Irregular Times Diaries: Unfit Discussion
In a time of the spring, old paths are obscured and new growth begins.
Irregular Times Diaries: Unfit DiscussionIn a time of the spring, old paths are obscured and new growth begins.
Right wing extremists are all busy getting in a tizzy again about fictional books daring to not be fawning tributes to the old, moldy stories of Christianity. This time, they’re complaining that Philip Pullman, the author of The Golden Compass is a “militant atheist”.
How do they know? Have the read the book? Have they spoken to the author? Have they even gone to visit the author’s web site?
No, no, no, they haven’t bothered to do any actual research on the subject. They’re just accepting the propaganda that religious leaders pass out to them. They accept that propaganda on faith, as is their habit.
If they bothered to do a little research, they’d see that Philip Pullman is not really an atheist. He’s an agnostic. That means that he says he doesn’t know if there’s a God or not.
Here are the words right out of the man’s mouth: “I don’t know whether there’s a God or not. Nobody does, no matter what they say. I think it’s perfectly possible to explain how the universe came about without bringing God into it, but I don’t know everything, and there may well be a God somewhere, hiding away.”
If you call Philip Pullman a militant atheist, you just don’t know what you’re talking about. Also, if you find yourself whipped into the frothy furor of outrage against The Golden Compass and you haven’t even read the book, you are agreeing to be a tool of the Religious Right, a voluntary ignoramus.
(190 votes, average: 3.1 out of 5)
Irregular Times
New Button Designs
69 queries. 3.527 seconds
Top Article Last Week
November 24th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
1) Who is calling this author a “militant atheist”? All the links we have seen so far only say a Catholic school removed the book–which is described as promoting atheism–from the shelves of its *private* *religious* school library.
2) The link to the author’s website doesn’t say anything about religion that I can see. It’s just a bunch of drivel about writing in some garden shed and what’s your-favorite-character fluffy filler. Perhaps you meant to post a different link.
3) Some people who say they don’t know if there is a god or not (which I would classify as an agnostic) prefer to be called atheists. Jim is one of these and has made strong statements about it on these pages. I would refer to him as an atheist out of courtesy, as that is what he calls himself. Not that these atheists, or whatever they are, ever return any courtesy.
4) Where are the “religious leaders” who are “passing out propaganda”. Haven’t seen a link to that either.
5) Where are all these “right wing extremists” who are in tizzies, frothy furors, or outrages? Not one link to even one of them. I’m sure the book’s publicists would like there to be some, but where are they?
Oh, and if you don’t read the book, the terrorists win.
November 24th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
The catholic league is a “right wing extremists†group. Who actually implies the author is a “militant atheistâ€.
http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1342
And here is a link to those “religious leaders†who are “passing out propaganda†http://catholicleague.org/catalyst.php?year=2007&month=October&read=2322
November 25th, 2007 at 6:12 am
Once again, you’re not reading for yourself.
Bill Donohue of The Catholic League used the phrase “militant atheist”, and now all the right wing ditto heads are using the phrase too.
If you can’t read the page that I linked to, that’s your problem, not mine.
November 25th, 2007 at 10:20 am
[…] as they have been about works of fiction like The DaVinci Code and Harry Potter in the past. They call Philip Pullman a “militant atheist”, though in fact, he’s not. Pullman is clearly agnostic, not truly atheist. He says as much […]
November 25th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Thanks for the link, Evoluoie. Is Pullman a “militant atheist”?
The people who like to argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin–whether “militant atheist” or progressive agnostic/atheist will probably enjoy it. To me it’s beginning to look like a big moralizing bore. I hate when authors use fiction as a vehicle for some pet moral theory, whether it’s Narnia or Atlas Shrugged.
I’m going to sit this one out and wait for the next space western.
November 25th, 2007 at 2:56 pm
I must say it’s curious that conservative Christians are treating fiction as a serious rival.
November 25th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Yes, very curious. Also curious how Iroquois, when debated into a corner after spending hours and hours and hours trying to justify her untenable position now says that she’s “going to sit this one out”. Looks to me like she’s already tried to stand this one in, and just fell down.
A classic case of “I meant to do that.”
Also curious how she is now saying that The Golden Compass is “a big moralizing bore” when she still hasn’t lifted a finger to actually read the book. Not one little page of it. How could she possibly know what she’s talking about?
WARNING: SPOILER TO COME, AVERT EYES ALL YE WHO WILL READ THE BOOK:
It starts with a little girl trapped with her companion spirit in a male-only elite room at Oxford, watching as the Master of the college pours a poison into a decanter of wine that her uncle, who is revealing the possible existence of multiple alternative worlds at the North Pole, will soon drink.
