Have a Good NEWS

Richard Dawkins has described David Cameron as a believer "in faith, the faith that believes it is good for people

Richard Dawkins, Oxford professor and author of The God Delusion Atheist, suggested that David Cameron is not "really" a believer in God, but a "believer in the faith", one of people who, if they themselves do not believe, I believe that religious faith is "good for the common people" and helps to keep in order. Dawkins can not, of course, know what I really think Cameron. Prime Minister profession "genre classic of the Church of England faith" may suggest a lack of intensity in the east, and enthusiasm for gay marriage in a certain moral relativism. But we accept that Cameron is not an atheist and Dawkins has no right to say it is.

Anyway, the whole point of Dawkins is a good idea. There are many people in politics and elsewhere, who believe that any religious faith, is better than nothing, no matter if it is based on truth or deception. As guest editor of the edition of the New Statesman Christmas, Dawkins wrote: "Unfortunately a number of high intelligent and educated, having surpassed religious faith themselves, without even thinking vaguely assumed that religious faith is a kind of good for others, good for society, good for the public, to instill good morals. "

is the attitude behind

reported would be known when he finally becomes king, as "Defender of the Faith" rather than simply as a defender of the faith of Prince Charles of England, and also behind Tony Blair Faith Foundation with former Prime Minister, a convert to Catholicism, striving to unite the different religions of the world as a force for social progress. It's a very strange idea to believe in something, whether it is better not to believe, and that any belief, however mistaken, makes you a better person than an unbeliever. How can you be virtuous to believe in something that is not true? And how a claim exclusive possession of the truth of religion by a common goal with those who believe that selling lies?

However, the belief in belief itself is so common that makes believers feel guilty. Curiously, people can not accept the proposals for which no empirical evidence tend to have more doubts than those who take great leaps of faith into the unknown. And this may help explain why the books that deny the existence of God - one of Dawkins, for example, and Christopher Hitchens God Is Not Great - pull straight up the charts. Because even in our largely secular society, faith in God is still regarded, even by those who have not, as proof of the respectability of a person, and guilt for non-believers can not get the reasonable assurance that it is perfectly acceptable for an atheist.

Despite its infamy, Brady seems superficially to be the healthier of the two. He expressed his "deep remorse" for his crimes, said he wants to be released, and took the transcription of books in Braille for the blind until the Interior Ministry, curiously enough, to an end to this work. He also always said he wants to die, and will almost certainly be dead if it had not been diagnosed as a psychopath in 1985 and therefore denied the right of ordinary citizens and prisoners starve to death if they want. Brady for wanting to die, it seems very healthy, and deny him the right to do so after 45 years in prison and macabre too cruel.

Find best price for : --Brady----Washington----Blair----Tony----Oxford----Cameron----David--