Read something about O'connor he sounds like a totally different guy than this one misquote make him seem. He says have "deep respect" for atheists.
One thing I find is they have taken the original off the internet because it violated Youtube's terms of service. In other words, rather than reading it critically they just said "It must hate speech becuase someone got offended by it."
except now we can't prove what he really said.
Yeah, it's too bad they took the video down; it actually sounds worse when you hear him saying it. And no, it wasn't taken out of context, that's his clarification of an answer to an earlier question about the rise of secularism.
And that article is a bit of a whitewash. Here's more from the good Cardinal...http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 334837.ece
From The Times
May 22, 2009
Archbishop of Westminster attacks atheism but says nothing on child abuse
The new and the departing Archbishops of Westminster launched a joint offensive yesterday against atheists and secular society.
At the installation of the Most Rev Vincent Nichols at Westminster Cathedral, his predecessor, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, described a lack of faith as “the greatest of evils” and blamed atheism for war and destruction, implying that it was a greater evil even than sin itself.
Now, I understand that the Cardinal is coming from a theological point of view, but I don't see how that makes his attitude any less offensive. He's judging me to be less of a human being than he is, and it is that kind of attitude, not "supposedly faithless societies ruled only by reason"
that allows monsters like Hitler and Stalin to do what they do (and make people like Cardinal O`Connor himself capable of putting the reputation of his Church ahead of the needs of the victims of a sexual predator under his supervision...http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/840594.stm
Like our friend Sgt. Thomas he's trying to privilege his belief by insisting that anyone who doesn't share it is "impaired" in some way. This is at best just a way to avoid dealing with the possibility that one's own beliefs may be mistaken. We don't have to deal with the beliefs of others if we can dismiss them as the product of a damaged or less than fully human person. At worst it becomes permission to treat those "impaired" and "less human" people like criminals or animals. http://www.secularism.org.uk/iranian-eh ... ll-be.html
It's one thing to say that you think someone is wrong, or mistaken or even deluded (though even that is a term I wouldn't generally use) and quite another to say that are actually lacking some essential human quality. The former is an observation about a belief, the latter is an assault on the dignity and respect that should be accorded to everyone as a matter of common human decency.
My attitude is nicely summed up by the quote in my signature line..."It is the human being who is sacred not beliefs or religion."
As soon as we make any idea, be it a religious belief or a political dogma, more important than simple human needs...that's when we risk losing something of our humanity.