Who’s More Tolerant Atheist Or Religious People? Tucker Carlson

Who’s More Tolerant Atheist Or Religious People? Tucker Carlson

Who’s More Tolerant Atheist Or Religious People? Tucker Carlson Debate On FOX News

Excerpts From FOX News

This video may contain copyrighted material; the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available for the purposes of criticism, comment, review and news reporting which constitute the ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Not withstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes such as criticism, comment, review and news reporting is not an infringement of copyright.



Brisbane Kilarny says:

Atheists are logical thinking and stand only on evidence. All atheists must believe in the organic macroevolution of life. Science is the religion of the atheist because they believe science has most of the logical answers (evidence) for why they are an atheist. Everything is founded on the logic science can provide or from their own personal life experiences. The atheist places his or her faith in man's revelations or conclusions ( the evidence) as presented in science. There is one problem with this faith- many scientists have a bias against any conclusions or data that would contradict a conventional scientific tenet. Today's science has one premise- there is not God. Atheists either knowingly or unknowingly disregard man's bias against a Creator, intelligent design or irreducible complexity. Both the atheist and the theist have faith- one faith is in man/science and the other is in God. Science is the God of atheists.

Akhil Vatsa says:

Man, I'm an atheist and some of the most close-minded people I've met happen to be atheist too

jimbones155 says:

Atheist lean more toward authoritarianism, so the study is correct in general. She is assuming being an atheist has something to do with logic, but logic should tell her the best she can be is agnostic. Proving there is no God cannot be done scientifically, nor can proving there is one. Belief or non belief in God is a separate issue from critical thinking. There is no such thing as atheism in it's truest form, because the label implies that someone has irrefutable scientific proof there is no God or that they know what God is in order to deny its existence. Being an atheist is illogical as much as being a theist.

DonReality says:

There's a difference between Open Mindedness and Tolerance. As a Christian I have to be open-minded but very critical and Vigilant of others views, I have to ask whether that matches up with Scripture and moral law. If not, I have to cast it aside with dignity and respect to those in opposition. Tolerance also requires the same feat, open-mindedness and tolerance both require Wisdom. I am frankly close minded but have been quick to listen and consider the alternative views, that is tolerance. 95% of atheists that I meet are generally Already hostile and mind made up. You can't enter an argument or debate if your mind is already made up. It's ludicrous. You defend your views and beliefs but be respectful enough to consider the strong points which atheïsts generally discard or "seemingly" have a strawman argument for.

Seth Evans says:


"Science" is a bit strong of a word (when it comes to the connotations YOU'RE clearly trying to conjure–dealing with "objective/deductive/certain" knowledge) when you're talking about what's meant by a "study" in some/many cases (and, here, clearly–survey data). Methodology matters–there's a REASON the term "soft science" exists–and the recognition of NON-scientific academic disciplines.

FOR EXAMPLE–to name just a single, obvious, major possible/likely problem; it's a near CERTAINTY given current demographics that the people conducting this click-bait-of-a-study were overwhelmingly THEISTS–WHAT A SHOCK THAT THEIR CONCLUSIONS CAST THEISM IN A POSITIVE LIGHT, AND ASSUMED IT WAS A REASONABLE POSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE.

xPMx says:

Think of all the wars and people who have died in the name of "God" in some form , religion is not very tolerant and is more dangerous because its what (as an individual) we set our moral compass on . Nothing is true all is permitted.

Introgauge .C says:

I'm atheist. but these people who claim their atheism as though it were a political stance. I've notice they have the extreme left leaning stance that is incredibly close minded. Richard Dawkins for example, suffered a heart attack due to his own followers turning against him for "wrong think" just by the stress they gave him.

Michael Lloyd says:

Simply on a fundamental level, Atheism is more tolerant, each religion claims to be correct and claims others to be wrong – each boasts enlightenment. Atheism doesnt say religion is wrong, it doesnt boasts enlightenment, it simply follows logic patterns.

Social Conservative says:

so according to this guest, you have to accept fag marriage and abortion to be classified as "tolerant"? i would say the more appropriate descriptor is immoral.

Sebawayh X says:

Believ in jesus or els…burn in hell. Jesus is so tolurunt n luving'v enumies.

whisperingmists says:

Pitiful showing by Carlson.

youtubing182 says:

The atheist did well overall, but she did cheat in one respect that Tucker didn't catch.

The study asked you if you could find the opposing argument you came up with to your original position as persuasive. The atheist falsely characterized this request as finding the opposing argument as MORE persuasive than your original position–and then tried to impose the element of self-contradiction into the mindset of the person who could find opposing views persuasive.

Ahmad Wright says:

Tucker didn't make a valid point or rebuttal in this one.

Comments are disabled for this post.