# Best Responses to New Atheists **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 1, 2010, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682 "2010-10-01T02:09:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/61 "2010-10-01T20:11:29Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > > > Doesn’t really matter. In addition to “communism” and “religion” as competing ideologies that can be taken to murderous extremes, one can throw in “racial purity” or really anything with nebulous goals that promise some utopian result. Heck, I can imagine mass murder being blindly and fanatically performed in the name of “the profit motive”. Your major mistake is pretending that religion is somehow apart from the other ideologies, that it’s special. It isn’t. > > When did I ever say that religion is apart from other ideologies in this respect? I don’t recall saying that. So it’s _not_ different from the other ideologies? I’d like to be clear on this point, since you invoke the image of the mass-murdering atheist quite a bit. If you were instead just invoking the image of the mass-murdering _communist_, I don’t expect anyone would object (unless they happened to actually be communists - I think there are two active on this board at the moment), since atheism and communism are not synonymous. ---
**Author:** ![Candyman74](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Candyman74](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Candyman74)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/62 "2010-10-01T20:19:33Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > “New Atheism” is just a group of people who don’t feel the need to shamefully hide their atheism and who don’t view religion as unquestionable. Because old-fashioned atheists _do_ view religion as unequestionable? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/63 "2010-10-01T20:20:38Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > And that has what to do with this thread? The question we’re looking at here, is whether atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004–that’s what Stenger et. al. seem to be implying. The fact that atheists murdered a great many Christians in the Soviet Union and other places proves that such a claim is false. The exact reason for the massacres of the clergy is not relevant to what’s being debated in this thread. UTTER LOGIC FAIL. The fact that atheists murdered a great many Christians in the Soviet Union and other places most definitely does **NOT** prove that [atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational [about atheism] and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004] is false. That is completely illogical, because you have utterly failed to show that a person who happens to be atheistic does their atrocities because of their atheism, or with the goal of acting on their atheism or demonstrating or spreading their atheist, as opposed to for other reasons entirely. Though it _is_ refreshing to know that by your “logic”, in the laughable event that you were to apply it consistently, every evil act ever committed done by a christian was done _because_ they were a christian. If a christan stiffs you on your tip, by your “logic”, he stiffed you _specifically because of christainity_. ---
**Author:** ![AClockworkMelon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aclockworkmelon/32/10803_2.png) [@AClockworkMelon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AClockworkMelon)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/64 "2010-10-01T20:22:12Z")
> [@Candyman74](#): > > > [@SenorBeef](#): > > > > “New Atheism” is just a group of people who don’t feel the need to shamefully hide their atheism and who don’t view religion as unquestionable. > > Because old-fashioned atheists _do_ view religion as unequestionable? 😕 Considering that the whole point of “new atheism” is to question religion openly; yes. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/65 "2010-10-01T20:24:23Z")
> [@AClockworkMelon](#): > > > [@Candyman74](#): > > > > Because old-fashioned atheists _do_ view religion as unequestionable? 😕 > > Considering that the whole point of “new atheism” is to question religion openly; yes. I think the point was that there is nothing new about new atheism. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/66 "2010-10-01T20:27:47Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > > > And that has what to do with this thread? The question we’re looking at here, is whether atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004–that’s what Stenger et. al. seem to be implying. The fact that atheists murdered a great many Christians in the Soviet Union and other places proves that such a claim is false. The exact reason for the massacres of the clergy is not relevant to what’s being debated in this thread. > > UTTER LOGIC FAIL. The fact that atheists murdered a great many Christians in the Soviet Union and other places most definitely does **NOT** prove that [atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational [about atheism] and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004] is false. That is completely illogical, because you have utterly failed to show that a person who happens to be atheistic does their atrocities because of their atheism, or with the goal of acting on their atheism or demonstrating or spreading their atheist, as opposed to for other reasons entirely. > > Though it _is_ refreshing to know that by your “logic”, in the laughable event that you were to apply it consistently, every evil act ever committed done by a christian was done _because_ they were a christian. If a christan stiffs you on your tip, by your “logic”, he stiffed you _specifically because of christainity_. _sigh_ Like hell it doesn’t. The Russian Orthodox Church was NOT being persecuted for their beliefs, which you seem to be implying. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ATHEISM VS. RELIGON. So stop talking out of your ass. (You also have to remember that the Church had been closely tied to the Tsarist regime – that would also been seen as a threat) I need a drink. ---
**Author:** ![AClockworkMelon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aclockworkmelon/32/10803_2.png) [@AClockworkMelon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AClockworkMelon)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/67 "2010-10-01T20:28:59Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > > [@AClockworkMelon](#): > > > > Considering that the whole point of “new atheism” is to question religion openly; yes. > > I think the point was that there is nothing new about new atheism. My take on new atheism is that it’s all about proselytizing for non-belief. New atheism as a movement is new anywhere that doesn’t have a history of people doing this in significant numbers. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/68 "2010-10-01T20:35:45Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > > [@begbert2](#): > > > > UTTER LOGIC FAIL. The fact that atheists murdered a great many Christians in the Soviet Union and other places most definitely does **NOT** prove that [atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational [about atheism] and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004] is false. That is completely illogical, because you have utterly failed to show that a person who happens to be atheistic does their atrocities because of their atheism, or with the goal of acting on their atheism or demonstrating or spreading their atheist, as opposed to for other reasons entirely. > > > > Though it _is_ refreshing to know that by your “logic”, in the laughable event that you were to apply it consistently, every evil act ever committed done by a christian was done _because_ they were a christian. If a christan stiffs you on your tip, by your “logic”, he stiffed you _specifically because of christainity_. > > _sigh_ Like hell it doesn’t. The Russian Orthodox Church was NOT being persecuted for their beliefs, which you seem to be implying. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ATHEISM VS. RELIGON. So stop talking out of your ass. > > (You also have to remember that the Church had been closely tied to the Tsarist regime – that would also been seen as a threat) > > I need a drink. Are you talking to me? ---
**Author:** ![Kolga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e56c9b/32.png) [@Kolga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolga)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/69 "2010-10-01T20:45:22Z")
I honestly don’t know why anyone bothers to engage **ITR Champion** on this issue. He’s as adamant about ignoring information and as staunch in his opinion in this arena as **Starving Artist** is about liberals. And about as intellectually honest, too. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/70 "2010-10-01T20:48:31Z")
> [@Kolga](#): > > I honestly don’t know why anyone bothers to engage **ITR Champion** on this issue. He’s as adamant about ignoring information and as staunch in his opinion in this arena as **Starving Artist** is about liberals. And about as intellectually honest, too. Cognitive error draws me like a moth to a flame. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/71 "2010-10-01T21:00:39Z")
> [@Gustav](#): > > Seriously though, _is_ there any actual difference between the New Atheists and the regular kind? [Not really. Atheists have been called “harsh and disrespectful” for at least 180 years.](http://www.archive.org/stream/somemistakesmose00ingeuoft#page/n49/mode/2up) ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/72 "2010-10-01T21:03:57Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > UTTER LOGIC FAIL. The fact that atheists murdered a great many Christians in the Soviet Union and other places most definitely does **NOT** prove that [atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational [about atheism] and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004] is false. That is completely illogical, because you have utterly failed to show