This is a very interesting dichotomy proposed by our friend Professor Dawkins and brings to mind the whole, lesser of two evils argument. I would love to hear your thoughts on this.


This post is from the discussion section of the Richard Dawkins Foundations for Reason and Science's discussion section. The link to the site is here.

Support Christian missions in Africa? No, but . . .

Given that Islam is such an unmitigated evil, and looking at the map supplied by this Christian site, should we be supporting Christian missions in Africa? My answer is still no, but I thought it was worth raising the question. Given that atheism hasn't any chance in Africa for the foreseeable future, could our enemy's enemy be our friend?


alt text

Views: 70

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

It would be nice to know if the completely grey areas on the map all represent religiosity, or if some of them represent insufficient data.
Most likely missing data. But I think you can extrapolate as to why...
I can in some cases, but not in others.  Maybe I'm just whining, but I do wish any nations where data was not included on the graph had been marked differently.  You can barely tell that Nigeria has been shaded in with a tinge of blue.  A country like Egypt, on the other hand, probably really is pure grey as far as the data is concerned.
The interesting is China though. Has this factor helped China grow in any way, and since religion tends to wave due to migratory patterns, what will happen when that dam of people bursts open?
The Chinese society is set up like another religion. Isn't fair to call them a progressive society - a comparison with The Party in the Book 1984 would be more apt.

Their ideology certainly has a lot in common with religion, certainly in many of it's acts, it is quite different due to leaving a lot more leeway. Other books than just a short red one is promoted.

But my post was more of a China vs. Religion speculation. China cracks down on religion quite hard (it is one of the large criticisms against it), but are we criticising China from a position of having found a better way to deal with religion or not..?

The consequence of freedom of religion has been strong enduring presence of religion. And the combined consequences of religion I think we agree on are tilted towards the negative. I guess it comes down to: What's worse, clamping down on religion or let it continue to corrupt society.

It depends at what price you are willing to accept this. At the price of losing as many liberties as china has lost? Having a completely narcissistic opinion of world history? Regularly violating human rights? Unfortunately, the clamping seems for worse a situation, and I'd rather fight the slow fight of re-education

I tend to agree. Though instead of choosing one of the extremes, I wouldn't mind tightening up on religion,. It's just so frustratingly slow to watch in many places.

Though copying and deleting electronic versions of holy books does provide some relief. ;)

Interesting! Thanks for posting Arcus. I would of expected the USA the be much lighter, closer to grey.

It helps to have a high level of education. 

Schools are to Atheism what Holy Buildings are to Religion. Questioning vs. not questioning everything. :)

I never liked school >./p>

My books, computer, google, wikipedia & wolframalpha are to me what holy stuff is to the religious :P


Religions are all oppressive and immoral/anti-humanistic.  I wouldn't favor one over another.  There are fanatical Christians, as well as fanatical Moslems.  Not all Moslems are "evil."  That's bias at play.  Shame on Dawkins!



Blog Posts

Forever Cursed

Posted by Nerdy Keith on February 25, 2015 at 8:00pm 2 Comments


Posted by Mai on February 25, 2015 at 2:30pm 2 Comments

Services we love!

Advertise with

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service