Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Manwon Lender

Atheist excommunicated after rejecting transubstantiation

178 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Manwon Lender

The Catholic Church teaches that bread and wine can become flesh and blood. The religion of progressivism teaches that a man can become a woman, and a woman can become a man, and a man can get pregnant. The first teaching is called transubstantiation. The second is called gender theory. Professional atheist Richard Dawkins recently stated he rejects both teachings, but it’s for denying gender theory that he has been excommunicated and branded a heretic. The American Humanist Association announced in April that it was retroactively stripping Dawkins of his honor as the 1996 Humanist of the Year.

Atheist excommunicated after rejecting transubstantiation (msn.com)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
  • Confused 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
godnodog

so the AHA now rejects biology? alrighty then

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
6 minutes ago, godnodog said:

so the AHA now rejects biology? alrighty then

That's some real crazy Chit man, I dont even know what to say about it!!!:lol:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nuclear Wessel

"Professional" atheist? Sign me up.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits
Posted (edited)

So, Manwon, you're reposting stuff from the Washington Examiner now (which bills itself as "The Conservative Source Americans Deserve")?

The brief statement of the AHA is here:

https://americanhumanist.org/news/american-humanist-association-board-statement-withdrawing-honor-from-richard-dawkins/

Dawkins's relevant tweets are below

Quote

In 2015, Rachel Dolezal, a white chapter president of NAACP, was vilified for identifying as Black. Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as. Discuss.

5:20 AM · Apr 10, 2021

and his follow up

Quote

Apr 12 Replying to @RichardDawkins

I do not intend to disparage trans people. I see that my academic “Discuss” question has been misconstrued as such and I deplore this. It was also not my intent to ally in any way with Republican bigots in US now exploiting this issue .

https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1380812852055973888

The matter has nothing to do with either AHA's nor Dawkns's views on transubstantiation. The nature of the AHA's action wasn't an excommuication, since they did not revoke his membership (if he ever had one).

As to the right verb, to cancel comes to mind, BUT I came across a delightful new (to me) word:

To underbus

The AHA underbussed Dawkins for what they perceived as his transphobia.

I am unsure what effect, besides virtue signalling, the AHA's pronouncement has. It remains a fact that Dawkins was the 1996 recipient of the award. The 2021 AHA board can regret its predecessors' choice, but they cannot change it.

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
32 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

"Professional" atheist? Sign me up.

Meh, part time atheist full time heretic.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Eldorado said:

This news has me puzzled. (which is not hard... lol)

What's the point of 'excommunicating' someone who isn't a Christian?

Also, calling an atheist a 'heretic' is a compliment, no?

What is crazy about this is the fact that he was excommunicated from the American Humanist Association which I believe is a organization based upon Atheist beliefs, all I can do is laugh at these fools!:lol:

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, eight bits said:

So, Manwon, you're reposting stuff from the Washington Examiner now (which bills itself as "The Conservative Source Americans Deserve")?

The brief statement of the AHA is here:

https://americanhumanist.org/news/american-humanist-association-board-statement-withdrawing-honor-from-richard-dawkins/

Dawkins's relevant tweets are below

and his follow up

https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1380812852055973888

The matter has nothing to do with either AHA's nor Dawkns's views on transubstantiation. The nature of the AHA's action wasn't an excommuication, since they did not revoke his membership (if he ever had one).

As to the right verb, to cancel comes to mind, BUT I came across a delightful new (to me) word:

To underbus

The AHA underbussed Dawkins for what they perceived as his transphobia.

I am unsure what effect, besides virtue signalling, the AHA's pronouncement has. It remains a fact that Dawkins was the 1996 recipient of the award. The 2021 AHA board can regret its predecessors' choice, but they cannot change it.

I will be very honest, I am not at all well versed in this subject as you have described. I posted this thread so that someone would come along, like you have and clear this up. So thank you for your participation and making sense of the Article in the OP, I appreciate it and I can honestly say, I have learned something new today.:tu:

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
3 hours ago, eight bits said:

Dawkins's relevant tweets are below

More precisely those are Dawkins' recent tweets, as the AHA statement does mention that this is a culmination of years of his comments.

3 hours ago, eight bits said:

As to the right verb, to cancel comes to mind

If that term ever actually meant anything I think it's by now gone the way of 'political correctness' and 'woke' to simply meaning 'I don't like that', and doesn't have any consistent objective meaning.

2 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

To underbus

The AHA underbussed Dawkins for what they perceived as his transphobia.

