|
Special Features Attack on The United Churches of Christ Attack on The United Methodist Church "The Christian Right, Dominionism, and Theocracy", by Chip Berlet "Taking Over The Republican Party", a four part series by Joan Bokaer The Woman in A Mink CoatWhile We Were sleepingAngels On a PinheadUnder Cover of Night BlogsBartholomew's Notes On ReligionChip BerletMax BlumenthalThe Panda's ThumbFrederick Clarkson Chuck Currie DefCon father Jake Stops The World John Gorenfeld Religion Clause Chris Mooney Religious Right Watch The Revealer Jesus Politics Majority Report Radio Blog Mainstream Baptist Orcinus Dispatches from the Culture Wars Ex-Gay Watch The Wall of Separation Blog From The Capital:a blog on religious liberty issues and the separation of church and stateOrganizationsAmerican Booksellers Foundation for Freedom of ExpressionACLUAnti-Defamation LeagueAmerican Library AssociationChristian Alliance for ProgressCitizens ProjectDefCon: Campaign to Defend The ConstitutionFaithful America People For the American wayInstitute For Democracy StudiesInterfaith AllianceJews On First: Defending the First AmendmentAmerican Fundamentalists Americans United for Separation of Church and StateBaptist Joint Committee on Religious Liberty The Clergy and laity Network Political Research Associates Theocracy Watch Media Matters for AmericaMilitary Religious Freedom FoundationMontana Human Rights NetworkNational Center For Science EducationReligious Coalition for Reproductive ChoiceThe RevealerSouthern Poverty Law CenterTexas Freedom NetworkCrossLeft: Organizing the Christian LeftTheocracy WatchTruth Wins Out" |
Reason Requires Facts (or it ain't reason)
If you are just joining us, here is where it all started: Gimme That Old Time Religion (Bashing). In response, Austin Cline, the atheism columnist at the mega web site About.com charged that I am "another who unambiguously misrepresents Sam Harris;" and "irresponsible and not particularly honest." He also lumps me together with "liberal Christians of all kinds [who] are adopting the same irresponsible, dishonest tactic. They can't address what Harris actually says, so instead they make up things they can attribute to him and whine about." Setting aside Cline's invective for the moment, let's get right into the heart of the matter: Briefly, I critiqued Mr. Harris's argument as it appeared in the op-ed. I pointed out that he claims that jihadists and dominionists are at the center of Islam and Christianity, respectively, and that there exist concentric circles of moderates and liberals beyond these who are providing cover for the extremists at the center of their faith. I objected first to the bogus premise that jihadists and dominionists are at the center of anything, and went on to discuss Harris's claim that moderate and liberal religionists enable this dysfunctional and dangerous condition and are therefore responsible for the views and acts of these extreme elements. Here is the nugget of Mr. Cline's complaint:
Frederick Clarkson is another who unambiguously misrepresents Sam Harris: There is a lot there, but Mr. Cline's attack on my honesty hangs on the phrase, "inadvertently provide shelter to extremists." Let's begin with the title on Mr. Harris's LA Times op-ed: "God's dupes: Moderate believers give cover to religious fanatics -- and are every bit as delusional." Note the active verb construction: "give cover" -- to religious fanatics while being every bit as delusional. Indeed. Harris's title makes his meaning crystal clear: and there is nothing in the article that would lead the reader to view it otherwise. When we get down to the ninth paragraph out of thirteen, we arrive at the phrase "inadvertently provide shelter to extremists." It is at this point that Cline lifts the word word "inadvertently" out of the context of the article to tell us what Harris really meant. Unfortunatley for Cline, even the out of context focus on that word doesn't help him. Mirriam Webster's online dictionary definitions for the one out of context word,"inadvertent" on which he hangs his accusation are, first, "inattentive;" the second; "unintentional." Neither word implies a lack of responsibility or blamelessness. For example, people die in traffic accidents because of being inattentive. Deaths in hunting accidents may be ruled unintentional. But lines of responsibility are clearly drawn in routine use. And that is precisely what Harris is doing in his op-ed regarding matters of tremendous consequence; war and peace; terrorism, and much more involving the role of religion and its adherents. So yes, a reasonble and I would say inescapable reading of Harris's op-ed is that he is holding moderates and liberals responsible for the views and acts of terrorists and theocrats. Again, he says up-top where you cannot miss it that "moderate believers give cover to religious fanatics." And even if he later avers that the cover given is inadvertent, Harris is nevertheless clearly holding moderates and liberals responsible for the views and actions of others. Whether he thinks the degree of responsibility is small or large is not clear and is one reason why we need to hear a factually supported argument. As some of the wise heads at Daily Kos like to say, extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence. I think that is a reasonable standard. Like any other responsible writer in the face of a challenge to his credibility, I gave Mr. Cline's complaint considerable time and consideration. I wanted to make sure I had not misunderstood or misconstrued anything. Having done so, I stand by what I wrote as a fair and reasoned analsysis of Mr. Harris's op-ed. Mr. Cline has every right to disagree with my critique of Mr. Harris -- but there was nothing remotely dishonest about it.
Reason Requires Facts (or it ain't reason) | 17 comments (17 topical, 0 hidden)
Reason Requires Facts (or it ain't reason) | 17 comments (17 topical, 0 hidden)
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
print page
