Perhaps Cardinal Pell may have learned something about leading a caring, purposeful, meaningful life had he attended The Amazing Meeting last weekend. He may also have learned something about actually embracing the universal ethics and morals advanced in the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Chrys Stevenson, “Revenge of the Godless Geeks“, Online Opinion, 8/12/10
Cartoon by Lindsay Foyle: http://newmatilda.com/files/images/LindsayFoyle23Oct.jpg
I had a wonderful time attending James Randi’s The Amazing Meeting in Sydney and was outraged to hear Cardinal Pell’s comments on the same weekend that the faithless were
coarse,uncaring and led lives without purpose – particularly when our actions at TAM proved just the opposite!
I wrote an article, “Revenge of the Godless Geeks”, refuting Pell’s statement and it’s been published on Australia’s Online Opinion – an e-journal for social and political debate. It’s the first time I’ve been published by Online Opinion and I’m hoping that, if my article proves popular, they may let me publish again on issues of importance to the atheist/skepticalcommunities. (NB: I wasn’t paid for the article so I’m not raising funds here!)
So, I’m asking my readers and subscribers to please visit the link below, read the article and, if you think it’s interesting, ‘like’ it, tweet it, maybe make a comment and pass the link on through your own networks.
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=11333
Chrys Stevenson
Related Articles
Cardinal Pell – Atheist Bible Forum
Gladly, the Cross-Eyed Bear 
Thank you for your link. I am added your blog in my blogroll.
Hi Chrys…
I’m no fan of Pell, but I think he is simply echoing the sentiments of Dawkins – without God, there is no objective purpose. Now that is not to say that most Atheists don’t have any purpose or lead lives without it; Cardinal Pell’s point is that if there is no objective purpose, such purpose is a subjective construct.
Do you think meaning and purpose is objective or subjective?
Invoking Hitler is never a good idea, but I think it’s quite a stretch, and perhaps a case of over-sensitivity, to suggest that he was comparing the sceptics at TAMOZ to Nazis. It seems to me that his point is that education alone, and the marginalisation of faith from public discourse will not necessarily lead to a better society. It’s almost certainly a poor choice of illustration, but I hardly think he is ‘vilifying’ anybody here.
Likewise, using the word ‘apartheid’ when talking about an ideological segregation is perhaps unwise, but I see his point, and I think it’s a valid one. We should not segregate faith and reason.
I find it very odd for Mr Taylor to argue for empathy and then turn around and basically say ‘Your beliefs are stupid’. Is that tolerance? And further, I don’t see how Cardinal Pell was promoting intolerance in what he is reported to have said. In fact, it appears to me that he was arguing against intolerance of faith discourse in the public arena. At absolutely no point did he say anything at all about sceptics or atheists being unwelcome, rather, he was criticising the view that faith is unwelcome in public life.
Your article does a good job of showing how most Atheists are good, loving people who do live lives of purpose and meaning. I think Michael Nazir-Ali put it well when he once wrote:
The question is not whether atheists can be moral but from where the moral codes come to which we seek to adhere.
Andrew, I cannot agree with you. My comment has been posted on my own blog.