That's the speech of a politician or a motivational speaker He
needs to go into politics. It was a nice soapbox speech though,
I'll give him that.
Substitute America for Science and Communism for Religion and
you have a nice speech for the 1950s America.
Horray for democracy over communism. I mean... Horray for
science over religion. "merika! yey. Scientists shouldn't have
to be considerate, yes. I agree. It's the crossing over into
political activism that's a little strange. I wouldn't even mind
it, but they should form a party like everybody else instead of
calling the activism science, which it isn't. thanks for the
heads up on that. I wasn't aware of them. That's what Krauss
should be speaking from then. At it stands, it's misleading to
mixup his atheism, with politics, with science and science
spokesperson. People get confused and consider them all Science.
He can do what he likes. But in his role as Science Spokesperson
on educational TV, I think he also has a responsibility to his
role, that's all. I have my opinion too, but he has an audience
of millions who look up to him. all that you said is fine. But
he's crossing over delicate lines in this article like a
bulldozer. He's going into divisive territory. Rather than
speaking for, or even speaking against a specific issue, he's
speaking against *IN GENERAL*, stereotyping a very large group
of people, and saying that all scientists - and more critically,
citizens who agree with him - become militant atheists.
It's a call to arms.
Much different than education. Carl Sagan also spoke against
government misspending, quackery in science and quackery in
religions. But arguing for militant atheism? No. He rarely
stated his religious stance, which was agnostic.
Yet he faught for the same things. Krauss is taking it into
another territory.