that a person who happens to be atheistic does their atrocities because of their atheism, or with the goal of acting on their atheism or demonstrating or spreading their atheist, as opposed to for other reasons entirely. Huh? Are you denying that the leaders of the Soviet Union were atheists and were very direct about promoting it? That they took a great many actions towards the goal of reducing and eventually eliminating religion from Russia and replacing it with atheism? How about [this:](http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/roundtable/roundtable/riding-the-godless-express.php) > [@](#): > > For nearly two decades, in the first half of the 20th century, an unprecedented mass movement, promoting and enforcing “godlessness,” spread everywhere from Kiev to Vladivostok. By 1932, the movement’s high-water mark, over five million Soviet citizens had joined the “League of the Militant Godless.” Dozens of “museums of religion” occupied former churches, preaching the atheist gospel. Aviators took Siberian peasants on flights high above the taiga, demonstrating that neither god nor angels lived in the sky. An “agit-train” called “The Godless Express” crisscrossed the USSR, its passengers distributing thousands of atheist tracts, desecrating the remains of saints, publicly celebrating a derisive “anti-Christmas.” Atheism became an academic discipline, complete with respected institutes, peer-reviewed journals, and tedious conferences. Filmmakers, illustrators, and painters produced an outpouring of work, blasting belief and superstition. For one season in Moscow, a theater called The Atheist mocked God from the stage. > … > Atheist journals flourished from the early 1920s: The Godless at the Workbench, The Anti-Religious, and Militant Atheism. The Bolshevik faith in print persuasion was boundless: both describing and directing anti-religious work, these publications were by turns incisive and thoughtful, graphically stunning, malicious and hectoring. From the most prominent of them—The Godless, a weekly newspaper established in 1922—would emerge the organization The League of the Militant Godless. > > The League was established in 1925, with the stated aim of transforming “Holy Russia” into “an atheistic Soviet Union." Party members, activist youth, intellectuals, and workers were among the members. Possibly the largest atheist organization in history, the League soon had its hand in almost everything: journalism, book publishing, education, supervision of the new atheist museums, policymaking, and more. Special emphasis was placed on opening cells in the countryside, beachheads for the spread of atheist teaching. The League even boasted a few branches outside the Soviet Union. > > Ceaseless publishing activity undertaken by the League—massive even by Soviet standards—supplied these local activists: by one estimate, the State Publishing House, working closely with the League, issued 140,000,000 copies of over 1,800 atheist titles between 1928 and 1940, and perhaps as many as 44,000,000 pieces of anti-religious literature in 1930 alone. One of the classics was entitled How Gods and Goddesses are Born, Live, and Die (1923) a didactic work by the league’s tireless founder, Emelyan Yaroslavsky, who was reported to enjoy the confidence of Dictator Stalin himself. > > League members vowed to create a new atheist culture, adapted to the needs of building socialism. Atheist study groups, reading circles, and correspondence courses proliferated; self-help guides, such as Teach Yourself to Be Godless, were widely distributed. Soviet schools and workplaces had “godless corners”, informative collections of posters, brochures, newspapers, and photographs which echoed the “icon corners," of Orthodox tradition. (They stood along side the “red corners” and “Lenin corners” of the time.) That certainly sounds like atheists being confrontational and not keeping their atheism hidden. Hence the Soviet example is proof that [atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational [about atheism] and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004] is false (in one case). Nor would it be hard to find examples of similar things in many of the other totalitarian regimes where secular governments persecuted religious believers. Outside those regimes, there were a great many prominent, aggressive promoters of atheism, and I’ve already given a list. Hence I see no basis for the claim that there’s anythign new about how Dawkins et. al. have aggressively promoted atheism in the past 6 years or so. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/73 "2010-10-01T21:16:34Z")
