<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=Windows-1252 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.7600.16625"></HEAD>
<BODY style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
id=MailContainerBody leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 bgColor=#ffffff text=#000000
CanvasTabStop="true" name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>While the statements under your number 2 may contain
some truths, I find that, for example, the statement, </FONT><FONT
face="Times New Roman">"...Christian pastors and religious who spoke the truth
in love [and] opposed the Nazis ... paid for that opposition with their
lives...", could also be said of many other persons who were neither
Christian pastors nor religious persons (but who opposed the Nazis and paid for
that opposition with their lives), so why focus on just the Christian pastors
and religious persons in a way as to hold them up as special martyrs
rather than saying many persons of good will and humanitarian beliefs opposed
the Nazis and paid with their lives.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>I also have some questions about the statement, <FONT
face="Times New Roman">"...the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public
life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society..."</FONT>,
which you admit is debatable. I fail to see the need to bring the notion
of God or religion into the equation since one could argue that, regardless of
the exclusion of God and religion or not, it is the existence some common civil
moral code of ethics and humane good will between people - be they a
religious based or secular based </FONT><FONT face=Calibri>ethical system - that
is necessary for a peaceful coexisting society to exist and the goals and
aspirations of man and society to flourish and without it the vision will be
truncated.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>Apart from this, I will note that upon reading the
Dawkins response I got the impression that he did not intend his comments to be
read literally but rather to be read tongue-in-cheek in a manner to make ironic
the Pope's statement and make it come off as being even more outrageous than it
otherwise might have been seen as. I do admit that I could very well be
wrong and Dawkins did mean it to be read literally and seriously; but that was
not the impression I came away with. </DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu">C. G. Estabrook</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Monday, September 20, 2010 2:10 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=brussel@illinois.edu
href="mailto:brussel@illinois.edu">Morton K. Brussel</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=ewj@pigs.ag href="mailto:ewj@pigs.ag">E.Wayne
Johnson</A> ; <A
title="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net">Peace-discuss</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Richard Dawkins Furious At Pope
For TyingGodless To Nazis</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Mort--<BR><BR>[1] I take it that you're volunteering for the
panel "Ditchkins and the Pope (and God)" that I'm putting together for News from
Neptune on UPTV (date TBA).<BR><BR>I envision four participants - I mean local
participants (i.e., not Dawkins, Hitchens, Benedict, & God) - of which you
and I are two, discussing the following four texts: <BR><BR>--R. Dawkins, "The
God Delusion";<BR><BR>--C. Hitchens, "God is Not Great";<BR><BR>--P. Benedict,
"Caritas in veritate" (his economic manifesto - in English); and<BR><BR>--T.
Eagleton (standing in for God), <SPAN style="WHITE-SPACE: pre">"Reason, Faith,
and Revolution: Reflections on the God Debate."<BR><BR>Perhaps you can suggest
other discussants, or they may volunteer themselves. </SPAN><BR><BR><BR>[2] Far
from being “a despicable outrage,” the paragraph from the pope that "set off
Dawkins" contains the following true statements:<BR><BR>"...a Nazi tyranny ...
denied our common humanity to many, especially the Jews...; [and]
<BR><BR>"...Christian pastors and religious who spoke the truth in love [and]
opposed the Nazis ... paid for that opposition with their lives..."<BR><BR>- and
the following debatable one (true I think as the Marxists say "in the last
instance"):<BR><BR>"...the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public
life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society..."<BR><BR>But
that last after all was what he was trying to convince people of. Let's
discuss it. <BR><BR>Regards, Carl<BR><BR><BR>On 9/19/10 11:25 PM, Morton K.
Brussel wrote:<BR><SPAN style="WHITE-SPACE: pre">> So what do you disagree
with in Dawkins' reply? Arguments would be<BR>> more useful than sneers.