That is a clever word and glad I'm now aware of it, but to me it doesn't apply in this situation although others may see it differently.  'Throwing someone under the bus' to me usually implies something unfair, wiki mentions 'betrayal' and 'sacrifice' to me is often implied.  Humanism > atheism, and comparing someone who lied about their race to trans people, or stating that it is immoral not to abort a pregnancy if you knew the child had Down's Syndrome, is difficult to reconcile with the 'human' part.  Note how he makes clear he didn't intend to ally with bigots, not that what he said can't be seen as bigoted; if he doesn't want to be viewed that way, then maybe he shouldn't tweet something that could have been posted verbatim by one of these bigots he wants to distance himself from.  

3 hours ago, eight bits said:

It remains a fact that Dawkins was the 1996 recipient of the award. The 2021 AHA board can regret its predecessors' choice, but they cannot change it.

It also remains a fact that Barry Bonds (and steroids) has the all-time home run record.  I think maybe our other new word here, which maybe I'm making up, is 'asterisked'. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mattacaster

excommunicated from what? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

More precisely those are Dawkins' recent tweets, as the AHA statement does mention that this is a culmination of years of his comments.

True, but if the AHA board chose neither to cite nor to explain why the supposed prolonged cumulative effect of Dawkins' earlier comments failed to stir the board to action until this very moment, then I am fair to them when (1) I link to their statement and (2) display the comments which I could confidently indentify as relevant based on the timing and subject matter discussed in the board's statement.

Obviously, if anybody here wished to introduce some other arguably unwoke statements from Dawkins into this thread for discussion, then that would be fine, too. I just wanted to clarify the situation discussed in the OP while being fair to both sides in what is, after all, not my fight.

2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

If that term ever actually meant anything I think it's by now gone the way of 'political correctness' and 'woke' to simply meaning 'I don't like that', and doesn't have any consistent objective meaning.

I agree. I still like to underbus, though.

2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

'Throwing someone under the bus' to me usually implies something unfair, wiki mentions 'betrayal' and 'sacrifice' to me is often implied.

Well, AHA doesn't owe Dawkins anything, nor vice versa. Twenty-five years ago, it served AHA's interests to confer an award on Dawkins and served his interests to accept it. The AHA can now pretend to "withdraw" it (as they did similarly with Lawrence Krauss, the 2015 awardee). Granting or withdrawing, the emolument is the same: publicity favorable to organization as the organization reckons favor.

Not that I would ever question wiki's take on anything, but I'll probably classify as underbussing any unilateral abrupt parting of the ways between those who seemed to be natural allies. That needn't be "betrayal," maybe Krauss and Dawkins sincerely had a different understanding of the award they accepted than the organization which awarded it. "Surprise" might be the more reliable feature than betrayal in underbussing.

2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

if he doesn't want to be viewed that way, then maybe he shouldn't tweet something that could have been posted verbatim by one of these bigots he wants to distance himself from.

I have no idea in the current environment why so many public personalities tweet what so many do. The idea that the first tweet's "discuss" question statement was supposed to be"academic" is too mushy, brown and fragrant not to be mistaken for recognized as BS.

2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

It also remains a fact that Barry Bonds (and steroids) has the all-time home run record.  I think maybe our other new word here, which maybe I'm making up, is 'asterisked'. 

Or, maybe accept Humanist of the Year as being what it says. The 1996 award praised certain things that Dawkins had done through 1996 (without cheating - knowingly or otherwise - in competition with others who are presumed not to have cheated). The 2015 award reflected what Krauss was known to have done at the time (and he continues to deny the charges made against him, which have never been adjudicated in a court room).

But fine, asterisking would work, too.

 

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cookie Monster
10 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

The Catholic Church teaches that bread and wine can become flesh and blood. The religion of progressivism teaches that a man can become a woman, and a woman can become a man, and a man can get pregnant. The first teaching is called transubstantiation. The second is called gender theory. Professional atheist Richard Dawkins recently stated he rejects both teachings, but it’s for denying gender theory that he has been excommunicated and branded a heretic. The American Humanist Association announced in April that it was retroactively stripping Dawkins of his honor as the 1996 Humanist of the Year.

Atheist excommunicated after rejecting transubstantiation (msn.com)

Now come on, a man cannot get pregnant lol

So Dawkins is an atheist but not into gender politics. Big deal. Whats all the hoo-ha about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
1 hour ago, eight bits said:

True, but if the AHA board chose neither to cite nor to explain why the supposed prolonged cumulative effect of Dawkins' earlier comments failed to stir the board to action until this very moment, then I am fair to them when (1) I link to their statement and (2) display the comments which I could confidently indentify as relevant based on the timing and subject matter discussed in the board's statement.

