What do Chuck Norris, the Pope, and Richard Dawkins All Have in Common? December 5, 2007

What do Chuck Norris, the Pope, and Richard Dawkins All Have in Common?

They’re all nominees for (UK publication) New Humanist magazine’s 2007 Bad Faith Awards.

The award, with nominees selected by readers, aims to figure out “who will be crowned 2007’s most scurrilous enemy of reason.”

The nominees:

  • Chuck Norris: These days the martial arts legend seems to spend less time cracking skulls and more time lamenting the moral decline of Western civilisation. His weekly column on conservative Christian website WorldNetDaily is a goldmine of evangelical rantings, and his Bad Faith nomination comes by way of his declaration that if he was US President he would “tattoo an American flag with the words ‘In God we trust’ on the forehead of every atheist”.
  • The Bishop of Carlisle: This Cumbrian prelate shot to fame when he suggested this summer’s floods were God’s punishment for Britain’s liberal attitude to homosexuality.
  • Richard Dawkins: One heretic New Humanist reader even put forward rationalism’s very own Dawkins, for turning “the 19th century’s doubting of religious dogma into another kind of dogma”. The cheek…
  • Westboro Baptist Church: That delightful bunch who picket the funerals of US soldiers killed in Iraq, displaying such tactful signs as “God hates fags” and “God blew up the troops”.
  • Archbishop Francisco Chimoio: Head of the Catholic Church in Mozambique who claims some European-made condoms are deliberately infected with HIV in order to quickly finish off the African people.
  • Dinesh D’Souza: Conservative author who said the following about the Virginia Tech massacre: “Notice something interesting about the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings? Atheists are nowhere to be found”.
  • General Sir Richard Dannatt: Chief of the General Staff, and self professed evangelical, who said: “In my business, asking people to risk their lives is part of the job, but doing so without giving them the chance to understand that there is a life after death is something of a betrayal”.
  • Pope Benedict XVI: Clearly the bookies’ favourite. Perhaps he should be excluded to give the rest a chance?

Go vote for your favorite here!

The deadline is December 16th. The winner will be announced in the January/February issue of New Humanist.

[tags]atheist, atheism[/tags]

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • I’m upset Allister McGrath didn’t make the list. Or, what I meant to say, was this: that while some may find Mr. McGrath a positive figure in many of the variations of faith in Jesus, I find Mr. McGrath-no offence meant to him at all, I’m sure he’s a wonderful person of that particular faith-a less-than-desirable speaker for his constant habit of wishy-washiness and his innate ability to talk for hours without saying anything or even finishing his first sentence, although some people may enjoy that style of debate and Mr. McGrath should continue if it makes those people happy, which it very well may do, on the other hand, one must ask himself (or herself) if, supposing that they have faith in Jesus, they would really want someone who is so apologetic to everything to be a spokesperson for their beliefs, but whatever is the consensus about Mr. McGrath, he is a nice gentleman with honourable intentions.

    Ugh… writing that made me sick.

  • The Unbrainwashed

    Sacrilege to include Dawkins! Since when is passion for the truth and passion for exhuming this world of superstition and delusion a bad thing?

  • grazatt

    D’Souza is in the lead. I wonder why?

  • stogoe

    Since when is passion for the truth and passion for exhuming this world of superstition and delusion a bad thing?

    Well, you see, it might make the ‘moderate’ believers slightly uncomfortable. Making people ashamed of their silly dogma is exactly as bad as kicking a baby in the face. DUH!

  • Viggo the Carpathian

    I think that Dawkins made the list because he is zealous in his non-beliefs and a zealot by any philosophy is still a zealot. Don’t get me wrong- I like Dawkins, but he and Hitchens and Harris are all a little over the top in dissing religion.

    As most religion is worthy of dissing, I’m cool with that.

  • Hitchens might have been a better choice than Dawkins for this particular list, IMHO.

  • Dawkins should be up there for bad Biblical scholarship alone which ranks with the cherry-picking of the worst Fundamentalist.

    Sacrilege to include Dawkins!

    And this statement clinches the argument that he’s setting himself up as atheism’s leading dogmatist.

    Arf arf!

error: Content is protected !!