It’s so, you know, boring… nothing ever happens in that book!
November 25th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Usually people tell me I should get out more, but “Frank Liberal”, if you’re spending an entire Sunday afternoon defending a children’s book you haven’t even read, and if you think medieval theological dogma isn’t boring, then YOU need to get out more.
Ralph, it isn’t “Christians“. So far, it’s just one Christian, the guy who announces what Catholics are supposed to read. Surprise, surprise, surprise, Catholics are not advised to read it.
But check wikipedia for Catholic league. [The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, (formerly The Catholic Purity League)–hee, hee] Apparently it’s run by one guy, William A. Donohue, who people say is typically alone in the office, which is inside the headquarters of the Archdiocese of New York. In 2005 Donohue’s salary from the Catholic league was $334,143.
Do you make $334,143, “Frank Liberal”? Are you still jeering? If your puppeteers really expect you to create the illusion of a huge right wing conspiracy against this book you’re hyping, they ought to cough up a bit more cash, ya think?
November 26th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Check a search engine or two, then tell me only one Christian has attacked this book.
November 26th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
My time is limited but I do want to keep up with the progressive thought, which is the main reason I read this blog. I hope, perhaps in vain, that the writers here are continuously familiarizing themselves with a range of progressive issues and are providing a digest of the most important (and most amusing) here.
Between them, in the last day, the writers here have written some umpteen articles on this book alone. If they have not posted more examples of the “right wing conspiracy” against the book than just this one guy at the Catholic league, I wonder why.
November 26th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
So, no time to check.
But time to “wonder…” and time to post over and over again, making claims based on a lack of evidence.
That’s awfully convenient.
We’ve been here before, IH. You’ve got your heels dug in on this one and are determined to be right, despite mountains of readily available evidence that you apparently don’t have three minutes to look up. When someone DOES look it up and spoon feeds it to you, you say “whoop-dee-doo, you can use a search engine.”
Knock yourself out.
For anybody else out there who is “wondering,” type the words “Golden Compass” and “militant atheist” into a basic search engine. Spend three minutes scrolling through the results, and you will find dozens and dozens of Christian bloggers who are opposed to this movie.
I did it. I saw it. It’s there. If you don’t believe me, do the search yourself.
Or don’t do the search, and “wonder” why I didn’t spoon feed you the results. Am I part of the “elitist-humanist/New Age/post-modern/scientist/pagan/atheist/homosexual/intellectualist/monsters-that-hide-under-fundamentalist-Christians’-beds” agenda?
Keep “wondering,” don’t check!
November 26th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Dozens and dozens of Christian bloggers opposed to the movie?
Time enough to post nine paragraphs about them but not enough to post a link to even one of them? Correct me if I’m wrong, but comments here are a “no follow” type of thing, and linking to a crackpot site does not give them google mojo juice? if that’s what you’re worried about, I’m only too happy to paste it in the browser window myself.
And no, I’m not going to take anyone’s word for it. I have long noticed that the writers here have religious blinders. Sometimes they link to something innocuous and claim it is scary, and sometimes they link to something that is scarier than I ever dreamed could exist and they have casually understated the threat.
And when have I ever complained about anyone posting a link? You MUST be thinking of someone else.
November 26th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Why, how diabolically clever of me to try to trick you into thinking that more than one Christian had objected to the Golden Compass!
My nefarious scheme apparently involved giving you the precise parameters of a web search, knowing full well you wouldn’t check. How manipulative of me!
The first two pages alone out of 48,000 hits on the web search you didn’t do would have turned up the following:
http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2007/10/27/dont-take-your-kids-to-this-movie/
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20071117/30131_The_Golden_Compass_Has_No_Moral_Compass.htm
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/nov/07112202.html
http://www.zenit.org/rssenglish-21008
http://spiritual-research-network.blogspot.com/2007/11/golden-compass-philip-pullmanss-books.html
http://community.kaboose.com/discussions/post/25319/
http://sunandshield.blogspot.com/2007/11/golden-compass.html
Of course, since you didn’t do the search, you have no way of knowing that.
And without checking, which is something you are adamantly avoiding for some reason, you will never have any way of knowing anything.
In fact, so long as you refuse to either accept someone’s word for something OR check for yourself, you can go on and on arguing indefinitely about something that is very easily proven or disproven.
Which would be a silly thing to do, but hardly an atypical way to discuss religion.
November 26th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
Nice choices.
I’ve always known that beside being nefarious and diabolically clever, you were also a gentleman and a scholar. High time for some scholarship, say I.
