1. if this is supposed to be an anti-religious film then I wonder if they will apply the same to Islam or will it just be to Christianity. Let's see how scathing Bill Maher is of Islam and if he addresses the true evil of Islam in all its honesty then he should get 24/7 security for he will be their next target.

Posted at 8:56PM on Jun 5th 2008 by Marty

2. When interviewed on Larry King Live, Maher mentioned visiting the Dome of the Rock, so he must be including Islam.

Posted at 9:29PM on Jun 5th 2008 by Christopher Campbell

3. @ Marty

I think you're assume that by religion he means Christianity, which he does not. He usually picks on religion as a whole (on the basis that they are all equally crazy).

“I think flying planes into a building was a faith-based initiative. I think religion is a neurological disorder.”

My personal favorite: “Religion to me is a bureaucracy between man and God that I don't need.”

Posted at 12:50AM on Jun 6th 2008 by facebookfake

4. My sentiments exactly Marty!

Posted at 9:44PM on Jun 5th 2008 by kaitlin hess

5. Bill Maher is well known for ridiculing all religions, so every Christian who likes to play the victim card shouldn't feel they're the only ones being picked on in this movie.

Posted at 11:21PM on Jun 5th 2008 by Steven

6. I agree that it's telling how much whine we are having read about Christians as victims even with a guy who is avowedly anti-all religion. The idea that Christians should be singled out as not to be ridiculed is really your goal here. Stop whining.

Posted at 1:45PM on Jun 6th 2008 by akaison

7. Just so you know: The audio track of Real Time with Bill Maher is available as a free iTunes podcast.

Posted at 1:47AM on Jun 6th 2008 by gottacook

8. Hey, Chris, look up TULLYCASTS on youtube.

Posted at 4:08AM on Jun 6th 2008 by Niko_Bellic

9. Saw the premiere. As a conservative I thought it was a great movie. You should see it only if you have an opened mind to ideas.

Posted at 1:20AM on Aug 2nd 2008 by Andrew

10. There are so many levels of bravery in life, and bravery for an entertainer is often things such as doing a low budget film for scale salary. I am a scientist, and certainly agree with Mahar on what I have heard of his rational attacks on religion, and am glad that he is backing up his agnostic beliefs with science, and scietists such as Richard Dawkins. I have recently read an early twentieth century essay titled "The Faith of a Naturalist", by the author and naturist John Burroughs. This essay has not been given much attention, at least in 70 years, yet I found it the only book which offers me the right to experience joy through discovery, even without the god of religion. I only mention this because it is not often read, and while I respect Dawkins, and others greatly, it is nice to see this romantic, and sometimes sounding spiritual appoach to God only to see that the God of Burroughs is much like the God of Einstein.

Posted at 10:46PM on Aug 26th 2008 by Matthew Putman

11. I think he has been fair in the past at attacking both religions. In recent months, I feel he has tended to look not just at some ridicualous and harmful political and personal aspects of organized religions, but of the more serious questions of whether beliefe in God itself causes irrational behavior. If this is how he is thinking, I expect the film to be rightly against any religion, for the false creation of a diety which we as humans have no way of contemplating rationally.

Posted at 10:54PM on Aug 26th 2008 by Matthew Putman