Concerns About Sony's Religious Intolerance

[Seabound]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

The original poster clearly said they had no objection to the book being generally available.
I'm puzzled why people are going out of their way to twist what was said, and then get themselves aerated about it.

I agree with this observation. I think some comments indicate that some are reading more into the original poster's words and motivations rather than taking them at face value.

[Seabound]

Originally Posted by kesey

Your argument was not simple. The U.S.S.R., China, Germany before and during W.W.II, not to mention many other regimes, had from time to time efficient methods of removing dissent or "attacks on their rightly held beliefs".

Shucks, you were thiiiiiiis close.

[AprilHare]

My point goes to the persons inability to face a challenge to their faith. Viewing an abstract to a book and asking for it to be censored in such a way as to prevent them and others from receiving it (whether they are informed previously or not is irrelevant) is in effect trying to shield themselves and others from it and the challenge. In my view, my point stands.

Originally Posted by Sparrow

The original poster clearly said they had no objection to the book being generally available.
I'm puzzled why people are going out of their way to twist what was said, and then get themselves aerated about it.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Seabound

And about the "There's probably no God" campaign, I'm curious to know why they have the word "probably" in there. It sounds like the campaign still has some lingering doubts about their belief, and leaves room that there is a finite probability that there is a God. Just sayin'.

I think there was some discussion about the word and if you google you will find that it was a compromise between different views.

But what I wanted to say was that all scientists are fallabilists. There is always room for the possibility that a theory is wrong. And since a lot of people do not know this and think that when you say "A is X" you mean it in the way that there is no room for it to not hold it can a good idea to use some other formulation in an advertisement. When you do science you do not use these kind of words.

[Valloric]

Originally Posted by Seabound

Shucks, you were thiiiiiiis close.

I too was expecting Godwin's Law to take effect, but alas, he missed it.

[mtravellerh]

Completely OT:

Just you wait. Only a few posts to go and then Mister Godwin is right again.
For those ignorant of Godwin's Law, here it is:“As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.”

[Patricia]

Originally Posted by msmith

As a new member, I really didn't expect to be tarred and feathered and have a hundred posts after mine in a matter of 24 hours for expressing a simple opinion.

Msmith, garnering over a hundred replies so quickly is a bit unusual. But it is because you expressed an opinion, and a controversial one at that. I suspect that you didn't realise that it was likely to stimulate such a lively discussion.
If you had posted a question on how to recharge the reader, (or anything calling for a factual answer) then a couple of people would have given you the solution and that would be that.
But opinions are different. By now you'll have noticed that everyone here has one, and that they don't always agree. In addition, we have members from all over the world and so, with their different backgrounds, they have different ideas about religion and diversity.
The hundred replies shows that the topic is interesting. Also, the topic was broadened in later posts (including mine) so that wider issues were discussed. This happens quite a lot on MR.

I am sorry that you feel that you've been "tarred and feathered." I don't think that was the intention of most of the posters. I think that the majority just saw an interesting discussion with strong contemporary resonances and jumped right in. And discussions online can quite "robust".

Incidentally do take a look at our book upload section, which contains a fair number of books on religion, including Christianity. There are Bibles, Apocryphas, lives of the saints, texts by Christian mystics and devotional works.

[Wetdogeared]

I've recently got a new PRS505 and PRS700 and excerpts from this book were not included. Now I want to read this book. Thanks for bringing this to my attention and for everyone's input. WDE

[netseeker]

Originally Posted by msmith

As a new member, I really didn't expect to be tarred and feathered and have a hundred posts after mine in a matter of 24 hours for expressing a simple opinion.

Tarred and feathered? Oh no, please don't think that. You started a thread with some highly controversial statements. Not all of us do agree with your opinion. Even if some replies (including mine) may sound a little bit unfriendly, i'm sure nobody here has the intention to bash you for your opinion. Different people -> different point of views. No reason to take our replies personally.

[HarryT]

In all seriousness, I'd love to read a book which put forward an argument for the existance of "God" which was even half as convincing as Professor Dawkin's argument against it. As a profound skeptic, I'm more than willing to be convinced by a well-reasoned argument and convincing proof that will stand up to scientific investigation.

[RickyMaveety]

Originally Posted by msmith

Can everyone see the difference between an advertisement being PRO religion, or God or spirituality and an advertisement ATTACKING the same by saying "There's probably no God"? That is like taking out an ad saying "athiests are morons". There is a big difference between being FOR something and ATTACKING something in an offensive way, which was the point of my original post. Even DixieGal expressed her faith in an honest an open way, complemented the people in this forum as being "good people" and then the "good" people in this forum proceeded to attack her and mock her beliefs. I don't get it.

