? What ‘militant’ atheism? Where are the buses and trains that atheists blow up? How odd that Theo Hobson, who (I surmise) thinks of himself as a benevolent Christian type, resorts to the pathetic insult ‘aging’ – does he think he is going in the other direction? Does he think it’s reprehensible to get older? And then there’s the bit about mostly female interviewers – oh yes – those stupid credulous dim-witted women, fawning on all the aging jowly cowardly atheists.
And that’s just the first paragraph. Needless to say, the rest of it is crap too, but I thought it was interesting to note how venomous and unpleasant pious Theo is once his beliefs are challenged.
I’m reminded of Mark Vernon, who is not even a theist but who seems to have a real hatred of atheists – at least I can’t imagine what else inspires him to talk such nonsense about them as he does in the comments on this post.
So here’s a few gently provocative comments in reply – though no doubt, to begin the provocation straight away, you conviction atheists will immediately reject them out of hand as confusion piled upon confusion, because, of course, you conviction atheists have all confusions ironed out by all-conquering reason, with your beliefs flowing cooly in streams of coherent logic…Doubt and belief go together. Let me just offer three reasons why that might be the case (‘Rubbish, rubbish, rubbish!’, I hear you faithful atheists reply – and you have company, with the fundamentalists)…It is only the fundamentalist – religious or atheist – for whom doubt, confusion, complications are seen as automatic failures of belief, opportunities to score points, or rallying calls for the soldiers to march around. Just being gently provocative.
Obnoxious, isn’t it. Inaccurate and sneery – an annoying combination. (I objected, in fact I objected twice, but answer came there none.) What’s the point? What’s the point of railing at the wrong target? Why not dispute real atheism instead of wild-fantasy atheism? I don’t know, but I find this kind of thing unimpressive.
Agreed.
But I do have to point out that Hitchens is also rather fond of hyperbole and pointless insults, as you will know if you’ve seen any of his recent television interviews.
To an extent, I understand where Theo’s and Mark’s sarcasm is coming from – some blog comment atheists are of the village atheist type: they are hardly dim, and do know a thing or two, but carry a self-assuredness and conviction disproportional to that knowledge. That said, there are many atheists who do not correspond to that type. And sarcasm and jeering seems to me to generally point to a kind of tribalist mentality I’m way too contrarian to be comfortable with.
Hobson’s piece is quite awful (and God knows this does not imply any agreement of me with Hitchens). I mean, “there is surely something religious in the communal ecstasy of a rave, or a pop concert, or a play, or a sporting event, or a political rally.”!? With friends like these… Mark Vernon gets a few points across, though, in between the sarcasm.
I, for one, am a militant atheist — armed, dangerous and pledged to kill the first god I can find, even if I have to die trying. (Those omnipotent beings go down hard.) Then I get to go to atheist heaven and bask in the presence of the glorious non-god.
Show yourselves, gods! Come out of the woodwork! Cowards…
(How do I look in this beret?)
Where are these fawning females?
As an aging atheist I demand an answer.
P. how do I look in this beret? like a french poofter!
Bonjour! Richard, – bon très bon! Voilà! Vous avez oublié vos oignons de vieillissement Il y a une crevaison dans votre roue! L’ATHÉISME RÈGNE BIEN!
Pyotr. Let’s beret the hatchet.
Is it just me, or do the sophistiated theists/apologist atheist types not seem to be the most sneery and self-rightious people in this whole debate? If we put the fundamentalist creationist types to one side (because they are by and large bat-shit insane,and thus to be considered beyond reasoned argument) the gentler Rowan Williams types are wrong and often use tendentious arguments but never seem so fucking full of themselves, on the other side, as angry as Dawkins is, he has a more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger sort of approach. These rent a gob Guardian columnist types seem really quite vitriolic and nasty in comparison.
I think I detect some of that common room arrogance that you often find in pseudo-academic discourse, so I wonder whether it is something to do with that cleverer-than-thou impulse.
Re: Hobson, anyone who can say “He has to show that he has the answer: if people shared his total rejection of God, then the world would be a better place. He needs to believe this. For he finds grounds for hope here. If humanity moves away from religion, things will get better. It’s a faith.” with a straight face in an argument over the truth or falsity of religion and the existence of god is deliberately playing silly buggers.
