Well the drama continues, the latest? Mick Nugent pens a response to an anti-Dawkins piece in The Guardian.
No, I didn’t link to any of it, all of this is getting rather tiresome. Someone writes an anti-[name inserted here] blog or article, there’s some piling on by others, then a response blog, more piling on from the “other side” (whichever it happens to be) and the cycle doesn’t seem to want to end.
The only way it will end (currently)is if Mick just moves on and starts ignoring those that want to do nothing but create wounds in others and keep dividing people. That’s probably a good thing for the rest of us to do as well. Some may say that would give the impression of surrender; I think it denies some the meat they crave.
I hope he’s starting to come to the realization that no matter what he writes, how he shows that the attacks are just that: without reason, nothing will ever change. Some people will never be convinced of any error in their opinion.
That’s a shame, too. I believe the first examination a skeptic should make is of his or her own beliefs. I actually think that Matthew 7:3 absolutely applies to skeptics as well as believers.
I don’t have an issue with skeptics disagreeing as I’ve written about numerous times over the last year or so; the problem I have is that when skeptics are presented with evidence that contradicts a belief or ideology, what happens is exactly the opposite of what should happen.