1. Religion & Spirituality
Send to a Friend via Email

Discuss in my forum

Austin Cline

Rush Limbaugh on Atheists

By May 3, 2004

Follow me on:

Rush Limbaugh is a major conservative spokesman, so it is perhaps understandable that he doesn't think highly of atheism and atheists. It would be helpful, however, if his criticisms of atheism were actually intelligent and informed rather than the same tired old arguments that we hear all the time.

A transcript of Rush Limbaugh's April 22, 2004 show reads:

You know, I have to tell you something, folks. How many of you, we hear all these people running around talking about the environment is this and that and man must do what it can to protect it and so forth, and I'm all for that to a certain extent, but have you ever thought about the irony that the militant environmental wackos are secularists, maybe even atheists?
They don't believe in God; they don't believe in creation; they believe that nature itself has some sort of deity characteristic to it. Yet I don't know about you, but if I run into anybody that doubts the existence of God or creation, all you have to do is take them somewhere in the midst of nature. Show them. Have a doctor explain to them what happens during open heart surgery with the human body and what doctors have to do to protect the human body during open heart surgery, bypass surgery, what have you. All you have to do is get into the miraculous functioning of all this to understand that the odds of this being an accident are next to impossible, and yet the people who are the environmentalist wackos try to tell us that all of this is so precariously balanced.

A secularist is not the same as an atheist. I don't know how many environmental activists are secularists, but there is nothing all that ironic about it if there were - even if we assume that Rush's description of them deifying nature were true. I don't know how many environmental activists are atheists, but there would be some irony in an atheist deifying nature. That's about the extent of Rush saying anything useful or valuable in the above.

Like his brother, Rush seems limited to a maximum of one useful or valuable point in any given rant. Having used his up on an interesting, but minor, point, he proceeds into full-blown buffoonery by espousing the tired Watchmaker Argument as if he were unaware of any of its flaws and any of the critiques. Well, come to think of it, it may indeed be true that he is unaware of them - he's an entertainer, not a serious scholar or thinker. He makes his living by pushing buttons and putting on an act, not by encouraging skepticism or critical thinking skills. Maybe that explains a lot about his brother, but at least Rush doesn't pretend to be anything other than this.

Read More:

Comments
July 27, 2011 at 6:58 pm
(1) Stefan says:

Well written!

/Stefan Sweden

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.