Heh. OB = fawning female. Heh heh..
Kiwi Dave: “Where are these fawning females? As an aging atheist I demand an answer.”
Kiwi – if you spend all your time shuffling through debris on the forest floor at night how are the females going to find you and fawn?
I saw that article yesterday and thought of you, OB, and hoped you would get your claw hammer onto it. My link to it won’t work at the moment but if memory serves me rightly, does he at any point discuss the truth or otherwise of atheism vis-a-vis religion (religion seeming to mean anything from a nice walk and a good gig)?
Theo? Mark? Uh oh – I didn’t realize they were friends of yours, Merlijn. Though I don’t suppose I would have been much politer if I had realized.
Vernon does get some points across in the intervals between inaccurate taunts, but the inaccurate taunts unmotivate me, for one, to pay him any attention.
“the nicest girls all seem to be on the other side of the barricade…the pretty girls were all with the Maoists”
Which are we talking about here? The nicest girls or the prettiest? And why the lack of interest in women? Because once they’re adult they’re neither nice nor pretty?
“Theo? Mark? Uh oh – I didn’t realize they were friends of yours, Merlijn.”
I know neither of them personally – and did my comments on Theo Hobson’s piece sound particularly friendly to you? I am certainly not protesting against your lack of politeness in response to his article.
“And why the lack of interest in women? Because once they’re adult they’re neither nice nor pretty?”
Don’t forget I was reminiscing there – and I was a lot younger myself back then.
If atheism is ugly, stupid, old and fat, perhaps it needs a pretty, clever, young, slender theist to help it along its diddery, dribbling, drooping, senile zimmer-frame way. Any offers?
When all the world is old lad – and all the trees are brown – and all the wheels have gone round – creep home you will find your place there [with the theists] – you loved when atheism was young.
Merlijn, no, your comments didn’t sound particularly friendly – I just thought your use of the first names might mean you knew them.
Reminiscing…yes, but there is some present tense in that comment!
Bad Websites: Catholics should avoid these.
I have been meaning to create this post for quite some time. I wanted to put together a list of websites that claim to be “Catholic” but should never be supported by Catholics. I am using Catholic Culture’s website reviews for some of the information. Please realise that these websites are generally opposed to the truth of the Faith. If you have a link to one of these websites on your blog/website, I strongly ask you to remove it in an effort for us all to promote the complete truth not a “watering down” of the Catholic Faith.
All links below are to the Catholic Culture review of the website; you may have to register (I believe it’s free) to see the review by Catholic Culture. I do not want to post an actual link to the website since that is to be avoided.
Apologetic Catholic Page – a website that shows the “difference between Catholicism and Biblical teaching”
Association for the Rights of Catholics In the Church – errors include saying that promoting women’s ordination is not heresy
Catholic Women’s Ordination – promotes women’s ordination
Catholics for a Free Choice (CFFC) – promotes contraception and abortion
Daily Catholic – apparently sedevacantist run, great disrespect for Pope Benedict XVI in some cases
Dignity USA – undermines Catholic Church’s teachings on homosexuality
Future Church – promotes women’s ordination
Georgetown Center for Liturgy – disobedient with the Vatican on the Liturgy
Jubilee 2000 Our Lady of the Roses – promotes a condemned apparition
Help for Catholics – tries to lead Catholics away from the Church by using poor interpretation of Scripture
Just for Catholics – created by Joe Mizzi, a fallen away Catholic and former seminarian, to lead Catholics away from the Church
Leadership Conference of Women Religious – As Catholic Culture states: “The site is filled with antagonism toward the hierarchy and Church teachings, the emphasis on political activism in a secular humanist context, and feminist rhetoric.”
Mother Mary’s Garden – has nothing to do with the Mother of God or real prayer. It is an occult site.
National Catholic Reporter – better named the National Catholic Distorter.
North American Forum on the Catechumenate – Founded by Rev. James Dunning, a dissenter who does not believe the Eucharist is Jesus. The prayer book has dissenting resources.
Online Confession – claims to be able to give the Sacrament of penance over the Internet. This is not allowed at all by the Church! Such confessions are not truly sacraments meaning sins are not forgiven if a person “confesses” online.