Obviously, if anybody here wished to introduce some other arguably unwoke statements from Dawkins into this thread for discussion, then that would be fine, too. I just wanted to clarify the situation discussed in the OP while being fair to both sides in what is, after all, not my fight.

Totally agreed, I'm just clarifying that the AHA statement itself states that it is not just because of these two tweets; failing to look at history is a frequent problem when 'the masses' defend people who are supposedly victims of 'cancel culture' (which to be clear you are not doing).  But no argument that 'relevant' is an apt word to use; these aren't 'straws', these are more like the bricks that broke the camel's back. 

1 hour ago, eight bits said:

Not that I would ever question wiki's take on anything, but I'll probably classify as underbussing any unilateral abrupt parting of the ways between those who seemed to be natural allies. That needn't be "betrayal," maybe Krauss and Dawkins sincerely had a different understanding of the award they accepted than the organization which awarded it. "Surprise" might be the more reliable feature than betrayal in underbussing.

Fair enough, instead of 'wiki' I should have more accurately said "numerous sites, including many of the the same sites that define the novel new word, 'underbus' ".  That word is too new to say it can't mean different things, but 'throwing under the bus' I don't think is consistent with just any unilateral abrupt parting of ways; it's not surprise or betrayal that is absolutely necessary for that, it is dissing.  Unless 'unilateral' necessarily implies 'non-amicable', "I'm going to divorce my spouse" I don't think is necessarily 'throwing under the bus'.  "I'm going to divorce my spouse and by the way they're bad in bed" is.

1 hour ago, eight bits said:

Or, maybe accept Humanist of the Year as being what it says.

It's customary for organizations giving out ' * of the Year' awards to continue to advertise and honor those winners beyond the year it was awarded.  The AHA statement clarifies that the 'continuing honor' part has ended, but yea is a big shrug overall.  I'd have to look up Krauss's situation again which I don't really probably care enough about to do, I think I had actually heard some untoward accusations towards Carrier too but I've forgotten the specifics.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
8 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

More precisely those are Dawkins' recent tweets, as the AHA statement does mention that this is a culmination of years of his comments.

If that term ever actually meant anything I think it's by now gone the way of 'political correctness' and 'woke' to simply meaning 'I don't like that', and doesn't have any consistent objective meaning.

That is a clever word and glad I'm now aware of it, but to me it doesn't apply in this situation although others may see it differently.  'Throwing someone under the bus' to me usually implies something unfair, wiki mentions 'betrayal' and 'sacrifice' to me is often implied.  Humanism > atheism, and comparing someone who lied about their race to trans people, or stating that it is immoral not to abort a pregnancy if you knew the child had Down's Syndrome, is difficult to reconcile with the 'human' part.  Note how he makes clear he didn't intend to ally with bigots, not that what he said can't be seen as bigoted; if he doesn't want to be viewed that way, then maybe he shouldn't tweet something that could have been posted verbatim by one of these bigots he wants to distance himself from.  

It also remains a fact that Barry Bonds (and steroids) has the all-time home run record.  I think maybe our other new word here, which maybe I'm making up, is 'asterisked'. 

I see your point very clearly, and yea your right. Like I said in a previous post, the reason I started the thread was because the article seemed mighty strange to me and I wanted someone with knowledge on the subject to explain it in more detail like you and Eight Bits have done. 

Thanks for your post and the information my friend.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
5 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

Now come on, a man cannot get pregnant lol

So Dawkins is an atheist but not into gender politics. Big deal. Whats all the hoo-ha about?

It is pretty obvious that you should reread the thread, because the Hoo-Ha as you put it is his bigoted attitude in general sorry this apparently escaped you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cookie Monster
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Manwon Lender said:

It is pretty obvious that you should reread the thread, because the Hoo-Ha as you put it is his bigoted attitude in general sorry this apparently escaped you!

Lets focus on you for a minute to make my point.

You are your own person. You have your own views and attitudes to life, just like the next person. Not everyone likes you, not everyone agrees with you, not everyone approves of what you get up to. Again just like the next person, and that is life.

If we cannot cope unless everyone likes us, agrees with us, and approves of us, then we have a problem. Furthermore nothing we do is ever going to change other people so we may as well take a pragmatic approach to life and except it. The sooner someone stops caring of what people think the sooner they can get on with living their lives, doing what they want, and for those who are against them then sod them.

