Dennis Prager takes on Richard Dawkins and the atheist illusion that God isn't necessary for morality.

Dennis Prager cuts through the argument made by  atheist scientist Richard Dawkins that things would be just fine without God, e.g. the world would continue to operate morally without the existence of God.

This past Friday CNN conducted an interview with Richard Dawkins, the British biologist most widely known for his polemics against religion and on behalf of atheism.

Asked "whether an absence of religion would leave us without a moral compass," Dawkins responded: "The very idea that we get a moral compass from religion is horrible."

This is the crux of the issue for Dawkins and other anti-religion activists -- that not only do we not need religion or God for morality, but we would have a considerably more moral world without them.
This argument is so wrong -- both rationally and empirically - that its appeal can only be explained by a) a desire to believe it and b) an ignorance of history.

First, the rational argument.

If there is no God, the labels "good" and "evil" are merely opinions. They are substitutes for "I like it" and "I don't like it." They are not objective realities.

Every atheist philosopher I have debated has acknowledged this. For example, at Oxford University I debated Professor Jonathan Glover, the British philosopher and ethicist, who said: "Dennis started by saying that I hadn't denied his central contention that if there isn't a God, there is only subjective morality. And that's absolutely true."

And the eminent Princeton philosopher Richard Rorty admitted that for secular liberals such as himself, "there is no answer to the question, 'Why not be cruel?'"

Atheists like Dawkins who refuse to acknowledge that without God there are only opinions about good and evil are not being intellectually honest.

None of this means that only believers in God can be good or that atheists cannot be good. There are bad believers and there are good atheists. But this fact is irrelevant to whether good and evil are real.

To put this as clearly as possible: If there is no God who says, "Do not murder," murder is not wrong.

Many people or societies may agree that it is wrong. But so what? Morality does not derive from the opinion of the masses. If it did, then apartheid was right; murdering Jews in Nazi Germany was right; the history of slavery throughout the world was right; and clitoridectomies and honor killings are right in various Muslims societies.

So, then, without God, why is murder wrong?

Is it, as Dawkins argues, because reason says so?

My reason says murder is wrong, just as Dawkins's reason does. But, again, so what? The pre-Christian Germanic tribes of Europe regarded the Church's teaching that murder was wrong as preposterous. They reasoned that killing innocent people was acceptable and normal because the strong should do whatever they wanted.

In addition, reason alone without God is pretty weak in leading to moral behavior. When self-interest and reason collide, reason usually loses. That's why we have the word "rationalize" -- to use reason to argue for what is wrong....

But if that isn't enough, how about the record of the godless 20th century, the cruelest, bloodiest, most murderous century on record? Every genocide of the last century -- except for the Turkish mass murder of the Armenians and the Pakistani mass murder of Hindus in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was committed by a secular anti-Jewish and anti-Christian regime. And as the two exceptions were Muslim, they are not relevant to my argument. I am arguing for the God and Bible of Judeo-Christian religions.

Perhaps the most powerful proof of the moral decay that follows the death of God is the Western university and its secular intellectuals. Their moral record has been loathsome. Nowhere were Stalin and Mao as venerated as they were at the most anti-religious and secular institutions in Western society, the universities.

Strong words.  But the implications of failing to confront these atheist illusions are frightening.  Just look at the 20th century gulags and killing fields.

Most people aren't atheists.  People have the innate sense that there is a God who created them and the universe.  The frightening thing is far too many people are functionally atheists.  Meaning they live as if there is no God.  They make up the rules as they go along (At least they think they can.) and believe they are the final arbiter of right and wrong. That's a frightening notion as well.

Dawkins crashes screening of Expelled

By Barb Anderson

Ben Stein, known for the catchphrase “Bueller? Bueller? Anyone?” in the 1986 movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, is challenging the elitist academic establishment for attacking our freedom of speech in the documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. He is willing to sound the alarm, but he needs your help.

Just as Ferris Bueller’s Day Off dealt with rebellion, this time Ben Stein is encouraging students to rebel against Big Science and the academic suppression of anyone who questions Darwinism—including scientists and college professors who are sympathetic to intelligent design (ID). This groundbreaking documentary makes shocking and profound points about how professors and scientists who dare to disagree are being silenced, penalized and removed from academic posts.

On Thursday, March 20th, 2008, a private, invitation only showing was held at the AMC Theater at the Mall of America. In this revealing documentary, viewers learned about scientific evidence that questions the claims of Darwin, heard from scientists who are being silenced for questioning Darwinism, and listened to the views of several of the world’s best-known atheists who appear in the documentary. Professor Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist from Oxford University and author of The God Delusion, was given considerable video footage in the film to present his anti-God views.

At the conclusion of the documentary, Associate Producer Mark Mathis took questions from the audience. Audience members were surprised when Richard Dawkins himself, stood up in the middle of the theater, was visibly angry, and accused the producer of expelling Professor Myers (a biology professor at the University of Minnesota who also appeared in the film) from the March 20th showing. Dawkins, apparently himself a gate crasher, complained that he had been duped into being a part of this movie, and that his comments were taken out of context.

Mathis calmly and respectfully replied that Dr. Myers was not expelled from the movie—that this event was a private showing by invitation only. He observed that Dr. Myers is welcome to attend the movie on opening weekend in April when he can purchase a ticket like everyone else.

Mathis also reminded Professor Dawkins that he had been thoroughly informed of the premise of the film, was given ample time on camera to express his views, and that he was also given a “healthy check” to appear in the movie. Mathis openly expressed his respect for the intelligence of Dr. Dawkins, however, he added, “Sir, you do have one blind spot—God!”

True science does not function well with blinders. The freedom to view and discuss new ideas makes it possible to reject outdated concepts and advance better ones. For those who have dared to challenge political correctness and have been attacked for doing so, this fast-paced, entertaining documentary just might be a dam breaker.

Apparently, Expelled has been well received as it landed in the Top 10 box office money-makers in it’s opening weekend April 18th. You will love this movie and at the same time you can be a part of making positive change in the culture by supporting this film and its message. Help Ben Stein sound the alarm!