Pax Christi USA – Catholic Culture states: “They seem to care more about finding common ground with abortionists and the gay rights lobby than about working for true peace.”
Priests for Equality – promotes changing the Scriptures as well as women’s ordination
Roses from Heaven – promotes condemned Bayside New York “apparitions”
The Aquinas Catholic Site – Sedevacantistism 101
These Last Days Ministries – promotes condemned Bayside New York “apparitions”
True Catholic – the website of a schismatic, sedevacantist group who believes the current pope is a man elected in Montana named Pius XIII
These are some of the many websites that I believe all faithful Catholics should avoid. If you would like to let me know about any others, please comment below in the comment box.
If you have any suggestions on others to add to this listing, please comment in the comment box below.
Yeah, sure – please do – contact without hesitation – B&W – Betsy will be more than obliging.
Seminarian, BAD Matthew would be a perfect candidate to help the frail atheists along their dis-enchanted way. I am sure he shall undoubtedly make himself available that is – when he has first weeded out the wayward wandering catholics.
M-T O’L, you really must tell us where you dig up this mierda.
“Online Confession – claims to be able to give the Sacrament of penance over the Internet. This is not allowed at all by the Church! Such confessions are not truly sacraments meaning sins are not forgiven if a person “confesses” online.”
Dammit! And there I was thinking I was as pure as the driven snow.
An excerpt from B&B’s front page link “Did Brownback Realize What He Was Saying?”
Senator Brownback, along with his two dissenting colleagues, really should be forced to answer a rather more embarrassing question: who is responsible for their being so misinformed? Where did they learn the so-called “problems” with evolution: at their mothers’ knees, or in Sunday school?
Misogyny and/or ageism can be found on both sides of the aisle. It is hard for me to get all excited about defending my atheism when women who embrace the role of mother or moral/spiritual guide are ridiculed so frequently and without any thought to the matter. Could evolutionists please applaud mothers who raise free-thinking children instead of dismissing all mothers. Mothers should be promoted as the front wave in the war against patriarchy, not given up on as the first lost cause.
I, too, demand to know where the “fawning females of atheism” are! (if that isn’t a blog title, I don’t know what is)
Like Hitchens, I am an ageing, chain smoking, disagreeable anti-theist who is growing more rotund by the hour. While I don’t share Hitch’s enthusiasm for scotch, I’ve done my bit to keep St. James gate open and enrich the Guinness heirs. So why not me? Of course, I could only wish to have his talent (and his money). Oh wait… perhaps that’s why there are fawning females? This Hobson character is a twit.
Hmm. Was Coyne dismissing all mothers there? I didn’t read it that way (and I was roundly rebuked just the other day for being one of those tedious hypertouchy women who see sexism everywhere, so I must be one of them). After all if Brownback did learn his suspicion of evolution in infancy it probably was at his mother’s knee. I don’t suppose Papa Brownback was a new man kind of daddy who did the misinforming himself; I’m guessing he left that to the missus. Also I thought Coyne was perhaps saying that it was not at his mother’s knee he learned it but in more official places.
As for Hitchens – I’ve been known to fawn, in my aging disagreeable anti-theist way. It’s not the money, it’s the way with words. Although ever since the Vanity Fair piece about how Women Don’t Do Wit – well, I feel much less fawnish, I must say. There’s something about men who don’t notice female wit that just…puts me right off. I’m not nice, I’m not clever, I’m not agreeable, I’m not polite, but if you tell me I’m not funny, well, I just pick up my glass of Ribena and go somewhere else.
“I’ve done my bit to keep St. James gate open and enrich the Guinness heirs”.
Blimey, Barney:
You can also hold the Wexford Malting barmy bashful Barley farmers responsible as they too do their fair share of driving through the same gate that – is by you kept open.
Slainte! Wink, wink, nudge nudge.
Incidentally, it is an exhilariting experience sitting up on the harvester watching the crops being gathered in on a fine hot August summer’s day.
Posting of which – right now here in Dublin it is the situation. There is also a warm, cool wind-swept balmy breeze to boot.
I will for now leave the fawning females and their detractors to their own Betsy/ungodly devices to thrash out their own atheistic/theistic barney’s.
Would you second that Barney, or what? Slainte and Cead mile failte romhat…….A Iosa??!!!