Perhaps you should read his book(s) and doff<BR>> your parochial
hat..<BR>> <BR>> His remarks were both apt and appreciated...<BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> On Sep 19, 2010, at 9:44 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:<BR>>
<BR>>> If anyone took Dawkins seriously before this, I doubt they
will<BR>>> now.<BR>>> <BR>>> For those who are still abject
believers, I recommend Terry<BR>>> Eagleton, "Reason, Faith, and
Revolution: Reflections on the God<BR>>> Debate" (Yale UP pbk,
2010).<BR>>> <BR>>> If I thought anyone took Ditchkins seriously,
I'd propose a<BR>>> symposium or panel on the subject. I doubt I'd find
many takers.<BR>>> <BR>>> Actually, I'd be willing to host it on my
UPTV program, News from<BR>>> Neptune.<BR>>> <BR>>> But I
don't think anyone's interested enough for that.<BR>>> <BR>>>
...<BR>>>> <BR>>>> Richard Dawkins Furious At Pope For Tying
Godless To Nazis<BR>>>> <BR>>>> Posted in Liberaland by Alan •
September 17, 2010,<BR>>>> <BR>>>> Pope Benedict’s speech to
Queen Elizabeth in England praised how <BR>>>> Britain fought “Nazi
tyranny that wished to eradicate God from <BR>>>> society,” prompting
one of the world’s best known atheists,<BR>>>> Richard Dawkins, to
proclaim it “a despicable outrage.” What set<BR>>>> off Dawkins is this
paragraph:<BR>>>> <BR>>>> “Even in our own lifetime, we can
recall how Britain and her<BR>>>> leaders stood against a Nazi tyranny
that wished to eradicate God<BR>>>> from society and denied our common
humanity to many, especially<BR>>>> the Jews, who were thought unfit to
live. I also recall the<BR>>>> regime’s attitude to Christian pastors
and religious who spoke<BR>>>> the truth in love, opposed the Nazis and
paid for that opposition<BR>>>> with their lives. As we reflect on the
sobering lessons of the<BR>>>> atheist extremism of the twentieth
century, let us never forget<BR>>>> how the exclusion of God, religion
and virtue from public life<BR>>>> leads ultimately to a truncated
vision of man and of society and<BR>>>> thus to a “reductive vision of
the person and his destiny”<BR>>>> (Caritas in Veritate,
29).”<BR>>>> <BR>>>> Dawkins responds:<BR>>>>
<BR>>>> Even if Hitler had been an atheist, his political philosophy
was<BR>>>> not based upon atheism and had no connection with atheism.
Hitler<BR>>>> was arguably (and by his own account) a Roman Catholic.
In any<BR>>>> case he enjoyed the open support of many of the most
senior<BR>>>> catholic clergy in Germany and the less demonstrative
support of<BR>>>> Pope Pius XII. Even if Hitler had been an atheist (he
certainly<BR>>>> was not), the rank and file Germans who carried out
the attempted<BR>>>> extermination of the Jews were Christians, almost
to a man:<BR>>>> either Catholic or Lutheran, primed to their
anti-Semitism by<BR>>>> centuries of Catholic propaganda about
‘Christ-killers’ and by<BR>>>> Martin Luther’s own seething hatred of
the Jews. To mention<BR>>>> Ratzinger’s membership of the Hitler Youth
might be thought to be<BR>>>> fighting dirty, but my feeling is that
the gloves are off after<BR>>>> this disgraceful paragraph by the
pope.<BR>>>> <BR>>>> Dawkins is urging a letter-writing
campaign to British media in<BR>>>> protest, adding:<BR>>>>
<BR>>>> I am incandescent with rage at the sycophantic BBC coverage,
and<BR>>>> the sight of British toadies bowing and scraping to this
odious<BR>>>> man. I thought he was bad before. This puts the lid on
it.<BR></SPAN><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>Peace-discuss mailing
list<BR>Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net<BR>http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss<BR></BODY></HTML>