Comments on: First Freedom First: Defending the right to worship . . . or not. http://dangerousintersection.org/2008/04/27/first-freedom-first-defending-the-right-to-worship-or-not/ Human Animals at the Crossroads of Culture, Science, Religion and Media Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:22:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Erich Vieth http://dangerousintersection.org/2008/04/27/first-freedom-first-defending-the-right-to-worship-or-not/#comment-17937 Erich Vieth Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:38:51 +0000 http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=2511#comment-17937 Dan: I agree with much of what you've said. The production of this video is somewhat 1960's--it seems amateurish--and I cringe at the cutaways to the audience clapping on cue. It reminds me of an infomercial. But it's one of the first times I've seen a lengthy presentation geared to regular folks where these issue of separation of church and state are discussed at length. Where else would you tell a person to go on the Internet to get a first taste of the debate regarding separation clause? A lot of people come to this debate with preconceptions that teaching the public school kids lessons about Jesus and the Bible "Will do them some good--maybe it will even get them off those street drugs and keep them from having indiscrimiate sex." I do think we need accessible videos of this sort (but yes, produced more professionally and persuasively) as a launch point for those people who have just come from Kent Hovind's or Ken Ham's sites and have no idea that there even IS a legitimate issue. I suspect that many of these people will immediately tune out to the extent that they encounter Richard Dawkins' videos. I also suspect that the presence of Believers (as in this video) will put some people at ease that this is not another example of those immoral atheists trying to destroy America. Do you have any suggestions of websites to recommend to Believers who are actually sympathetic to the idea of the Ten Commandments being posted in public schools, who are nonetheless willing to listen to the other side? Dan: I agree with much of what you’ve said. The production of this video is somewhat 1960’s–it seems amateurish–and I cringe at the cutaways to the audience clapping on cue. It reminds me of an infomercial.

But it’s one of the first times I’ve seen a lengthy presentation geared to regular folks where these issue of separation of church and state are discussed at length. Where else would you tell a person to go on the Internet to get a first taste of the debate regarding separation clause? A lot of people come to this debate with preconceptions that teaching the public school kids lessons about Jesus and the Bible “Will do them some good–maybe it will even get them off those street drugs and keep them from having indiscrimiate sex.”

I do think we need accessible videos of this sort (but yes, produced more professionally and persuasively) as a launch point for those people who have just come from Kent Hovind’s or Ken Ham’s sites and have no idea that there even IS a legitimate issue.

I suspect that many of these people will immediately tune out to the extent that they encounter Richard Dawkins’ videos. I also suspect that the presence of Believers (as in this video) will put some people at ease that this is not another example of those immoral atheists trying to destroy America.

Do you have any suggestions of websites to recommend to Believers who are actually sympathetic to the idea of the Ten Commandments being posted in public schools, who are nonetheless willing to listen to the other side?

]]> By: Dan Klarmann http://dangerousintersection.org/2008/04/27/first-freedom-first-defending-the-right-to-worship-or-not/#comment-17936 Dan Klarmann Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:09:36 +0000 http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=2511#comment-17936 This <b>2-hour</b> video will not persuade believers in "our Christian Nation" that there is any valid way to live other than as a Christian (or grudgingly as a Jew). The initial flip and comic interludes seemed sophomoric to me. Much of the text seems to argue for "an atheist agenda", if seen through the eyes of the "oppressed Christians". Remember that "Atheist", "Secular", and "demonic" are synonymous to true believers. All the speakers and clips were from the same side. There isn't even a semblance of fairness, as "Expelled" <i>appears to</i> intend. This appearance is critical if one wants to change the minds of people. Watch some of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind" target="_blank" title="wiki: Kent Hovind" rel="nofollow">Kent Hovind</a>'s lecture videos. His ideas are demonstrably whack, but he delivers them convincingly with charm and persuasion. He is a pleasure to listen to, however much you disagree with him. I found this video tedious in many places. Points are made, but generally not in a manner meant to endear either opponents or undecideds. This 2-hour video will not persuade believers in “our Christian Nation” that there is any valid way to live other than as a Christian (or grudgingly as a Jew). The initial flip and comic interludes seemed sophomoric to me. Much of the text seems to argue for “an atheist agenda”, if seen through the eyes of the “oppressed Christians”. Remember that “Atheist”, “Secular”, and “demonic” are synonymous to true believers.

All the speakers and clips were from the same side. There isn’t even a semblance of fairness, as “Expelled” appears to intend. This appearance is critical if one wants to change the minds of people.

Watch some of Kent Hovind’s lecture videos. His ideas are demonstrably whack, but he delivers them convincingly with charm and persuasion. He is a pleasure to listen to, however much you disagree with him.

I found this video tedious in many places. Points are made, but generally not in a manner meant to endear either opponents or undecideds.

]]> By: Niklaus Pfirsig http://dangerousintersection.org/2008/04/27/first-freedom-first-defending-the-right-to-worship-or-not/#comment-17920 Niklaus Pfirsig Mon, 28 Apr 2008 04:18:42 +0000 http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=2511#comment-17920 Back when the "Moral Majority" was campaigning against the first admendment, the chairman of the Conference of Southern Baptists took a stand against Falwell, by stating "You can't have freedom of religion without freedom from religion." There has always been a belief among Christians that a church run government would be a virtuous government. History has shown time after time that the result is a corrupt church that anti democratic and un forgiving. The integration of church and state has brought many things to mankind: The crusades The Inquisition The Salem Witch trials The Taliban and for an extreme example, read up on the Roman emporer Caligula Back when the “Moral Majority” was campaigning against the first admendment, the chairman of the Conference of Southern Baptists took a stand against Falwell, by stating “You can’t have freedom of religion without freedom from religion.”

There has always been a belief among Christians that a church run government would be a virtuous government. History has shown time after time that the result is a corrupt church that anti democratic and un forgiving. The integration of church and state has brought many things to mankind:
The crusades
The Inquisition
The Salem Witch trials
The Taliban
and for an extreme example, read up on the Roman emporer Caligula

]]>