“Is it just me, or do the sophistiated theists/apologist atheist types not seem to be the most sneery and self-rightious people in this whole debate? If we put the fundamentalist creationist types to one side (because they are by and large bat-shit insane,and thus to be considered beyond reasoned argument) the gentler Rowan Williams types are wrong and often use tendentious arguments but never seem so fucking full of themselves, on the other side, as angry as Dawkins is, he has a more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger sort of approach. These rent a gob Guardian columnist types seem really quite vitriolic and nasty in comparison.”
I blame the influence of South Park on the culture. Seriously. It’s hip to be a commentator who plants himself (and it’s always a ‘he’, isn’t it) squarely in the “middle” and blasts “both sides”–whether a reasonable middle actually exists or not. You get to have the satisfaction of getting your rant on, plus the feeling that you are on a higher plane because you have seen beyond the tiresome dichotomy of the debate. (That this dichotomy is often your own creation… well, let’s just brush that under the rug.)
Oops, thinking about all the “wild oats” in the Malting Barley and all the hassle the atheistic fawning females are having to endure has notwithstanding – left me putting an “I” instead of an “A” in –
“exhilarating”. How narcissistic indeed!
Perhaps I had better stick to OB’s quench-thirsting Ribena and leave Barney et all on B&W on the Guinness.
“I must say. There’s something about men who don’t notice female wit that just…puts me right off”.
Hear, hear OB – you never said a truer word. Perhaps they feel threatened by female humour? Perhaps they feel undermined? Perhaps they feel they alone are the ones who hold the key to making females happy? Pehaps they feel less powerful – by females – who dish out all the fun. Perhaps they feel the only thing she should be dishing out is [to them] their dinner?
Perhaps! Perhaps! perhaps!
Go raibh maith agat, Marie-Therese. One of my fondest memories of Ireland was haymaking with my relations. Putting up cocks of hay and working our way down the field to find an old whiskey bottle filled with half Smithwick’s/Guinness and a pack of fags stashed in the hedgerow as our reward for a job well done. A bit of craic and a few tunes from my uncle (he had a powerful voice); then it was off to do another row with the same reward at the other end. Perhaps a nice theistic jackeen girl such as yourself would join me at the ceili for “two facing two now for the “Walls of Limerick”. For I’ve still a few steps in me. Maybe not paradise…but as close as I’ll ever come – go leor!
OB, Hitchens’s bit on women and humor fell flat to be sure. (I think you’re funny!) He’s taken a fair amount of abuse for that one – and deservedly so. Hitch pisses me off now and then, but he is rarely dull. These recent accusations of him being a bullyboy with the theists are, to use one of his favorite words, laughable. After all, they’ve had the Pope, the bishops, imans, rabbis, etc. for centuries doing their bullying for them. He may be a bully, but he’s OUR bully!
“Dammit! And there I was thinking I was as pure as the driven snow”.
Well what do you know.
When will confessions be heard for all the heathens, atheist’s who post on here who are convinced they are as white as the driven snow. As I am sure The French beret – wearing padre friend of Richard’s carrying the ageing onions on his punctured bicyclette would do the honours.
Eh, what do you reckon?
Excusez-moi s’il vous plaît. Do not all rush at once. Merde, must not forget the perles de rosaire.
Sadly, suffice it to post white gowns -are only reserved for Hindu widows.
I have mixed feelings about Hitchens. I’d probably disagree with him strongly about religion. I most definitely disagree with him over his terrible position on the war in Iraq – though I must he’s strongly criticized the Bush gov’t as well over aspects of it. And yes, his idea that women have no humour makes me wonder which women he’s been hanging around with. They do not correspond with my experiences at all.
On the other hand, I don’t know of a more eloquent defender of the right of the likes of me to light up when having a beer. And that weighs very heavily in his favour with me. And his virtuosity as a polemicist is not in question.
Hitch on women and wit
Is full of shit
But Hitch on other things
Is one of the kings.
I really like his writing on literary subjects eg Kipling’s poetry. I’m ready to fawn on a bloke who can write trenchantly about politics and with feeling ears about poetry.
So you blokes who have complained about being deprived of fawning, I’m afraid being fawned upon is not a right but something you have to earn by being clever, witty and sensitive. Go on, work on it!