Yep, that’s communism for you, picking fights with rival ideologies. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/74 "2010-10-01T21:20:23Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > > [@Guinastasia](#): > > > > _sigh_ Like hell it doesn’t. The Russian Orthodox Church was NOT being persecuted for their beliefs, which you seem to be implying. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ATHEISM VS. RELIGON. So stop talking out of your ass. > > > > (You also have to remember that the Church had been closely tied to the Tsarist regime – that would also been seen as a threat) > > > > I need a drink. > > Are you talking to me? No, sorry – Just added on to your post – to use it for extra emphasis. I should probably been more clear about that. Sorry. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/75 "2010-10-01T21:21:24Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > > [@begbert2](#): > > > > UTTER LOGIC FAIL. The fact that atheists murdered a great many Christians in the Soviet Union and other places most definitely does **NOT** prove that [atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational [about atheism] and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004] is false. That is completely illogical, because you have utterly failed to show that a person who happens to be atheistic does their atrocities because of their atheism, or with the goal of acting on their atheism or demonstrating or spreading their atheist, as opposed to for other reasons entirely. > > Huh? Are you denying that the leaders of the Soviet Union were atheists and were very direct about promoting it? That they took a great many actions towards the goal of reducing and eventually eliminating religion from Russia and replacing it with atheism? How about [this:](http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/roundtable/roundtable/riding-the-godless-express.php) > > > [@](#): > > > > For nearly two decades, in the first half of the 20th century, an unprecedented mass movement, promoting and enforcing “godlessness,” spread everywhere from Kiev to Vladivostok. By 1932, the movement’s high-water mark, over five million Soviet citizens had joined the “League of the Militant Godless.” Dozens of “museums of religion” occupied former churches, preaching the atheist gospel. Aviators took Siberian peasants on flights high above the taiga, demonstrating that neither god nor angels lived in the sky. An “agit-train” called “The Godless Express” crisscrossed the USSR, its passengers distributing thousands of atheist tracts, desecrating the remains of saints, publicly celebrating a derisive “anti-Christmas.” Atheism became an academic discipline, complete with respected institutes, peer-reviewed journals, and tedious conferences. Filmmakers, illustrators, and painters produced an outpouring of work, blasting belief and superstition. For one season in Moscow, a theater called The Atheist mocked God from the stage. > > … > > Atheist journals flourished from the early 1920s: The Godless at the Workbench, The Anti-Religious, and Militant Atheism. The Bolshevik faith in print persuasion was boundless: both describing and directing anti-religious work, these publications were by turns incisive and thoughtful, graphically stunning, malicious and hectoring. From the most prominent of them—The Godless, a weekly newspaper established in 1922—would emerge the organization The League of the Militant Godless. > > > > The League was established in 1925, with the stated aim of transforming “Holy Russia” into “an atheistic Soviet Union." Party members, activist youth, intellectuals, and workers were among the members. Possibly the largest atheist organization in history, the League soon had its hand in almost everything: journalism, book publishing, education, supervision of the new atheist museums, policymaking, and more. Special emphasis was placed on opening cells in the countryside, beachheads for the spread of atheist teaching. The League even boasted a few branches outside the Soviet Union. > > > > Ceaseless publishing activity undertaken by the League—massive even by Soviet standards—supplied these local activists: by one estimate, the State Publishing House, working closely with the League, issued 140,000,000 copies of over 1,800 atheist titles between 1928 and 1940, and perhaps as many as 44,000,000 pieces of anti-religious literature in 1930 alone. One of the classics was entitled How Gods and Goddesses are Born, Live, and Die (1923) a didactic work by the league’s tireless founder, Emelyan Yaroslavsky, who was reported to enjoy the confidence of Dictator Stalin himself. > > > > League members vowed to create a new atheist culture, adapted to the needs of building socialism. Atheist study groups, reading circles, and correspondence courses proliferated; self-help guides, such as Teach Yourself to Be Godless, were widely distributed. Soviet schools and workplaces had “godless corners”, informative collections of posters, brochures, newspapers, and photographs which echoed the “icon corners," of Orthodox tradition. (They stood along side the “red corners” and “Lenin corners” of the time.) > > That certainly sounds like atheists being confrontational and not keeping their atheism hidden. Hence the Soviet example is proof that [atheists did, in fact, generally refrain from being confrontational [about atheism] and keep their atheism hidden prior to about 2004] is false (in one