As you probably know, Gnu activist Jerry Coyne has a reputation for banning people who dissent on his blog (in fact, I think he even bans people who refer to his blog as a blog). This is not surprising, as Gnu activists thrive in echo chambers. The echo chambers are needed to sustain the steady diet of straw men they feed on. But what if someone like Coyne was given the power to ban people from other venues aside from his blog? Would he use it? If you pay attention to his language and complaints, I think it rather obvious Coyne would love to control the free speech of others.
For example, he is once again complaining about Francis Collins with a blog entry entitled, “National Geographic allows Francis Collins to spout theology in its pages.” Did you catch that? Collins was “allowed” to “spout” in the pages of a magazine and that made Coyne angry. He even asks, “Why did National Geographic publish this kind of stuff, using theology to answer scientific questions? ”
Why was Collins allowed to speak? Why did the magazine dare to publish this stuff? Clearly, Coyne believes Collins should not have been allowed to be published in the magazine. Just as Coyne thought Collins should not have been allowed to head the NIH.
The same attitude was seen in another case from a couple of days earlier.
This time he is angry because Trevor Noah is going to replace Jon Stewart and Noah has previously mocked atheists on his twitter account. Coyne summarizes his complaint: “When so many young people watch this show to get not just news analysis, but news itself, it would be nice if they didn’t hire someone who osculates the rump of faith.” In other words, Noah should not be hired.
And then a few days before this, we again see Coyne making the same type of angry complaint. This time he is angry at CNN for publishing a religious piece and asserts, “Read it—it’s short. And after you do, I’ll be you’ll wonder why CNN would not only publish such a thing, but even pay somebody to write it.” He even ends his blog entry with the familiar complaint: “But the question of whether Judas is in hell is far less important than this question: Why did CNN publish such a ridiculous piece?” (BTW, David Heddle has some fun with Coyne here).
Notice a pattern? Why was the religious person allowed to speak? Why was this mocker of atheists hired? Why was this religious article even published?
Does it surprise anyone that someone who regularly asks such questions would also routinely ban all dissent from his blog? After all, once you deny free will, why think such a thing as free speech should exist, right?