I'm not going to go back to other threads to collect examples of what I consider uncivilized comments. I can tell you though that it started out with your very first comment to me on someone else's thread. This was our very first interaction. I would be willing to track that one down if you like. I even asked you before if you'd like me to do that. I'm not claiming you're distracted by your comments by the way. It's probably more the other party that gets distracted. I didn't start this thread with the intention of posting and then backing out. But if the responses are out of line, I'm not going to respond to them. I feel no obligation whatsoever to allow myself to be a sounding board for someone's anger.
I'm willing to attempt a fresh start, and just see where it goes from there.
When I say misuse of the word religion, I don't necessarily mean misinterpretation (although it can be that). An example of what I mean would be where someone might address a specific negative belief or action of a specific religion, denomination, faction, group, or individual; and then refer to religion as a whole being the problem. In other words, claiming that religion itself is responsible for Muslim terrorist attacks, Westboro Baptist Church bigotry, etc.
Someone gives accurate detail on what happened on 9/11, but then adds something like this is what religion does to people. This would be an example of what I mean. Very similar to giving a report about a crime committed by members of a specific racial group, and then adding to the report that the actions were due to a common trait possessed by that racial group. If someone did that in the media, they'd be fired immediately.
I used the example of Dawkins' reference to Abrahamic religion in conjunction with the 9/11 attack. Again, not at all an issue of interpretation.
Dawkins knows exactly what Abrahamic religion means. The misuse is really the idea of relating it to the attacks at all. The promises made to Islamic soldiers committing suicide is not a religious issue. It's an Islamic issue, or an issue promoted by specific Muslims. It's got nothing to do with Judaism or Christianity.
Is Richard Dawkins brain dead? No. Obviously he's an intelligent individual. Is everyone who listens to Richard Dawkins intelligent? Or to take it a step further, is every atheist (including those who listen to Richard Dawkins) intelligent? No. And that's a big problem. People do stupid
things when they're not able to analyze what's being projected properly.
An example. If we analyze properly the messages extended by Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Sojourner Truth, etc., we can get a proper perspective on dealing with racism. If we don't, we could experience destructive forms of protest. Instead of peaceful protests, we get chaos where innocent people suffer (businesses burning down, bystanders getting injured or killed). And in recent protests, the threat of the spread
of Covid-19 has increased. Now we're literally seeing a self-imposed form of pandemic spread when we're supposed to be uniting against it.
We don't have control of the thought of others, including the newer generations. Not everyone is going to properly scrutinize/analyze what RD or any atheist or humanist activist has to say.