case). Nor would it be hard to find examples of similar things in many of the other totalitarian regimes where secular governments persecuted religious believers. Outside those regimes, there were a great many prominent, aggressive promoters of atheism, and I’ve already given a list. Hence I see no basis for the claim that there’s anythign new about how Dawkins et. al. have aggressively promoted atheism in the past 6 years or so. I’m denying that the violent actions done by communists were because they were atheists. And I also deny that they were promoting atheism because they were atheists! They were promoting atheism because they were _communists_. A disbelief in god had dick-all to do with their actions; they were against christainity because they were pro-communist and saw them to be in conflict, full-stop. But it’s convenient to the cause of fallaciously attacking atheism to pretend that _atheism_ is the root of all evil, and thus you vomit the bullshit. And even if we bought the bullshit you’re spouting, I would think that _even you_ would see there to be some _slight_ difference between “writing books and giving talks about atheism” and “slaughtering christians in the name of really-communism-but-we’re-pretending-it’s-their-nongod-telling-them-to-do-it”. Which is why even _accounting_ for the slanderous bullshit, your statement “I see no basis for the claim that there’s anythign new about how Dawkins et. al. have aggressively promoted atheism in the past 6 years or so” remains well and truly in bizarre-land. Unless you really are trying to imply that it’s just as bad to write books about atheism as it is to slaughter theists wholesale in the name of the Party? ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/76 "2010-10-01T21:22:21Z")
I’m not going into the whole “atheists being a distrusted minority” idea, since IAFAIK it’s very US-specific and does not apply to a lot of the rest of the world. ITR’s “confusion” probably stems from that. I’ve met plenty of people who were quite specific about their atheism even the first time I talked to them, since where I live, we generally don’t think people’s religious beliefs are automatically reflecting on their moral worth. I’d _like_ to see some _intelligent and honest_ rebuttals to atheism (not “new atheism”, since I don’t think it’s new at all - even in the US) and since the only ones mentioned in this thread were posted by **ITR Champion** , I’d like to ask him to outline at least the basics of the arguments in his cited books - that way I might be able to determine if it’s worth obtaining any of them. There’s also **collision** (the documentary, which is partly based on the discussion and book “Is Christianity Good for the World?”) by Hitchens and Douglas Wilson, who seems to be at least intelligent and honest, even if I find his arguments unconvincing; it seems to be mostly an attempt to deny an atheist “grounding” for morality (this kind of argument can only be made if you believe that whatever God wants is axiomatically “good”, and while he does claim that, but most people - even most Christians - probably wouldn’t agree). ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/77 "2010-10-01T21:26:03Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > > [@begbert2](#): > > > > Are you talking to me? > > No, sorry – Just added on to your post – to use it for extra emphasis. I should probably been more clear about that. Sorry. :smack: No problem - I suspected as much - but I thought I’d check. > [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](#): > > I’d _like_ to see some _intelligent and honest_ rebuttals to atheism (not “new atheism”, since I don’t think it’s new at all - even in the US) and since the only ones mentioned in this thread were posted by **ITR Champion** , I’d like to ask him to outline at least the basics of the arguments in his cited books - that way I might be able to determine if it’s worth obtaining any of them. I’d like to see intelligent and honest rebuttals too - sinking my teeth into such things is really quite fun. (Plus when I see a book mentioned, but without its main points and arguments described, it leaves me feeling somewhat left out.) ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/78 "2010-10-01T21:35:16Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > > > When did I ever say that religion is apart from other ideologies in this respect? I don’t recall saying that. > > So it’s _not_ different from the other ideologies? I’d like to be clear on this point, since you invoke the image of the mass-murdering atheist quite a bit. If I invoke the image of the mass-murdering atheist quite a bit, it’s because atheists have committed mass murder quite a bit. It’s true, of course, that atheism and communism are not synonymous, but neither are they disjoint and historically there’s been strong overlap. Every communist regime that I know of undertook some type of violence against organized religion. As for whether religious perseuction has sometimes been in the same lines as that by