AS26: CJ Werleman and Noah Lugeons, Part 2
Serious Inquiries Only
Thomas Smith
4.6 • 1.1K Ratings
🗓️ 24 April 2014
⏱️ 58 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Summary
CJ, Noah and Thomas continue the discussion of CJ's contentious article about atheists and Islamic terrorism. Then, Thomas talks about a segment which was meant to debut in this episode but didn't. Because of that, he then introduces a replacement segment called "WTF Salon.com" or something like that. Article discussed: http://www.salon.com/2014/04/19/science_doesnt_disprove_god_where_richard_dawkins_and_new_atheists_go_wrong/ Also, for an exclusive, … Continue reading AS26: CJ Werleman and Noah Lugeons, Part 2
The post AS26: CJ Werleman and Noah Lugeons, Part 2 appeared first on Atheistically Speaking.
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | You're listening to, atheistically speaking. Oh, Hey, welcome to Atheistically Speaking, episode 26. |
| 0:35.0 | I'm Thomas Smith as per usual. |
| 0:38.0 | All right, well, as advertised, I want to get to part two of the discussion with C.J. Wurleman and No Allusions. |
| 0:46.6 | I think we did a good job of challenging as I alluded to on the Facebook, this was a tough article to read. |
| 0:55.0 | I'm not going to pretend like I agreed with more than like half of it. |
| 1:00.5 | But you know, I did agree with half of it and I think we emphasize the parts we agreed with but there are parts that we definitely disagree with and well I won't speak for no. I mean he actually agreed with different parts and the point of Noah being here wasn't to gang up on CJ, |
| 1:16.5 | although maybe it turned out that way a little bit, but let's just get to it because I know especially the patrons who are getting this ahead of time |
| 1:28.1 | They are probably getting it because they want to hear part two of that interview. So here we go. |
| 1:36.8 | But I mean, I don't, you know, I'm trying not to let you off the hook for the fact that you say |
| 1:42.2 | Harrison Dawkins, you know, where is it? |
| 1:45.4 | They're just as bad as the thugs of the likehood party or whatever. |
| 1:51.1 | You know, I mean, I don't know. I think you went a little further than you're sticking to here. I mean. |
| 1:57.4 | Oh, no, I don't, their rhetoric is as foggish as that, you know, when it comes that. |
| 2:03.3 | I don't, you know, and when if I read that piece again from Sam Harris on Israel, |
| 2:09.2 | that that is, you know, a British argument which is a British point made which would be not |
| 2:15.2 | dissimilar to anything that Netanyahu would a liquid party would make. |
| 2:19.6 | Well okay I think when you when you bring up specifically Israel, Palestine, sure, but I just want to say that the danger is that you |
| 2:27.6 | Possibly people might get the impression from your article that you can discount all of these other objections to Islam that they have. |
| 2:35.3 | And because there are other objections that you can have to terrorism. |
| 2:41.2 | There is Islam on Islam, you know, Muslim on |
| 2:44.1 | Muslim terrorism that's not, doesn't have anything to do with us. And it's, I don't |
| 2:49.7 | know, that rhetoric, I think, I see what you mean and when you spell it out I get it I just that wasn't the |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Thomas Smith, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of Thomas Smith and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.