Could Bill Maher Be Making Religulous II?

[rug]

During his (now annual) winter trip to Hawaii, Bill Maher met up with Larry Charles, the director of Religulous, and hinted on Twitter that a sequel could be in the works:



It’s possible he was only joking, but the idea isn’t that far-fetched. (Plus, Religulous: Resurrected would be a pretty damn catchy title.)

The 2008 documentary cost under $3,000,000 to produce but took in more than $13,000,000, making it one of the most successful documentaries of all time.

If anything, Maher has only cemented his status as one of the most recognizable atheists on television since then, especially after his blunt criticisms of Islam on Real Time last season.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/01/05/could-bill-maher-be-making-religulous-ii/

[cbayer]

1. Not that he asked, but I would like to see him use his resources to positively

promote atheism, agnosticism, humanism, and other non-belief categories.

But that's not where the bang is, and if he does make a sequel it will most likely be juvenile mocking like the last one.

There is most definitely a market for that, but it just further alienates people.

[Bluenorthwest]

2. That's so funny.

I'd day that if the faith community does not want such things done unto them, they might think about not spewing so much venom about others.
When the Pope says gay people are disordered and fighting our rights is God's own war, do you think those are words that sound kind? I'd prefer some juvenile mocking to that virulent certainty and hateful dogma.
The very idea that religion should be free to say hateful things unanswered is why people like Bill keep nagging at the religious.
I say that when hate mongers are attacking me, I am allowed the same level of rhetoric they employ against me if I want to use it. Thus when some cleric is claiming I am disordered and God is at war with me, I get a great deal of leeway when responding to that insane, hateful bullshit.
Thank all that is actually holy for people like Bill.

[cbayer]

3. Do you take the same position in defense of his overt sexism?

[Promethean]

4. Redirection.

You can't address what the person actually said so you attack from a different angle with a subject that isn't defensible with the implication that they must defend it. This kind of dishonesty is why a lot of people don't like you cbayer. Dishonest tactics like this are why the atheists on this board are so aggressive.

[Heddi]

5. Whoooot

[Promethean]

7. Thanks Heddi.

I read DU a lot but as you can tell from my post count don't post often. The dishonesty has been frustrating me and I just couldn't let that one stand. Blue's post was perfectly rational and wasn't insulting. The response he got was, from my perspective, horribly insulting.

[Heddi]

8. I agree with you.

Well stated points completely ignored for nonsense. It's a tried and true diversion tactic that I'm sure you're well aware of. Then, of course, Atheists get the blame for the 'tone of the room' being 'negative.' Never anyone else. Just the Atheists, who all have been bestowed the label "vicious anti-theists" by certain posters. Notice that the only Atheists that get a pass here are the ones that find no problem with Religion (other than general and rarely specific complaints about lackluster treatment of gays and women and abortion and birth control. Akin to "they could do better, but....what about the homeless shelters they run???!??&quot .

To be an Atheist that doesn't kiss the ass of religion, that finds problems with the Pope or, doesn't think there's anything wrong with being open with non-belief in public or, gasp, actually says that they're an Atheist with a voice louder than a whisper is suddenly transformed to a vicious Anti-Theist" and lumped in with the rest of the miserable miscreant non-believers of the room.

Welcome to the club

[Promethean]

9. I've been in the club I just don't post a lot.

For the most part I don't respond to them because engaging never pays off. When I do post it is for the benefit of those who are reading after the fact. Its why I spelled out exactly what was done so it was clear precisely how odious it is.

[cbayer]

6. I am shattered! I don't know how I will be able to go on knowing that you

and whoever else you speak for don't like me.

But I am glad to know that you recognize my immense power and how I use it to make the atheists on this board so aggressive.

Go me!!!



BTW, who are you?

[AtheistCrusader]

16. Deflecting that way didn't work, let me try this way!

Promethian was dead-on.

[cpwm17]

10. Bill Maher deserves the criticism and he is a very bad messenger.

He's a massive hypocrite. Along with being a sexist, he's a racist holy warrior that is very selective on what religions he really doesn't like.