I don't see anywhere that Dixie Gal was "mocked." A lot of people definitely disagreed with her, including me, but mock my friend? Not bloody likely.

There is no difference between being for something or being against it in the sense that both sides can be equally offensive.

And, sadly, "neutral" books seldom sell. Books that provoke thought or entertain sell. Sony is not putting book excerpts on the reader to bore people to death, the general idea is to place the bestsellers in front of the consumer.

Yes .... you were polite. If you think that immunizes you against people disagreeing with you, good luck with that. This is a global community. There are quite a few people in this forum who are not Christians. It's as simple as that. You asked (more or less) if people agreed with you on this point of yours, and you found out ... pretty resoundingly.

Whack me with a mackerel, if I'd gone completely round the bend every time Pilot Bob tarred and feathered me for my opinion .... well, we wouldn't be good friends, and we are.

If you are going to state a particularly controversial opinion, do be prepared to get your ass handed to you on a plate. Either that, or get involved in the argument ... that's half the fun .... arguing a point. It's what literate people do, they read, they discuss ... well, it's what they do after a certain point, I personally found it difficult to discuss the subplots associated with "See Spot run. Run, Spot, run!!" But that was long ago and far away.

Oh, and PS, if you want to see an example of a real tar and feathering .... do a search for "I am a genius". Now THAT was tarred and feathered, with ants and honey for a topper.

[ShortNCuddlyAm]

Most of the religious adverts I've seen on public transport are a lot more firm in their stance that there is a god (The Quakers are the most memorable exception to this); whereas the atheist advert, by using the word "probably" allows for some doubt.

As for why that book was chosen, I very much doubt that it was chosen for anything other than commercial reasons.

As for the debate, I think it's been generated more by msmith's reaction to the excerpt and to Sony for including it on some devices than their question as to why Sony chose it.

I also find the comments that it is only offensive to Christians a little odd, as my understanding of the book is that its stance is that there almost certainly isn't a supernatural creator figure, not that the Christian god doesn't exist but others might. I'd've thought that people of any religion that believed in a god or gods could therefore take offence at it...

[Patricia]

Originally Posted by RickyMaveety

Oh, and PS, if you want to see an example of a real tar and feathering .... do a search for "I am a genius". Now THAT was tarred and feathered, with ants and honey for a topper.

It can be found here:
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33607
The person in question did post rather intemperately in other threads too.

[msmith]

Fair enough! All of you are obviously "forum veterans" and I am not. I don't normally post anything on forums (only read as many people do) and I really and honestly only expected a few people's opinions in response. I probably would not have brought up the topic had I thought so many people would have been upset by it. Lesson learned. It is amusing to me that a few posters have felt "inspired" to buy Dawkins book after the post! My opinion for that is --knock yourself out. As I said in my posts, I completely believe in freedom of speech and your right to buy or read what you want. This is NOT an issue of censorship.

My original point was only to have topic neutral books preloaded on the Reader suitable for a diverse audience, and then people can have the freedom to BUY whatever they want wherever they want. Again, it wouldn't be right to have anti-hispanic or anti-african american books on there either.

Originally Posted by HarryT

In all seriousness, I'd love to read a book which put forward an argument for the existance of "God" which was even half as convincing as Professor Dawkin's argument against it. As a profound skeptic, I'm more than willing to be convinced by a well-reasoned argument and convincing proof that will stand up to scientific investigation.

If you honestly would like to read the other side of Dawkins position and be challenged by another well-reasoned point of view, you may want to try the following books:

"The Case for Faith" and "The Case For A Creator" both by former athiest, Lee Strobel.

Both books are heavily researched and footnoted, were NYT Bestsellers, and contain extensive interviews with experts in both science and faith with tough questions from a scientific and ardent skeptic's point of view. And, yes, Dawkin's books and points of view are part of the footnotes and content.

"My road to atheism was paved by science...but, ironically, so was my later journey to God." --Lee Strobel

And I really do appreciate those who read and clarified what I actually said, and did not criticize me for things I DIDN'T say. I understand and appreciate that other people have different beliefs than me and I completely respect that.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by RickyMaveety

Whack me with a mackerel, if I'd gone completely round the bend every time Pilot Bob tarred and feathered me for my opinion ....

Links please... so I can mark them as favorites.

Originally Posted by RickyMaveety

well, we wouldn't be good friends, and we are.

Aww shucks.

BOb