Almost all of your links are part of the Catholic League echo chamber and repeat basically the same stuff about anti-Catholicism and an agenda for teaching children atheism. Snopes repeats it verbatim and some are quoting Snopes as well.
The last is more thoughtful from a retired professor of a Methodist university who muses about atheism and posts these links to Pullman’s old interviews. I’ve always preferred reading originals to secondary sources, so here are his links:
Pullman interview about C.S Lewis and Narnia:
http://www.crlamppost.org/darkside.htm
1993 Pullman interview about His Dark Materials:
http://www.thirdway.org.uk/past/showpage.asp?page=3949
In a 2004 sermon, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, advocated teaching “His Dark Materials” as part of Religious Educatioon for schoolchildren:
Williams considers Pullman to be part of the tradition of ‘protest atheism’, or “the mythological theme of revolt against God”, and groups Pullman with Bertrand Russell, Shelley, and Blake.
http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sermons_speeches/2004/040308a.html
Now THAT is a lot more interesting than all the media hype.
November 26th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
The system is throwing my comments in the spam filter when I’m logged in? Or maybe they’re in moderation.
Until the smurfs can fish them out, I’ll post just one link which hopefully will make it past the watchdog software.
Just in case there is someone out there who wants to read something thoughtful, instead of all the U-rah-rah I-hate-old-ladies cheerleader hype out there tonight:
http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sermons_speeches/2004/040308a.html
December 7th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Got to side with Iriqouis on this one. Though I don’t agree with everything, you got to expect people, especially christians to feel under attack. Reading the book, its easy to see why, regardless of what the author says about “unbiased” views. There ARE attacks in their, and Christians dont want their kids to read that, they got every right too. If they feel they need to prevent others to read it, again they got their own rights. Meanwhile, the agnostics, atheists and everyone else will be fighting the other way and the quiet readers will sit back, watch and figure out their own ideas for themselves.
Your being a bit of a hypocrite yourself Ralph by the way you lump the entire christian groups as being one opposed force. Each branch is unique and different, though based on the same ideas, just like all asians are not from the same country and people are differnt. A majority is gonna be opposed to this book; just like a majority of aethists, agnostics, muslims, and so forth don’t like reading the bible.
I know a lot of christians here that enjoyed the movie and could care less about it. They enjoyed the special effects, as did I and the overall charachters. Either way though,some peopl feel the need to stand and fight for something. All in all, I don’t like the book. And I am under the banner of “No beleif set yet”. Im a seeker.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
During a Nov. 28, 2007 phone interview, Pullman told the Humanist Network News podcast:
“Identifying oneself as anything, for a writer, for a novelist, is a perilous thing because then you find yourself acting as a spokesman for this cause or that cause. I have always tried to avoid saying ‘I am an agnostic’, ‘I am an atheist’, ‘I am a humanist’, ‘I am an anything else’ because that way you are limiting the way that your books are received.”
…
“I’m sorry to be sort of reluctant to accept labels, but one of the reasons for this is that I don’t like telling people how to read texts. This is the sin that the fundamentalists commit, in my view. They say, ‘You must understand this book literally,’”
To listen to the interview or read the entire transcript from the 20 minute interview, visit: http://humaniststudies.org/podcast/philippullman.html
December 8th, 2007 at 10:57 am
I believe Pullman is getting too much credit for the “uproar” surrounding the The Golden Compass movie and the books they are based on. He is just one of many sources of thinly veiled swipes at Christianity over the recent years, only now under the guise of fiction. My main concern is the use of childrens books to campaign for support of atheistic “ideals” to fill the spirtual void in children’s lives with a more concentrated void of self fulfillment. Will Pullman become Christianity’s Salmon Rushdie? Hardly. He will be dismissed like all the others when his 15 minutes are up. PS. Hw many atheists does it take to change a light bulb? None, for there is no light.
December 8th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
You obviously haven’t read to the end of the books if you think the message is one of self-fulfillment, vraskoko.
December 8th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
You also obviously haven’t even looked at the book, The Golden Compass, if you think it’s a children’s book that promotes atheist ideals. It’s not for children, and it doesn’t promote atheist ideals. Have you read it?
Also, vraskoko, why would you blame atheism for the void that Christianity leaves in people’s lives?
December 11th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
I’d like to know what a “more concentrated void” is.
How do you concentrate a void?
December 11th, 2007 at 8:35 pm
Yes, yes! In what way is Christianity a concentrated void of self-fulfillment?
War on Christmas! War on Christmas!