His war mongering shows why he's a poster child for why religious thinking often sucks.

[Heddi]

11. No, he isn't selective on which religions he doesn't like

he really doesn't like any of them.

I'd like proof of your statement that he is selective on his anti-theist stance, because that's more a figment of your wish than any basis in reality.

"he's a poster child for why religious thinking often sucks" um, he's an atheist, you know....

[cpwm17]

12. He is a consistent outspoken supporter for Israel's aggressions against the Palestinians.

He says it was proper for the Zionist to ethnically cleanse the native Palestinians at Israel's creation, even though he acknowledges the obvious: the Zionists were the aggressors.

He considers Muslims inferior and he says the only way to deal with Muslims and Arabs is with violence because that is what they know. That is showing his lack of self awareness, typical with religious nuts like Bill Maher.

I don't care what Bill Maher claims about any stupid god. He's an aggressive, religious bigot.

[LostOne4Ever]

19. Where has Bill Maher ever said any of that?

[font style="font-family:papyrus,'Brush Script MT','Infindel B',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]I would like quotes with sources please.

I acknowledge that he is pro-Isreal; however, there are many liberals who also support Isreal.

That does not mean he supports ethnic cleansing. That is a pretty extreme charge. And I have [font style="font-family:'Brush Script MT',''Lucida handwriting','forte',cursive;" size=5 color=crimson]NEVER[/font] heard him say he supports violence against Muslims or stating that they were "inferior." I have heard him critique their religion but never a single word saying all muslims are inferior or anything like that.

The worst thing I have heard him say was when he lamented the popularity of the name Mohammad in England. The rest is usually people putting words in to his mouth.

Is this hyperbole or do you have quotes supporting these assertion?[/font]

[cpwm17]

20. Unfortunately what appears on his show isn't searchable.

I don't have cable so I haven't watched him in a long time. 1/2 dozen or more years ago I had access to cable and I witnesses him directly quoting and supporting Israeli historian, Benny Morris.

There are no links to most of Bill Maher's shows, but this does cover Benny Morris:

http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/israel-stands-by-the-damned-of-1948-as-it-seeks-to-finish-the-nakba

His argument echoed that of the Israeli revisionist historian Benny Morris, another leading light of the Zionist left, whose early work exposed the mass expulsions of Palestinians in 1948 and before, but who declared in a shocking interview with Shavit during the height of the Second Intifada that Israel had not gone far enough.

The Jewish state would never be at peace, Morris suggested, until it purged the rest of the Arab demographic contaminants living within its realm.

“I don’t think that the expulsions of 1948 were war crimes. You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs. You have to dirty your hands,” Morris told Shavit. Building on his zero-sum analysis, he continued: “A society that aims to kill you forces you to destroy it. When the choice is between destroying or being destroyed, it’s better to destroy.”

[cbayer]

14. Exactly and that is why I brought this up.

The member I was replying to takes issue with the pope no matter what good he does. I was curious as to why Maher might get a pass when he also presents issues with sexism and islamophobia.

[Goblinmonger]

15. Do you support the Pope's overt homophobia and sexism, too?

See how that comment can be used against you?

[cpwm17]

17. Yes, I was agreeing with you here.

The same reason I don't mind (and support) people bringing up the Pope's homophobia as often as they like, I support people bringing up what a dirtbag Bill Maher is and what a poor messenger he is for the evils of religion.

[cbayer]

18. The important point to me is to be able to see and tolerate shades of grey.

Recognizing and endorsing one position of a person should not mean that you then must embrace all of their positions.

I like many things about this pope, but there are still things he says and stand for that I strongly object to.

I'm not able to come up with much I like about Maher, though. He has some interesting guests and I do like the panels he puts together. He is funny on occasion. But his increasing intolerance towards those with whom he disagrees is really off-putting. I agree that he is a poor messenger. He's got his audience, but it is relatively narrow at this point and John Oliver is reportedly kicking his butt.

[MisterP]

13. could it be glass in my urethra?

[cbayer]

21. I certainly hope not.