Video: compilation of interruptions by Lawrence Krauss from debates with William Lane Craig

Here is the video:

Now compare that video with this story about a professor who was denied tenure for being personally pro-ID:

Internal e-mails and other documents obtained under the Iowa Open Records Act contradict public claims by Iowa State University (ISU) that denial of tenure to astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez was unrelated to his writing on the theory of intelligent design. According to these documents:

  • Dr. Gonzalez was subjected to a secret campaign of vilification and ridicule by colleagues in the Department of Physics and Astronomy who explicitly wanted to get rid of him because of his intelligent design views, not his scholarship.
  • Dr. Gonzalez’s work and views on intelligent design were repeatedly attacked during department tenure deliberations.
  • Dr. Gonzalez’s colleagues plotted to evade the law by suppressing evidence that could be used against them in court to supply proof of a hostile work environment.
  • One of Dr. Gonzalez’s colleagues admitted to another faculty member that the Department of Physics and Astronomy had violated the principle of academic freedom “massively” when it came to Gonzalez, while other colleagues expressed qualms that their plotting against Gonzalez was unethical or dishonest.
  • Dr. Gonzalez’s department chair misled the public after the denial of tenure by insisting that “intelligent design was not a major or even a big factor in this decision”–even though he had privately told colleagues that Gonzalez’s support for intelligent design alone “disqualifies him from serving as a science educator.”
  • In voting to reject tenure for Dr. Gonzalez, members of the Department of Physics and Astronomy all but ignored recommendations made by the majority of their own outside scientific reviewers, who thought Gonzalez clearly deserved tenure.

The bottom line according to these documents is that Dr. Gonzalez’s rights to academic freedom, free speech, and a fair tenure process were trampled on by colleagues who were driven by ideological zeal when they should have made an impartial evaluation of Gonzalez’s notable accomplishments as a scientist.

I have noticed a troubling trend during the last few years as I have blogged about the secular left. It seems to me that people on the left tend to have a strong, intense intolerance for any opinions that are different from their own. And they act on this intense intolerance by aggressively attacking the free speech and religious liberty of others.

You can see examples of this in the public schools and especially in the universities. Students being denied degrees, students being charged with offensive speech, students having secular leftist propaganda rammed down their throats, professors being prevented from teaching anything critical of the secular left, professors being denied tenure, and so on. It’s not a surprise either when you think that authoritarian regimes are typically atheistic, like in North Korea, Cambodia, the Soviet Union, etc. North Korea would be a paradise for an atheist like Lawrence Krauss. If anyone said anything about Jesus or even owned a Bible, then he could just have them killed. It’s less work than interrupting us, and more permanent.

I’m not saying that every atheist is like Krauss, but there does seem to be this tendency to silence, coerce and intimidate anyone who says anything that disagrees with atheism. Especially in the rank and file of the atheist movement. The whole atheist political effort (e.g. – Freedom from Religion Foundation, etc.) seems to be about forcing Christians to act like atheists in public, so that atheists don’t have to be offended by hearing views that disagree with their own views. They want to silence Christians by using the coercive power of big government. You can see it in debates, you can see it in the universities, and you can see it in the courtroom. They’re not trying to win arguments with evidence, they’re trying to end the argument with threats and coercion.

You can see a video and summary of the third Craig-Krauss debate from Australia here.

You can read a statement of how militant atheists view Christians here. (Warning: reader discretion is advised)

4 thoughts on “Video: compilation of interruptions by Lawrence Krauss from debates with William Lane Craig”

  1. “It seems to me that people on the left tend to have a strong, intense intolerance for any opinions that are different from their own. And they act on this intense intolerance by aggressively attacking the free speech and religious liberty of others.”

    Why aren’t they policed by “moderate” liberals? Why don’t they see their hypocrisy? It’s not true tolerance if you only tolerate those who agree with you.

    Christians self-regulate. We call out the Westboro Baptist folks, who actually are outliers with regards to tactics.

    Good post and good thoughts Wintery Knight. Keep up the frequent blogging.


  2. You’ve hit the nail on the head here. ‘The intolerance of the supposedly tolerant …’ !! I suppose it just highlights the fact that a denial of intelligent design is at heart a spiritual rebellion against God – not just ‘another theory.’ The implications of it being true are just too much to bear for some people, because it will compel them to accept a Power higher than themselves …


  3. I caught a glimpse of this attitude first-hand recently. I asked a question about evolution on a strongly atheistic website. It was an honest question stemming from a lengthy discussion between myself and an atheist colleague. I write Christian sci-fi and wanted to know what modern secular science had to say on a particular subject, and this site seemed to have quite a few experts.

    The question didn’t make it past moderation. I was basically ignored. I’m not sure why because I was very polite. Perhaps I shouldn’t have mentioned that I’m a Christian….

    I’ve heard it said many times that Christians don’t do “proper” science and would soon “see the light” if they only understood how evolution works. And yet they can’t (or won’t) answer a simple question.

    I ended up doing the research myself. Turns out my atheist colleague doesn’t understand the theory of evolution as well as he thinks he does.


  4. He is not even listening. He is so quick to speak and think about what he is going to say next instead of hearing what William Lane Craig has to say. A lot of people do this and it is extremely annoying and a waste of time for the other person.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s