I love Stephen Fry, I think he's a brilliant actor / writer and I have nothing but respect for him but I was very saddened by this:
http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/what-stephen-fry-would-say-if-he-met-god--gk01sclnie
Fry is digging his own grave here and he doesn't even know it.
And he seems to be making a career of attacking God, which is always good for business. Militant atheism sells: nobody knew who Richard Dawkins was until he wrote 'The God Delusion'.
What really bothered me though, was The Independent's shameless endorsement of his views. What happened to objectivity and impartiality in journalism?!
A few thoughts here.
I've never really taken to SF but that's by the by.
I've felt for quite a while he is a "militant atheist". While other's seem to perceive other religions (particularly Islam) as the the biggest threat, I am quite worried about this one and believe atheism will increase.
The problem the way I see our lack of real answers to science. I'd not argue science is wrong in the main (in fact I think what it can discover is God's sort of day to day running of things) but it explains more and more and our beliefs become more easily passed off as superstition.
I might expand on that later but to keep things brief for now, I will move on to the media.
I actually view the Independent as one of the better papers but I believe its objectivity is coloured by my "sceince vs religion" thoughts above. Our own choice of national newspaper at home is actually its little sister, the I.
Of course, popular amongst some Christian circles seems to be the output of NewsCorp. This is an organisation that had one paper (News of The World) go out of publication (later to be replaced by a Sunday Sun edition) because of scandals including phone hacking (the
Milly Dowler one was arguably the worst), the Sun itself who until a couple of weeks ago had
page 3 as a major selling point. And at least by my interpretation of something someone pointed to me while hurricane Katrina was happening what I felt were very uncharitable views towards the poor and needy by (I think) Bill O'Rielly.
As a group, it's output is known to vary and shall I say pander to the particular tastes it can sell without regard to "conflicts of interest". It's no wonder we rather than the press can become the laughing stock with some.