Gentlemen, I enjoyed your latest podcast, as I usually do. I also do commend your efforts to be somewhat politically neutral, though your sincerity in that regard is somewhat dubious, since your statements of neutrality are often followed by snickers or knowing jabs about what you REALLY think. I’d suggest that you be open and honest about your political ideologies but just make an attempt to not stray too far off the atheism topic (you did well this time) and recognize that there are many atheists who are not necessarily American political Democrats (I’m not making any claim to your beliefs, just stating a fact). That said, I definitely do not share your optimism about the future of the treatment of religion that you conclude from Hillary Clinton’s statement on the attacks on our embassies in Cairo and Benghazi (I’m referring specifically to her comments with the Moroccan Foreign Minister). Sure she hit the correct talking points - she condemned the violence, she distanced the US government from the video, etc. But, it was her emphasis, the order of her presentation, and her concessions to religion and potential censorship that I found troubling. She spent the majority of her comments condemning the VIDEO. She made it clear that the US government had nothing to do with it, that it was disgusting and reprehensible and had cynical purpose. She made claims to Islam as a great religion and went on about how we have great respect for people of faith. Please don’t just dismiss my comments out of hand because you may like Hillary Clinton. I recognize that she is a diplomat and has a responsibility to maintain relations. But, the use of words and emphasis are tools of the diplomat that convey nuanced meaning. Listening to her speak, it was evident that she was focusing more on damage control for the video (which evidence suggests was just an excuse for the violence) and more on appeasing the thin-skinned sensibilities of Muslims than on condemning senseless violence and the murder of our good men of diplomacy. I do not find our constant deference to the religion of “the offended” to be a cause for optimism.

Thanks for the comment Marc. I share much of your skepticism when it come to Clinton’s remarks. I think Chris was slightly more optimistic than I was, but it at least speaks to something that her comments are even viable as damage control. I also agree that, for example, if you questioned Clinton on her statements asking more about religion and Islam she might meander closer to her previous statements about it being a “great” religion.

As for the politics, I am sorry if you felt I was trying to mask it facetiously. I am open about my very liberal political stance, I just find that much discussion about it is unwarranted and I am perhaps overly paranoid about alienating conservative listeners. I have been trying to refine how to mix in my political opinions when we discuss topics and I agree that balancing out the absurdity of religion in the DNC and RNC was fairly neutral and good. I hope that my attempts to balance my personal political belief and my more relevant opinions on religion are more to your suiting, and that of the other listeners, in the future.

Thanks for listening!

I’m a new listener and have been enjoying your podcast. However, I found your discussion on the film “Innocence of Muslims” to be misguided. Your lack of knowledge about the Middle East, the motives behind the Coptic Christian filmmaker and the point of view of the people who feel deeply offended by the film was apparent in your discussion. I don’t agree with the violent protest, but even as a staunch athiest, I can see how deeply offensive the film is, how confusing this film is to people who have never experienced or understood what it is like to live in a place where freedom of speech is protected. I think it would be very valuable to have an athiest guest from a Muslim background when talking about Islamic culture, religion and politics. I would definitely listen to a show like that!

I agree with your criticisms and wish we could deliver more - know any good Muslim atheists with some free time?

I don’t understand why the film was as sensational - material like this is uploaded to the Internet all the time. What made this one take off?