Your daily source of news & videos on science & religion since 2007
Dan completely blew them out of the water. I'm so tired of hearing, "Why don't you just let these people pray under these difficult times?" They still cannot seem to understand that this IS NOT about allowing people to pray. It's simply about the government endorsing a national day of prayer, which goes against the constitution the same way a national day of Hindu prayer would (which I know would piss them off).
Does fox news ensure they omnly hire have religious newcasters? This guy was obviously uninformed about what is in the US constition but was hoping by bluster he could make headway. Fortunately Dan took control and shot down his every argument for this rediculous idea of a govenment sponsored day of prayer in a secular country. It is incredible how far the religious have pushed the envelope that hopefully protects the US from theocracy.
Much better, thank you Dan Barker !
Dand handed that hack's ass to him on silver platter. Good job.I LOVE how Fox "subtly" put a glowing crucifix in the background image behind Dan to the left. Incredible. Dickbags.
Dan Barker is a good man, full stop. He's getting better at this.
Great job by Dan Barker. Keep torching those straw men!
Definitely one of Dan's best appearances on Fox!
MenInFrox News. Bless 'em.Its like shooting fish in a barrel!
See the 1st 5 pages of the chapter "Did Prayer Save the Constitutional Convention?" in the book <span>Liars For Jesus</span> by Chris Rodda. Chris debunks this "Christian Nation" myth.Also, see the <span>Liars For Jesus</span> chapter "James Madison's Detached Memoranda" for Madison's views on separation. He didn't approve of paid chaplains in the military or Congress, and he didn't approve of proclamations of days of prayer.
Wow! Dan won every single point. BTW, this isn't the first time I've seen a nutter slipping the "creator" into the Constitution.Judge Crabb's decision.An online article titled The Christian Nation Myth by Farrell Till.
Listen to the interview again, and you'll realize what makes this news item so devastating is that, unFauxlike, Barker was able to finish sentences, even ideas, before being cut off, drowned out, overtalked or cut off. Perhaps a lot of others "interviews" would go equally well under the same conditions.I figure this "journalist" is going to get a dressing down from the News Deflector ...er, Director...
It made me wonder if the "journalist" is a real journalist and did all this mistakes (according to Fox tradition) on purpose.
He was misleading viewers on purpose, there was no confusion. His bad acting revealed that.Dan was much stronger here than the other clip
My guess is porpuse. They want controversy, remember, it's a business
This was unusual for Fox news in that they allowed the atheist side to be stated for once. Normally when they have someone like Dan on they ask the same sort of leading propagandistic questions as we saw here, but with one difference - they immediately grab microphone control away from the atheist after only getting about one sentence to reply - making it impossible for the atheist to have the time to say anything sophisticated and complex. It's not that Dan's competence here was better than normal. He's always this competent at replying to these questions. What's different is that for whatever reason, this time Fox news actually allowed him the airtime to do it unlike before.
Dan did a very nice job....very nice.
Did anyone else see Dan's organisation miss spelled as the "freedom FOR religion" foundation?Kind of hammers it home to the moderate theists too, the freedom from religion of a government is the freedom for religion of the people.How do they not get this?B