Prager responds to Dawkins

Whenever I'm listening to the radio at Noon and I notice that Rush Limbaugh is getting a bit repetitive, I always kick over to Dennis Prager's show. The man is really brilliant, and this article showcases his persuasive, bold and clear defense of the Truth against the serious error of the kind of modern, militant atheism espoused by Richard Dawkins. Excerpts:

Years ago, I interviewed Pearl and Sam Oliner, two professors of sociology at California State University at Humboldt and the authors of one of the most highly-regarded works on altruism, The Altruistic Personality. The book was the product of the Oliners' lifetime of study of non-Jewish rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust.

The Oliners, it should be noted, are secular, not religious, Jews; they had no religious agenda.

I asked Samuel Oliner, "Knowing all you now know about who rescued Jews during the Holocaust, if you had to return as a Jew to Poland and you could knock on the door of only one person in the hope that they would rescue you, would you knock on the door of a Polish lawyer, a Polish doctor, a Polish artist or a Polish priest?"

Without hesitation, he said, "a Polish priest." And his wife immediately added, "I would prefer a Polish nun."

That alone should be enough to negate the pernicious nonsense that God is not only unnecessary for a moral world, but is detrimental to one.

And:

Perhaps the most powerful proof of the moral decay that follows the death of God is the Western university and its secular intellectuals. Their moral record has been loathsome. Nowhere were Stalin and Mao as venerated as they were at the most anti-religious and secular institutions in Western society, the universities.

Nowhere in the West today is anti-Americanism and Israel-hatred as widespread as it is at universities. And Princeton University awarded its first tenured professorship in bioethics to Peter Singer, an atheist who has argued, among other things, that that "the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog or a chimpanzee" and that bestiality is not immoral.

Dawkins and his supporters have a right to their atheism. They do not have a right to intellectual dishonesty about atheism.

I have debated the best known atheists, including the late Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Lawrence Krauss ("A Universe from Nothing") and Daniel Dennett. Only Richard Dawkins has refused to come on my radio show.

RTWT (Stands for read the whole thang.)

Them Perfidious Cathlicks

A commenter calling himself/herself "Cathlicks SHURE are dum" has a great response to Rod Dreher's latest Catholic bash which features hot chicks doing liturgical dance in a Cathlick church.

What an absurd post. The SSPX certainly was not created in reaction to and did not break away from the church over such liturgies.

Rod has explained time and again that he is by nature incapable of presenting a balanced picture of Catholicism. He is psychologically incapable of passing up any opportunity to make Catholics look foolish and backward (see, they're not only corrupt as in the previous post they are also a bunch of clowns). Therefore, there is absolutely no point in saying (as likely 99% of Catholics would truthfully say) that they have never once in their life encountered a liturgy like this one even one time in their life. Nor is there a point in explaining that there is a debate about the legitimacy of "inculturating" catholicism to embrace elements of cultures other than Western European ones. He don't care folks. He like to laugh at Catholics and deride their leaders. It's his shtick, and as he has explained many times, it's his blog. Therefore, just grin and nod and move on.

How grateful you must be to have joined a perfect Church Rod. And how grateful Catholics will be when you finally get over your need to continuously pat yourself on the back for your wise choice. You've left the Catholic Church, Rod. Congratulations. Now see if you can somehow let go of your need to continuously harp on its many, many, many failures. Then you will truly be free of its perfidious influence.

This brings up an interesting point to me. Maybe Dreher doesn't really have a problem with Catholics, but with "Cathlicks". Or possibly "Catlicks"? Maybe even "Ca'lix"? Which leads me to wonder, is Dreher an Orthodox or is he an "Ort'docks"?

But seriously, this response to Dreher's Catholic-bashing is the kind that I like the best. We could also read this, I suppose, for balance. But after numerous unanswered requests for suggestions of how exactly I should adequately express my rage over the sexual molestation of boys by perverted Catholic priests, I assume God is letting me off the hook regarding anger at perverted Orthodox priests.

When you don't have professional anger training and you're not naturally predisposed to wrath, face it―you're limited as to what you can do with or without the megaphone. Of course a lot has to do with how you answer this quiz question about what Christ suggested for getting out the most stubborn demons:

a) Prayer
b) Fasting
c) Getting really angry
d) A and B
e) All of the above

What happened to "Multiculturalism"?

From the Catholic League.

PUNDITS SLAM PALIN ON WITCHCRAFT
Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments today on news reports that an African minister once asked God to protect Sarah Palin from witchcraft:

“In 2005, Sarah Palin went to church and found that a visiting minister from Kenya, Bishop Thomas Muthee, was doing the service. He offered a prayer asking Jesus to keep her free from ‘every form of witchcraft.’ Palin said nothing—she simply kept her head bowed throughout the blessing. Why this is newsworthy is one issue, but why it has quickly become the subject of scorn is another.

“For the past two decades, Americans have been lectured by educators and the chattering class that we must respect cultural, religious, racial and ethnic diversity. It seems that exceptions to the creed of multiculturalism are only made when it suits the ideological agenda of the left. Enter Keith Olbermann: He exploited this incident last night as a club to paint Palin as an extremist. Moreover, he used this single blessing to unfavorably contrast the African minister to Barack Obama’s spiritual mentor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. The MSNBC commentator incredibly said that Wright—who spewed hate speech before Obama for 20 years—‘seems pretty mainstream’ by comparison.

“Witchcraft is a sad reality in many parts of Africa, resulting in scores of deaths in Kenya over the past two decades. Bishop Muthee’s blessing, then, was simply a reflection of his cultural understanding of evil. While others are not obliged to accept his interpretation, all can be expected to respect it. More than that—Muthee should be hailed for asking God to shield Palin from harmful forces, however they may be manifested. And for this he is mocked and Palin ridiculed?

“We know that many cultural elites have a hard time embracing religion, but is it too much to ask that they at least show some manners when discussing subjects which most Americans hold dear?”