Atheists claim that Atheism is not a Religion, but when Richard Dawkins is denied being allowed to give lecture at a private establishment, his organisation claims protection under ‘Religious Discrimination’ laws: “It really violates the basic principles of America, the principals of Jefferson and Madison,” said Sean Faircloth with the Richard Dawkins Foundation. “The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is probably the most revered piece of legislation in the 20th century, and it prohibits discrimination based on race or religious viewpoint. The proprietors of the Wyngate made clear their specific intent to discriminate based on religious viewpoint.”
However, the intellectual founding father of United States of America, John Locke, upon whom the principles of the constitution were built, disagrees:
‘those that by their atheism undermine and destroy all religion, can have no pretence of religion whereupon to challenge the privilege of a toleration’
[Letter on Toleration, John Locke]
—-
Michigan Country Club Reportedly Cancels Richard Dawkins Appearance Following Fox Interview
A renowned British scientist is reportedly claiming he’s the victim of religious discrimination following the cancellation of a book signing at a Michigan country club following a controversial interview on Fox News.
Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist and author perhaps best known for his 1976 book “The Selfish Gene,” appeared on Bill O’Reilly’s “O’Reilly Factor” on Oct. 5 to discuss his new children’s book. Dawkins, who is an atheist, said his appearance at a country club in Rochester Hills, Mich., was cancelled following the interview with O’Reilly that centered on creationism.
“It’s obviously an outrage that at the last minute when a contract has been signed, that the owner of a country club should cancel it on the basis of the philosophical views of a speaker,” Dawkins told MyFoxDetroit.com. “What’s even more extraordinary is that instead of reading the book himself or even opening it, apparently, he took the word of Bill O’Reilly.”
Sean Faircloth of the Richard Dawkins Foundation told the station that the cancellation “violates the basic principles of America” and is clear discrimination based on religion.
Calls to the country club were not returned, MyFoxDetroit.com reports.
Faircloth said the cancellation is wrong on many levels and that his new book, which aims to teach adolescents and adults that science can explain ancient myths, is not intended to discuss God and religion.
“He’s published numerous books, incredible best sellers to explain science to the public, so it’s rather an affront, to reason in general, to shun him as they did,” Faircloth said.
The organization that worked with Dawkins said that they plan to pursue legal action against the country club since the contract, according to them, was broken.
Share this:
Categories: Atheism, NEWS COMMENTARY, The Muslim Debate Initiative, Western Society & Culture
Abdullah al Andalusi 
“Atheists claim that Atheism is not a Religion, but when Richard Dawkins is denied being allowed to give lecture at a private establishment, his organisation claims protection under ‘Religious Discrimination’ laws.”
True; atheism isn’t a religion, but discrimination against atheists is religious discrimination. Trinitarianism isn’t a religion (it’s a tenet of some religions), but discrimination against someone for being a trinitarian would also be religious discrimination.
LikeLike
Hi Brian,
Thank you for your comment. But as Atheists like to say, “If Religion were a hair colour, Atheists would be bald”. I disagree with that (but that is a different discussion), humouring that assertion, how can you have a bald man claiming discrimination due to hair colour?
Thus Trinitarianism may not be a religion, but it is a Sect of a Religion, and thus Religious discrimination applies between religions and between Sects of Religions – so there is no scope for Atheists to claim protection against Discrimination between people of different religious beliefs, when they purportedly do no possess such beliefs of which to be discriminated against in the first place.
It’s as absurd as Animal rights activists using the law of Racial discrimination to claim protection against the unequal treatment of Apes compared with humans.
LikeLike
“so there is no scope for Atheists to claim protection against Discrimination between people of different religious beliefs, when they purportedly do no possess such beliefs of which to be discriminated against in the first place”
Of course there is; if you discriminate against someone because they believe in a god, OR because they DON’T believe in a god, that’s religious discrimination. If you discriminate against someone who doesn’t worship your particular god, that’s religious discrimination (and that would automatically include anyone who doesn’t worship, or believe in, any gods at all).
The Rochester Hills Country Club is being sued over this, so we’ll see what the courts say.
LikeLike
Legal questions are not metaphysical ones. The courts have ruled that atheism is a religion for purposes of determining free exercise issues.
LikeLike