Difference between revisions of "2006-12-29 God's Enemies Are More Honest Than His Friends"

From Issuepedia
(new page from form at http://issuepedia.org/Issuepedia:Form.link.news)
 
m (Text replace - "<noinclude>category:data.links</noinclude>{{#vardefine:keylist|}}{{data.pair|Date|" to "<hide> <let name=data index=Date>")
Line 1: Line 1:
<noinclude>[[category:data.links]]</noinclude>{{#vardefine:keylist|}}{{data.pair|Date|2006-12-29}}
+
<hide>
 +
<let name=data index=Date>2006-12-29}}
 
{{data.pair|Topics|\Sam Harris/writings\atheism vs. religion}}
 
{{data.pair|Topics|\Sam Harris/writings\atheism vs. religion}}
 
{{data.pair|URL|2=http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2006/12/gods_enemies_are_more_honest_t_1.html}}
 
{{data.pair|URL|2=http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2006/12/gods_enemies_are_more_honest_t_1.html}}

Revision as of 18:04, 4 April 2011

<hide> <let name=data index=Date>2006-12-29}}{{#vardefine:Topics|\Sam Harris/writings\atheism vs. religion}}{{#vardefine:keylist|{{#var:keylist}}\Topics}}{{#vardefine:Topics.disp|\Sam Harris/writings\atheism vs. religion}}{{#vardefine:URL|http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2006/12/gods_enemies_are_more_honest_t_1.html}}{{#vardefine:keylist%7C{{#var:keylist}}\URL}}{{#vardefine:URL.disp%7Chttp://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2006/12/gods_enemies_are_more_honest_t_1.html}}{{#vardefine:Title%7CGod’s Enemies Are More Honest Than His Friends}}{{#vardefine:keylist|{{#var:keylist}}\Title}}{{#vardefine:Title.disp|God’s Enemies Are More Honest Than His Friends}}{{#vardefine:Text|“As someone who has spent the last few years publicly criticizing religion, I have become quite familiar with how people of faith rise to the defense of God. As it turns out, there aren’t a hundred ways of doing this. There appear to be just three: either a person argues that a specific religion is true, or he argues that religion is useful, or he simply attacks atheism as intolerant, elitist, irrational, or otherwise worthy of contempt. Any conversation between atheists and believers is liable to fall into one or more of these ruts, or lurch back and forth between them:” Harris proceeds to discuss and answer each of these three claims.}}{{#vardefine:keylist|{{#var:keylist}}\Text}}{{#vardefine:Text.disp|“As someone who has spent the last few years publicly criticizing religion, I have become quite familiar with how people of faith rise to the defense of God. As it turns out, there aren’t a hundred ways of doing this. There appear to be just three: either a person argues that a specific religion is true, or he argues that religion is useful, or he simply attacks atheism as intolerant, elitist, irrational, or otherwise worthy of contempt. Any conversation between atheists and believers is liable to fall into one or more of these ruts, or lurch back and forth between them:” Harris proceeds to discuss and answer each of these three claims.}} {{#xploop:{{#var:Topics}}||}} {{#xploop:{{#var:keylist}}|\n* $s$: \o#var:$s$.disp\c}}

  • Topic pages:{{#xploop:{{#var:Topics}}| $s$}}
  • Topic categories:{{#xploop:{{#var:Topics}}| $s$}}