20 replies to this topic

[quadclops]

My sister just sent me the link to this guy's site.  I thought the athiests here would get a kick from it, if they haven't seen him already.  Cheers!  

Here's a favorite Blip.tv video Children of a Stupid God

Here's his homepage.

Pat Condell's Godless Comedy  

I find him to be very like an even funnier version of Richard Dawkins!  

[goodman]

I've known this guy for a while...used his video in a classroom presentation
when I first saw him I thought he was kinda arrogant but his humor is sophisticated and
he makes a lot of great arguments

[forever freedom]

I love this guy's videos.

[Ben Simon]

I'm always very disheartened when atheists express positive opinions of Condell. This is the kind of guy the atheist community should want no association with whatsoever. He's a hateful, spiteful, obsessional bigot. His videos are nothing but televised rants.

At its best, atheism is courageous, rational and humane. This guy is none of those things. He's just another fanatic who happens to be on your side.

Edited by ben, 25 July 2009 - 03:13 PM.

[gregandbeaker]

I prefer the godless libertarianism stylings of Doug Stanhope and Joe Rogan.

Show a God fearing person this video:

[forever freedom]

ben, on Jul 25 2009, 02:21 PM, said:

I'm always very disheartened when atheists express positive opinions of Condell. This is the kind of guy the atheist community should want no association with whatsoever. He's a hateful, spiteful, obsessional bigot. His videos are nothing but televised rants.

At its best, atheism is courageous, rational and humane. This guy is none of those things. He's just another fanatic who happens to be on your side.

He's just very pissed with religion and all the evil it has caused humanity. I guess all atheists can identify with him in some level, because it's impossible to see the situation of the world more clearly and not get pissed at all the crazyness around us that halts true human potential. If it wasn't for all these crazy ideas and beliefs humans constantly have, we could very well have already beaten aging, and thinking about this also makes me furious.

Edited by forever freedom, 25 July 2009 - 08:07 PM.

[Ben Simon]

forever freedom, on Jul 25 2009, 03:06 PM, said:

He's just very pissed with religion and all the evil it has caused humanity. I guess all atheists can identify with him in some level, because it's impossible to see the situation of the world more clearly and not get pissed at all the crazyness around us that halts true human potential. If it wasn't for all these crazy ideas and beliefs humans constantly have, we could very well have already beaten aging, and thinking about this also makes me furious.

I believe serious, thinking religious people have a responsibilty to distance themselves from rabid, ideological fundamentalists. The same should be expected from atheists when it comes to someone like Pat Condell. The problem is not, nor has it ever been 'religion', or even 'bad religion'. It's people and their capacity for irrationality, hatred and tribalist 'us v them' thinking. One is a symptom, the other a disease.

Atheists who make excuses for ideological hatred just so long as it's of an atheist bent need to reassess their priorities.

[cyborgdreamer]

ben, on Jul 25 2009, 10:00 PM, said:

I believe serious, thinking religious people have a responsibilty to distance themselves from rabid, ideological fundamentalists. The same should be expected from atheists when it comes to someone like Pat Condell. The problem is not, nor has it ever been 'religion', or even 'bad religion'. It's people and their capacity for irrationality, hatred and tribalist 'us v them' thinking. One is a symptom, the other a disease.

Atheists who make excuses for ideological hatred just so long as it's of an atheist bent need to reassess their priorities.

I see what you mean.  The problem is how to express anger toward certain religious concepts without being intolerant towards the people who need to believe in them.

[Reeve Treaty]

All this guy does is tell the religious folk why they are wrong. The only thing common people will set aside their ego to listen to is undeniable proof shoved in their face about how someone else is right. When scientists massively produce immortal godly robotic bodies and dimension-hopping cars with a price tag that makes them convenience store worthy, only then will people all give into atheism universally. Until then, this comedy is only good for a few laughs and a lot of hate mail.

[kismet]

Yay, thread-revival.

ben, on Jul 25 2009, 09:00 PM, said:

Atheists who make excuses for ideological hatred just so long as it's of an atheist bent need to reassess their priorities.

Eh? What and when? I fear you'd quickly accuse sceptics practising their right of mockery and freedom of speech as "ideological hatred". OTOH, I may even concur. I do hate religion because of my ideology. My ideology is sceptical inquiry and religion is the antithesis of our world-view.

Reeve, what?

Edited by kismet, 07 October 2009 - 08:10 PM.

[Mind]

The one thing I respect about him is that he takes on other religions besides Christianity. Most others are not that courageous.

[JLL]

That's a damn fine speech he makes. I get what ben is saying, but no rational man should be afraid of criticizing religion. Howl mockery at the cross!

[Ben Simon]

JLL, on Oct 7 2009, 06:07 PM, said:

That's a damn fine speech he makes. I get what ben is saying, but no rational man should be afraid of criticizing religion. Howl mockery at the cross!

It's hardly criticism of religion that I take issue with. I take issue with irrationality and hatred.

There is nothing rational about Condell's rants, and anyone who supports him while claiming a commitment to rationality is announcing themselves as being totally frivolous. That this even needs to be pointed out is staggering to me. It really should be perfectly self evident. The guy deals in free association hate mongering devoid of meaningful content.

Whatever you think of religion in any of it's varied forms, the discussion simply deserves better than the sort of discourse a man like Condell is capable of providing.

