halconero Posted September 17, 2012 Posted September 17, 2012 I feel both bad and good for Brandon.Bad because it was kind of obvious that he was ambushed, first by being asked about his faith and politics when he was there to promote his album and second when they jumped Richard Dawkins on him.I feel good for him though...I've been a fan of his for years now and it's obvious that his testimony and personal convictions have grown since his initial rise to fame. I don't think he would have been so forthright with his throw down against Dawkins 8 or so years ago.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8uEr69s5nQ&feature=player_embedded
MorningStar Posted September 17, 2012 Posted September 17, 2012 I saw that too. I bet Dawkins felt like a big man smacking down a non-scholar.
Duncan Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 I am no fan of the Killers but unleashing Dawkins on him was stupid and if I were Flowers I wouldn't ever go back on that show
LDSGuy Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 Nice ambush tactics! Like to see him up against an actual scholar.
DavidB Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 I saw that too. I bet Dawkins felt like a big man smacking down a non-scholar. That's about what i think too.A career naysayer who often debates the topic v some random guy - whose band produced a terrific first album, and whose "Don't shoot me santa" is just as good, who happens to be mormon.
MorningStar Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 Brandon always appears nervous in inteviews even when he's not talking about religion. Really lame thing to do to him. It's not like they even allow enough time for a full rebuttal even if he were a scholar.
MorningStar Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 Dawkins says The Book of Mormon is an obvious fake because it uses 16th century language, not 19th century language. ???????
Glenn101 Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 Dawkins says The Book of Mormon is an obvious fake because it uses 16th century language, not 19th century language. ???????Is that Dawkins' best logic???Glenn
MorningStar Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 Yes, because it uses the words "verily I say unto you" and "it came to pass", it's an obvious fake. Those phrases are in The Bible too.
Verum Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 All this shows is how uninformed Brandon Flowers is (telling Dawkins to do his reasearch??) but also how much of an @$$ Richard Dawkins is.
Antoni Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 A genuinely bewildering "interview" not sure what the producers/interviewer were thinking really.Dawkins came out blustering with his usual criticisms. I felt Brandon responded ok, but it was clearly geared against him.I think his willingness to engage more fully gave him more credit than Dawkins "soundbite" attacks.
thesometimesaint Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 A jerk with an education is just an educated jerk.
mapman Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 All this shows is how uninformed Brandon Flowers is (telling Dawkins to do his reasearch??) but also how much of an @$$ Richard Dawkins is.Wasn't it obvious that Dawkins needs to do more research? He even admitted that he didn't read the whole Book of Mormon in the interview.
Verum Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 Wasn't it obvious that Dawkins needs to do more research? He even admitted that he didn't read the whole Book of Mormon in the interview.I really don't think a lack of research is Dawkin's problem. Prejudice against Mormonism and religion most likely, but he's not uninformed.
emeliza Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 I am going to have to watch this later, but I read the title of the thread and had to come look because I couldn't figure out how those two names would ever go together.
thesometimesaint Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 Verum:Maybe he just saw the Broadway play and thought he knew what Mormons believe.
emeliza Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 How horrible. Poor Brandon. I wonder if he knew before hand who was going to be on that night. I also think the host was pretty wrong in how he was treating the situation. I think if I was Brandon, I would have focused on the band a bit more and possibly ended the interview, but he is a better person than I for sticking with it.I watched the second part and the interviewer is pretty bad.I also hate how Dawkins thinks that evolution and religion can't co-exist.
altersteve Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 "Convicted con man"?I know he's probably referring to the 1826 trial, but come on...
Damien the Leper Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 Brandon held his own well enough for as much as he understands.Sicking Dawkins on him shows the integrity of the show and not of Dawkins himself. Although Dawkins didn't really impress me with his uninformed criticisms of Mormonism, the BoM or Joseph Smith.
Calm Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 Sicking Dawkins on him shows the integrity of the show and not of Dawkins himself. Dawkins didn't have to agree to do it and could have just talked to him about music if it was a surprise to him as well.
thesometimesaint Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 It would have gone better if both had just stuck with discussing music.
Damien the Leper Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 Dawkins didn't have to agree to do it and could have just talked to him about music if it was a surprise to him as well.Dawkins isn't responsible for the interviewer bringing up the subject of religion either. It was inevitable that Flowers' faith and religion would be brought up given the political climate. Flowers' could have put an end to the discussion if he wanted to. Or he could have just said "I don't want to talk about it."
MorningStar Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 Dawkins isn't responsible for the interviewer bringing up the subject of religion either. It was inevitable that Flowers' faith and religion would be brought up given the political climate. Flowers' could have put an end to the discussion if he wanted to. Or he could have just said "I don't want to talk about it."The host is a little puppetmaster. He's acting like he's just giving Brandon the opportunity to talk about his feelings about faith, then he brings on the "expert" to trash his religion. Brandon would come off looking lame if he said he now didn't want to talk about it. I doubt he even knew who Dawkins was.
Damien the Leper Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 The host is a little puppetmaster. He's acting like he's just giving Brandon the opportunity to talk about his feelings about faith, then he brings on the "expert" to trash his religion. Brandon would come off looking lame if he said he now didn't want to talk about it. I doubt he even knew who Dawkins was.Dawkins is an irrelevant figure to Flowers. There is no reason why he should know who he is. When I suggested that Flowers not talk about his religion it was intended for when the first question about religion was posed.
thesometimesaint Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 Valentinus:Except that most people are happy to talk about their religion if asked. What most people don't expect is an ambush. It was a setup by the host to trash Mormons. You have heard of a "ringer"?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.