One of the great polemecists, and polemecist is not a perjorative. As someone on another site commented, Dawkins has his Bad Cop.
Yeah, that’s why I’ve tended to fawn – the literary stuff, the polemics – the icy refusal to let people interrupt him until he’s really finished – the pursuit of Kissinger – etc etc.
So Theo Hobson now rates a picture in “Comment is Free”? He looks like a poster boy for some organization like BNP Skinheads for Christ.
He looks like one of God’s little angels.
I don’t understand all this Hitch-envy. Am I the only other cranky, graying, paunchy male atheist surrounded by adoring women?
;-)
G
Hitch envy comes from the fact that Hitch is just about the most intelligent voice on the left today,there may even be something to his women are not funny argument! for instance my wife never laughs at my jokes,so she obviously has no sence of humour.
Of course it could be because my jokes are crap.
I *wish* I were surrounded by fawning women. Not only am I not surrounded by them, I don’t think I’ve ever met even one.
My wife vacillates between coddling and criticizing. I look for the fawning moment, but never see it.
I *am* surrounded by fawning girls, though — two of them, who thankfully are too young to have figured out how f@(ked up I am.
I’m betting that one of these days they’ll appreciate the fact that I told them the truth about the harshness of the godless universe, and forgive me for my failings.
G “Am I the only other cranky, graying, paunchy male atheist surrounded by adoring women”. Yes but they adore gardening, not you.
“Comment is free”…
…but thinking is clearly far too expensive for the Grauniad. Again.
Maybe the photo is to assist those who would seek to pelt Mr. Hobson with rotten fruit, veg, etc, as an honest expression of their admiration for him?
“Putting up cocks of hay and working our way down the field to find an old whiskey bottle filled with half Smithwick’s/Guinness and a pack of fags stashed in the hedgerow as our reward for a job well done”.
Barney;
Ah, certainly, these days in the sunny South East the cocks in the fields are an atypical vista without a doubt. The hay season which is now underway is all for the most part gathered in by contractors with big machinery. There is fierce competition between the latter so the tendency to monetarily up the ante on the [unfortunate, struggling, yearly EU cheque in the post] farmer is widespread. There is very little tribute/camaraderie these days amongst farmers/contractors. Farming is solely a commercial enterprise. Sycophantic, obsequious, toadying, slimy/smarmy farmer-ette’s are the least species to be entertained first in getting their hay saved. They have to wait their turn till roughly last. Farmers find them unsounded at the best of times And wont be fooled by their fawning ways. They are just not taken seriously. Farmers find them very intimidating. A women’s place [in their narrow mindset] is in the farmstead warming up their dinners and cleaning their wellies etc.
Those were the days my friend [Mary Hopkins] that you talk about in the sunny South East – anyway.
Gone too are the days when farmers/workers made a big event of haymaking time. The boss-man, then, and his ilk went through the front door and had whiskey etc while the labourers and their ilk went through the back door and drank tea.
Suffice it to say, though, in poorer parts [land-wise] like Cavan/Leitrim/Mayo the cocks/minute stacks of hay in the fields are still to be seen. It immediately tells one about the status of the land. In these parts too tillage crops are rarely to be seen. Farmers/ette’s in these parts I find are very obliging, laid back and have more time for everyone. Unlike, I should add – their Southern counterparts.
Misogyny plays a big role in all spheres of Irish life.
“Hitch envy comes from the fact that Hitch is just about the most intelligent voice on the left today”
That I would disagree with. If we’re talking about sheer intelligence regardless of the rottenness of the politics proposed, I think it’s still hard to beat Chomsky. If talking about intelligence actually applied to political positions, I’d have to prefer the people behind workersliberty.org or the Third Camp statement, for taking a position against Islamism which does not involve cheering on American warplanes or parrotting the WMD line.
“A bit of craic and a few tunes from my uncle (he had a powerful voice); then it was off to do another row with the same reward at the other end”.
Surely, Barney, ye cannot beat a bit o’ the aul trad music. I expect your uncle kept his fiddle up over the hearth, as did thuther’s with the intention of giving an aul bash at it at a moment’s notice. Some thought so much of their pride and joy that they requested to have them on top of their coffins.
“Perhaps a nice theistic jackeen girl such as yourself would join me at the ceili for “two facing two now for the “Walls of Limerick”.
