An excellent article thanks.

It is essential that we criticize people who are now alive when they make idiotic statements. The criticized person can then answer back and a chance exists to change the opinion of some of those who have accepted the idiodic views.

When a person is deceased, and particularly when a person has been long deceased and his or her ideas are now incorrectly accepted as true by a religious following, then the criticism should be directed at the ideas using evidence to show why the ideas are no longer tenable.

For example just today I saw an excellent short video on the dangers of foisting creationism on young children. Fundamentalist religious leaders, and even some publicly funded schools, still indoctrinate young children with creationist ideas that stunt the child's intellectual development. That is a genuine great evil and our governments should not fund it.

The video is less than three minutes long and is available at;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU&feature=player_embedded

People who believe in things which they think are rational and can be supported by evidence respond to criticism by putting forward that evidence and discussing its relevance. The fact that fundamentalist Muslims are unable or unwilling to do this shows their own deep sense of doubt and uncertainty about the beliefs they claim to espouse. The protests are the political equivalent of a toddler, caught being naughty, threatening to hold its breath until it turns blue.

Maybe the collapse of Islam is closer than we think.

The extreme sensitivity of millions of Moslems to criticism, ridicule, whatever (actually dissent) of their idol calls to mind a ridiculing song popular in 1942: "Ve go Heil! Heil! Right in der Führer's face". What a red rag to a bull that would have been to tens of millions lost in adulation of a scoundrel! A sneering dagger at the heart of something more vital to them than life itself - hunger to end freedom throughout the world.

What do the message of Nazis and the message of Islam have in common? The will to suppress dissent, from the most banal to the most profound. Death to infidels, apostates, blasphemers! Islamophobia and Naziphobia have the one message: "No way, José"

#...Religious ideas are not only personal convictions; they also have a nasty habit of crossing over into the political sphere…#

Go on!!

...Christianity abandoned its crusade against immorality long ago in the West. Secularism and Christianity both face off to that abandonment in many ways. One of which is the surprise at displays of moral outrage among Muslims world-wide, of insults to historic beliefs of Islam; and human rights abuses ignored as the combined forces of the West attacked Islam directly, in unjustified wars in the Middle East and central Asia. While Pakistan and Iran await the inevitable, tensions naturally heighten. Secularism and Christianity are seen by Muslims as “sluts” and rightly so!

Moira writes

'It is even more unfortunate that certain religious leaders find it necessary to make racist, misogynous or homophobic pronouncements to their followers'

It is also unfortunate that fundamental secularism promotes immorality, perversion, Christophobia, abortion and then are often apologist for Islam. Secularist promote free speach until their idiotic pseudo science such as demonstrated by the warmist industry is exposed for its fraud. I love the way secularist take the 'high 'moral ground despite the fact they really have no moral basis for their failed philosophy.

Oh dear, Runner has missed the point and charged off into a rant.

There is nothing new about anti-science and accusations of warmism. What the author has argued for, and done so very well, is the right of contested free speech, the freedom to argue, not some kind of right to spout utter nonsense without challenge.

Quote: "...if we really want to live in a society where we can be aware of unpalatable points of view, discuss them and explain why they are wrong, we must let him [Hilaly, Runner, anybody] speak."

The key is discussion and explanation. This is not the time or place to discuss or explain the subject of warmism, by whatever name. The discussion here is about the rights of all to discuss anything at all with reason and without censorship or threat.

So, Runner may say whatever he chooses, but in the absense of any factual basis to his statements, his use of terms including "idiotic... pseudo science... fraud... failed philosophy" speaks volumes for his attitude and zero for the reasoning behind it, if any.