Now lets take me, you dont agree with my political views, do I care? Nope. Do I demand you change your views to mine? Nope. Do I think you should be legislated against to make you be quiet? Nope. Its a free world we live in and that applies not only to me and yo but everyone else too.

Edited by Cookie Monster
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Lets focus on you for a minute to make my point.

You are your own person. You have your own views and attitudes to life, just like the next person. Not everyone likes you, not everyone agrees with you, not everyone approves of what you get up to. Again just like the next person, and that is life.

If we cannot cope unless everyone likes us, agrees with us, and approves of us, then we have a problem. Furthermore nothing we do is ever going to change other people so we may as well take a pragmatic approach to life and except it. The sooner someone stops caring of what people think they sooner they can get on living their lives, doing what they want, and for those who are against them then sod them.

Now lets take me, you dont agree with my political views, do I care? Nope. Do I demand you change your views to mine? Nope. Do I think you should be legislated against to make you be quiet? Nope. Its a free world we live in and that applies not only to me but everyone else too.

You must have missed this my friend, I have been a practicing Buddhist for many years and the highlighted Paragraph above is the Buddhist Mantra, in other words that's how we live our lives. You should seriously study a little Buddhism if you truly believe what you said above, you may find it very enlightening!!!!:tu:

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cookie Monster
3 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

You must have missed this my friend, I have been a practicing Buddhist for many years the highlighted Paragraph above is the Buddhist Mantra, in other words that's how we live our lives. You should seriously study a little Buddhism if you truly believe what you said above, you may find it very enlightening!!!!:tu:

Well its rare that I give you a like but I`ll make an exception today lol. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
4 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Well its rare that I give you a like but I`ll make an exception today lol. 

Its also rare I give you like, but for once you make some sense and I can appreciate what your saying because that is a philosophy that I live by!!!:tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy Horse
8 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

Lets focus on you for a minute to make my point.

You are your own person. You have your own views and attitudes to life, just like the next person. Not everyone likes you, not everyone agrees with you, not everyone approves of what you get up to. Again just like the next person, and that is life.

If we cannot cope unless everyone likes us, agrees with us, and approves of us, then we have a problem. Furthermore nothing we do is ever going to change other people so we may as well take a pragmatic approach to life and except it. The sooner someone stops caring of what people think the sooner they can get on with living their lives, doing what they want, and for those who are against them then sod them.

Now lets take me, you dont agree with my political views, do I care? Nope. Do I demand you change your views to mine? Nope. Do I think you should be legislated against to make you be quiet? Nope. Its a free world we live in and that applies not only to me and yo but everyone else too.

Well said, only I would disagree with the above point..

Every action has a reaction, every effect had its cause, and so everything one does, matters.

Every word, every thought, and every deed shall either be marked as a credit, or a demerit, so to speak.

To heal one needs power, love, and the truth.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cookie Monster
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Crazy Horse said:

Well said, only I would disagree with the above point..

Every action has a reaction, every effect had its cause, and so everything one does, matters.

Every word, every thought, and every deed shall either be marked as a credit, or a demerit, so to speak.

To heal one needs power, love, and the truth.

 

I think some people could do with a lesson in letting problems exist and letting themselves loose at things..

While doing it watch what their egos do.

Edited by Cookie Monster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy Horse
17 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

I think some people could do with a lesson in letting problems exist and letting themselves loose at things..

While doing it watch what their egos do.

Sounds good..

What lesson did you have in mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
20 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

Lets focus on you for a minute to make my point.

You are your own person. You have your own views and attitudes to life, just like the next person. Not everyone likes you, not everyone agrees with you, not everyone approves of what you get up to. Again just like the next person, and that is life.

If we cannot cope unless everyone likes us, agrees with us, and approves of us, then we have a problem. Furthermore nothing we do is ever going to change other people so we may as well take a pragmatic approach to life and except it. The sooner someone stops caring of what people think the sooner they can get on with living their lives, doing what they want, and for those who are against them then sod them.

Now lets take me, you dont agree with my political views, do I care? Nope. Do I demand you change your views to mine? Nope. Do I think you should be legislated against to make you be quiet? Nope. Its a free world we live in and that applies not only to me and yo but everyone else too.

Getting this is enlightenment as far as I’m concerned. We really are not as important as we think we are in our heads. No one has to like us, it is that simple. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
Posted (edited)

*

 

Edited by Hammerclaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.