No, but you can't have it both ways. If you speak as a scientist and want to be respected as a scientist or speak from athority, then you must act like a professional.
I don't agree with you about how professionals, especially scientists, normally behave in public debates. They love to provoke each other, and they can be quite emotional about their political and religious opinions. In Dawkins' case, he is particularly emotional over the way his science is being attacked and distorted by politicians and religious figures. He has every right to express himself on that subject and any other topic pertaining to religion. His public lectures on atheism go well beyond science, however, and he does not attack religion on purely scientific grounds. If religious figures can expound on science, why can't scientists expound on religion? I see nothing wrong with all of this public debate over religion and science. There is nothing "unprofessional" in polemical speeches. Scientists and other academics engage in them all the time, both inside and outside of their profession.
And it is especially ironic that any of us in this religious debate forum would criticize someone else for using ridicule and mockery against the religious beliefs of others. Which of us has not done that in the past?
If you want to speak as an average joe with an opinion, then you have to qualify that it is just your opinion. Doctors don't wear their white coat on the golf course when they cuss after making a bad shot just as they don't wear golf attire and cuss when they are seeing patients.
Dawkins is not cussing on a golf course. Nor is he the first or only scientist out there who uses ridicule to make a point, as you would know if you bothered to listen to cablescavenger's video. Astronomer Fred Hoyle, for example, used mockery to attack evolution theory in his famous reference to a tornado assembling a Boeing 747 in a junkyard. He was, essentially, calling evolutionists idiots for not seeing what was obvious to him and everyone else. There was nothing wrong in his behavior, just as there was nothing wrong with those who pointed out the flaws in his reasoning.
The bottom line is, opinions are like butt holes, everyone has one and most of them stink.
Well, that's your opinion, isn't it? And you are using it to mock Dawkins' behavior, aren't you?
As far as mocking is concerned, everyone has a right to behave badly in real life if they choose to. The thing is, others usually act badly in return. What is the good of that? Does it change anything? Dawkins thinks people like me are full of crap, I get that. He has every right to his opinion.
No, he doesn't think that people like you are full of crap. He does think that some of your religious beliefs might be crappy, however. There is a difference between mocking believers and mocking their beliefs. The former may be considered unacceptable behavior, but everyone engages in the latter, including you.
What I believe is going to happen is many Atheists are going to start pushing others real hard. When this happens, others may push back. Someone will get hurt and things will get out of hand.
Perhaps we should have a religious war in this country and the last person standing can have things their way.
I'm not sure where you are coming from on this. Are you expecting to stop the atheism movement in its tracks by telling outspoken people to stop speaking out? Not only is that unlikely to work, but surely you must realize that atheists have been pushed very hard and very openly by theists for centuries. I don't see why people of faith cannot sit still when their faith is being challenged and respond calmly to the criticism. A great many do. I think that Dawkins is very courageous to speak out as openly as he does. If we can't have open debates on religion and politics in public, then what does that say about us?
Or, we could just respect differences of opinion and enjoy spirited debate with a degree of mutual civility.
A much preferred solution.
I don't have a problem with how others think until they start telling me how I should think. Now we have a big problem. Just imagine if I was to drag Dawkins into church and beat the crap out of him until he got himself "saved".
Does anyone think that would fly?
Why would we? Nobody is trying to drag you out of church and beat the crap out of you until you come to reject religion.