December 11th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
Hmmm, a concentrated void of self-fulfullment? Perhaps this is a contrast with “self-denial”, as in “what are you giving up for Lent?” Having observed Ramadan on a number of occasions, it occurs to me that self-fulfillment might be more concentrated than self-denial. If you fulfill yourself with, say, Brussel’s sprouts, instead of chocolate, this might well leave the aforementioned “spiritual void”.
Before embracing a religion, always, always ask the food questions.
December 13th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Evrybody makes there own Truth. The Atheist The religion of the world Makes theire own Truth
The Truth is that There is no Truth, The Truth is what one makes and want to Believed on it There wasnt no Superiority on one Truth or another.
The VOID was the unlimited Truth that cannot been comprehend By Reason You cannot concentrate on the void if you have a lot of unwanted thougths that delude your mind,That’s imposible, The Mind and Reasons exist only on Dual world. The questioned was How could be one with the Void, in order to know the Existence? That questioned makes a Billion dollar problem, The Agnostic said I DONT KNOW.
December 13th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
There’s a difference between “concentrating” something and “concentrating on” something.
If you sit down and think really hard about milk, shutting all other thoughts out of your mind, do you end up with concentrated milk?
December 13th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
That was interesting though, You know what it’s very easy to say, First of all you should control your mind then knowing the thought process in order to create an still object, But to control the mind and thougth is not that easy Ralph, Your just like controlling the wind.
December 15th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Apparently gaining control of mind and “thougth” doesn’t do much for your spelling or grammar…
December 15th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
Your Rigth Genuis that’s all you got to Defend your Ego
December 15th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
Perhaps Davoid’s first language is not English. Doesn’t Toronto have a lot of immigrants?
December 16th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
You are Absolutely Rigth Iroquois Im using the Library internet From GERARD st. in Toronto. Am Immigrant just like your Mom & Dad
December 16th, 2007 at 10:40 pm
No, Davoid, I’m 3rd generation American.
Ralph is correct about the difference between “concentrate”, which can mean either “think hard” or “make (food) stronger by taking out the water” and “concentrate on” which means “think about”.
In post #18 vraskoko says:
Vraskoko is not thinking for himself, but only repeating the opinion of the Catholic church. A void is nothing. So how can you have a “more concentrated void.” If you multiply zero by a thousand, you still have zero. Ralph is good at catching that type of meaningless speech–he knows how to concentrate! Hee, hee. Vraskoko’s spelling is also not very good.
December 16th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
BTW, isn’t it curious that all the people who were going to read the book in order to defy the Catholic church’s pronouncements are suddenly very quiet. Maybe they don’t want to spoil the ending. Yeah, that’s the ticket. It’s not a profound philosophical book, it’s just another Agatha Christie-type don’t-spoil-the-ending formula book. The movie opened some time ago but no posts from anyone who saw the movie either.
December 17th, 2007 at 9:43 am
Your on Denial iroquois I Know you, How could I believed that you guys are Correct Did you experienced what your are saying?it’s only Words Iroquois, LOGIC without Experienced was IRATIONAL.You want me to believed of what you are saying? “No Way” You guys are on Denial.
December 17th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
No Davoid, it is not a joke.
This internet dictionary has 30 languages:
http://dictionary.reference.com/languages/
Look for it in your own language.
You also need to review the English rules for using capital letters.
December 17th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
That’s not the language bariers, otherwise you wouldnt respond,That’s all you got Have some dignity with your self, you worked with Jim, so your one of his DOG,
December 18th, 2007 at 1:04 am
I don’t know Jim. I am a teacher. I teach English to immigrants.
http://teachernotebook.wordpress.com/
Now we are chatting about a book. Do you have a comment about the book or do you just like to say bad things to people you don’t know?
December 18th, 2007 at 7:53 am
Iroqios says “No Davoid im 3rd generation American” Pls. Dont lie to your self Your from TORONTO
The Differences Beetween us Im HONEST and Your NOT.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:27 am
“The Truth is that There is no Truth”
–coo-hoool! So you’re saying that one of the characteristics of truth is that it isn’t true? How cool is that!
“The Agnostic said I DONT KNOW.”
–is that really true?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:45 am
#38: Anonymous is me, Scott
December 18th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
What do you “THINK”
December 18th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
I “think” you missed my joke.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Well, it’s always good to be “Rigth.”
So people say sarcastic things to other people to defend their egos?
Is that right, Genius?
December 18th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Hey genuis that’s My line, Are you talkin to Scott
I think i got your joke.
July 16th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
I have not read the book, so can make no comment on The Golden Compass as a literary work.
I have,however, seen the show, and it is very boring. But then, I consider the Chronicles of Narnia boring as well as Lord of the Rings.
January 6th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
YEfA5njuXutlb