Say what you want about the content of this exchange. Dawkins is thoughtful, logical and consistent. O’Reilly hasn’t even read the book. He says things like “I looked through it” and then mocks the work pushing his delusional agenda.
At one point he says that religion has a constraining effect on bad behavior, like murder and killing. I wonder what he would say about the religion of ISIS in that regard?
He also points out that Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot, murderous dictators, all were atheists, stipulating therefore that atheism is a bad thing. He didn’t point out that Hitler was a Christian, since that would not have supported his point.
The behavior of O’Reilly in this exchange simply points out the intellect and consistency of Dawkins and O’Reilly’s own insecurity in his fabricated world of the Judeo-Christian “philosophy.”
In the show, the label “Atheist” is shown under Dawkins’ name. Perhaps in this context it might make sense, and Dawkins is probably proud of it. Normally I would put “Author” there instead. He would not put “Christian” under the name of a non-atheist author, would he?
O’Reilly truly is a dick.