Quote

I fear you'd quickly accuse sceptics practising their right of mockery and freedom of speech as "ideological hatred".

That assumption is based on nothing more than the convenience it affords you in ignoring my argument. I would only accuse anyone of such if I had legitimate grounds to do so. Mere scepticism doesn't qualify.

Quote

My ideology is sceptical inquiry and religion is the antithesis of our world-view.

Then be consistent in the application of that world-view. Otherwise you're just another primate looking for a tribe to adopt you. Siding with the atheist equivalent of a demented soap box preacher is not a good start.

Edited by ben, 08 October 2009 - 05:30 PM.

[Esoparagon]

Yeah, I've known of him for a while. He's extremely intelligent and absolutely hilarious. He's just what this world needs.

[Singularity]

ben, on Jul 25 2009, 08:21 AM, said:

I'm always very disheartened when atheists express positive opinions of Condell. This is the kind of guy the atheist community should want no association with whatsoever. He's a hateful, spiteful, obsessional bigot. His videos are nothing but televised rants.

At its best, atheism is courageous, rational and humane. This guy is none of those things. He's just another fanatic who happens to be on your side.

ben, you are confused.  Atheism is not a moral doctrine... or even a religion.  It's just a word with a really simple definition.  Atheists are as varied as you can imagine.  Stop trying to redefine what it means to be an atheist.  That's a religious tactic used to stir-up judgment of others.

[Singularity]

He NAILS it here:

"The truth has become distinctly unfashionable.  Speaking your mind is now seen as virtually antisocial because some opportunistic crybaby is surely to take offense and throw a tantrum and that might threaten community cohesion."

[Shannon Vyff]

My husband viewed Eddie Izzard's current live show in Manchester last night, and along with dressing straight for this tour he is tearing down all religions in a "polite" manner, sounds good-he'll be taking his new tour to the US in '10.

[Ben Simon]

Singularity, on Nov 8 2009, 03:55 AM, said:

ben, on Jul 25 2009, 08:21 AM, said:

I'm always very disheartened when atheists express positive opinions of Condell. This is the kind of guy the atheist community should want no association with whatsoever. He's a hateful, spiteful, obsessional bigot. His videos are nothing but televised rants.

At its best, atheism is courageous, rational and humane. This guy is none of those things. He's just another fanatic who happens to be on your side.

ben, you are confused.  Atheism is not a moral doctrine... or even a religion.  It's just a word with a really simple definition.  Atheists are as varied as you can imagine.  Stop trying to redefine what it means to be an atheist.  That's a religious tactic used to stir-up judgment of others.

How odd. Are you using my above quote as an example of what you describe? That would be strange.

I have not presented atheism as a moral doctrine, or a religion (wtf?), nor have I stated that atheists are not varied (in fact my comment suggest that they are).

Redefine what it means to atheist?? Religious tactic?? Are you suggesting my opinions on Condell are derived of religious beliefs?

How bizarre.

Please explain your comments. Consider that perhaps you are merely throwing rocks at someone because you don't like what they have to say, as your post was a non sequitur.

Edited by ben, 08 November 2009 - 06:56 PM.

[Ben Simon]

Esoparagon, on Oct 8 2009, 01:25 PM, said:

Yeah, I've known of him for a while. He's extremely intelligent and absolutely hilarious. He's just what this world needs.

*Facepalm*

[Singularity]

ben, you are implying that Condell is not a good atheist.  Just exactly where do you get this dogmatic idea?  Condell is 100% atheist because he does not believe in God.  You can't say he's not a very good atheist or not representative of some ideal atheist because you don't like something about the guy personally.  THAT is a non sequitur.

There is no "atheism at it's best," as you say.  There are no good atheist or bad atheist.  There are just atheists; those who don't believe in God.  Atheism has nothing to do with moral codes or anything else other than not believing in God, period.

[Ben Simon]

Singularity, on Nov 8 2009, 06:34 PM, said:

ben, you are implying that Condell is not a good atheist.  Just exactly where do you get this dogmatic idea?

No, I am implying that he is a poor thinker on par with a religious lunatic, and as such a poor representative of atheism. Like all viewpoints, atheism is 'up for sale'. It has to make its way in a marketplace of ideas, and will be scrutinised on the basis of its most vocal proponents.

As for 'dogmatic'? I know we disagree and stuff, but you're being theatrical and it diminishes the quality of discussion. I haven't come close to expressing a dogmatic viewpoint.

Quote

Condell is 100% atheist because he does not believe in God.

Uh huh.

Quote

You can't say he's not a very good atheist or not representative of some ideal atheist because you don't like something about the guy personally.  THAT is a non sequitur.

See above. My position is legit.

Quote

There is no "atheism at it's best," as you say.  There are no good atheist or bad atheist.  There are just atheists; those who don't believe in God.  Atheism has nothing to do with moral codes or anything else other than not believing in God, period.

Like it or not, while atheism itself is a simple state of non belief, there absolutely is an atheist culture. There are atheist conferences, websites, advocacy groups, etcetera. There are also those in public life who are (whether they choose to be or not, and most do) spokespeople for atheism.

Pat Condell is a terrible spokesperson, reinforcing the worst stereotypes.

Edited by ben, 16 December 2009 - 02:32 AM.