Begorrah, Barney,Go raimh maith agat seein’ dat tis yerself ashking, I’ll not refuse, mind, ye – I must be soon away abroad in the fields, cocking the hay. I’ll leave me sliothar an’ join ye so! If I ashk ye – do ye come here ofthen, I suppose ye’ll tell me – no – only when there’s a ceili on? Will ye be around for the sthack of barley and the haymakers jig. Meself is fond of the fairy reel. “Look, look, leanna, do ye see yer one across the hall she’s a scalder/yeller-belly/Kilkenny culchie cat, but she pretends to be a right dub jackeen ass Jaysus, she’s spluttered the fawning fairy. Have ye a fag on ye at all am gasping for a pull”? Diddly ity ity diddly dum.
“For I’ve still a few steps in me“.
I have gone/still go to many Ceili mors around the country. They are a source of great exercise. Gosh, it is in the blood, and as soon as the music starts the mind and feet are tapping away joyously. I absolutely love Irish dancing/music. I read that Moya Doherty’s Riverdance USA production was by the critics recently panned. It has become too hackneyed. — go leor!
“Maybe not paradise…but as close as I’ll ever come”
How sweet is life but we’re crying
How mellow the wine but we’re dry
How fragrant the rose but it’s dying
How gentle the wind but it sighs
What good is in youth when it’s ageing
What joy is in eyes that can’t see
When there’s sorrow in sunshine and flowers And still only our rivers run free Sláinte chugat = Good health to you.
Tá failte romhat = The same to you.
Chomsky may be brilliant but if his world veiw gains any curency we will all be going to work with prayer rugs and compases!there is nothing wrong with Hitchens cheering on American heros in a time of war Merlijn.
Chomsky is rotten, but Hitchens is still wrong when it comes to the war. There is no contradiction here.
Richard – I have no problem cheering on American heroes providing the war is just. Americans contributed a lot to the liberation of my country (together with Canadians, Brits, Poles and indirectly but crucially the Russians).
I even have no problem calling a hero a hero in a patently unjust war. I’m sure many American GIs are behaving heroically in Iraq at the moment even if they have no business being there.
I’m just not cheering on someone sitting in an elegant sleek metal can dropping high explosives on people that have done him no personal harm, blowing them and their homes to smithereens!
Incidentally, I found the following defence of Chomsky by you-know-who. It’s a bit old, though. And I don’t like that Hitchens disses Geoffrey Sampson, who is granted somewhat to the right of Enoch Powell but a serious linguist in his own right. (Though his means of dissing is hilarious – one can be utterly wrong and a great polemicist).
“I’m just not cheering on someone sitting in an elegant sleek metal can dropping high explosives on people that have done him no personal harm…”
Hear! Hear!
Merlijn are you saying these heroic young men only deserve cheering if you happen to agree with the war in question? air raiding is a perfectly legitimate tactic of war,it may not be nice but war never is. I just thank God that the western world can still produce young men like them!
I should have said men and women because there are many women in this role as well now.
Trouble with the Rusians they enslaved the people they liberated!
Atheist Gives $22.5 Million for Catholic Fund
“Philanthropist and retired hedge-fund manager Robert W. Wilson said he is giving $22.5 million to the Archdiocese of New York to fund a scholarship program for needy inner-city students attending Roman Catholic schools. Wilson, 80, said…that although he is an atheist, he has no problem donating money to a fund linked to Catholic schools.
“Let’s face it, without the Roman Catholic Church, there would be no Western civilization,” Wilson said. “Shunning religious organizations would be abhorrent. Keep in mind, I’m helping to pay tuition. The money isn’t going directly to the schools.”
Wilson’s donation is the largest the archdiocese has ever received. The money will be used to fund the Cardinal’s Scholarship Programme, which was started in 2005 to give disadvantaged students attending the archdiocese’s inner-city schools partial or full tuition grants”
Read article on Blomberg.com
I am kind of puzzled by this goodwill gesture. It seems from my standpoint very conflictual.
“Let’s face it, without the Roman Catholic Church, there would be no Western civilization,” Wilson said. “Shunning religious organizations would be abhorrent.
And even more puzzled by this remark.
Is this man an atheist or – a-theist?
Or do I need tuition to help me grasp his reasoning?