secular regimes, I’ve never denied it. I may, at some times, have suggested that the tolls racked up by the secular regimes are much larger, as for instance we have frequent mentions of the Spanish Inquisition that killed 1,000 people (give or take) in four centuries, but if we’re so interested in Spanish historical atrocities then why have I never heard anyone mention the 6,832 Spanish clergymen killed in the red terror, which took less than three years. But I’d never deny that at some times extremists of certain religious varieties can act like extremists of the secular varieties. For example, just look at what Dawkins says in his introduction: > [@](#): > > If this book works as I intend, religious readers who open it will be atheists when they put it down. What presumptious optimism! Of course, dyed-in-the-wool faith-heads are immune to argument, their resistance built up over years of childhood indoctrination. Now most authors begin a book by trying to strike a friendly, reconciliatory tone, acknowledging to the reader that it’s the author’s responsibility to make their case. So it’s somewhat strange for Dawkins to open up by declaring that anybody who doesn’t read his book and automatically change their life to obey it must be an idiot. But it’s not unique. I can name another author who does the same thing: the Prophet Mohammed. > [@](#): > > [2.1] Alif Lam Mim. > [2.2] This Book, there is no doubt in it, is a guide to those who guard (against evil). > [2.3] Those who believe in the unseen and keep up prayer and spend out of what We have given them. > [2.4] And who believe in that which has been revealed to you and that which was revealed before you and they are sure of the hereafter. > [2.5] These are on a right course from their Lord and these it is that shall be successful. > [2.6] Surely those who disbelieve, it being alike to them whether you warn them, or do not warn them, will not believe. > [2.7] Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing and there is a covering over their eyes, and there is a great punishment for them. > [2.8] And there are some people who say: We believe in Allah and the last day; and they are not at all believers. > [2.9] They desire to deceive Allah and those who believe, and they deceive only themselves and they do not perceive. > [2.10] There is a disease in their hearts, so Allah added to their disease and they shall have a painful chastisement because they lied. > [2.11] And when it is said to them, Do not make mischief in the land, they say: We are but peace-makers. > [2.12] Now surely they themselves are the mischief makers, but they do not perceive. > [2.13] And when it is said to them: Believe as the people believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know. > [2.14] And when they meet those who believe, they say: We believe; and when they are alone with their Shaitans, they say: Surely we are with you, we were only mocking. > [2.15] Allah shall pay them back their mockery, and He leaves them alone in their inordinacy, blindly wandering on. > [2.16] These are they who buy error for the right direction, so their bargain shall bring no gain, nor are they the followers of the right direction. > [2.17] Their parable is like the parable of one who kindled a fire but when it had illumined all around him, Allah took away their light, and left them in utter darkness-- they do not see. > [2.18] Deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they will not turn back. It’s often said that “great minds think alike.” Richard Dawkins and Mohammed both starting off in the same way is surely proof that lousy minds also think alike. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/79 "2010-10-01T21:43:54Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Now most authors begin a book by trying to strike a friendly, reconciliatory tone, acknowledging to the reader that it’s the author’s responsibility to make their case. So it’s somewhat strange for Dawkins to open up by declaring that anybody who doesn’t read his book and automatically change their life to obey it must be an idiot. Which book is that, and can you quote it? I’m assuming you’re talking about the God Delusion, but I can’t immediately find what you’re talking about. And if you have the time, please expand on the part of my post #76 that was addressed to you. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682/80 "2010-10-01T21:44:14Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > > > So it’s _not_ different from the other ideologies? I’d like to be clear on this point, since you invoke the image of the mass-murdering atheist quite a bit. > > If I invoke the image of the mass-murdering atheist quite a bit, it’s because atheists have committed mass murder quite a bit. It’s true, of course, that atheism and communism are not synonymous, but neither are they disjoint and historically there’s been strong overlap. Every communist regime that I know of undertook some type of violence against organized religion. Ah, but they do so to promote and secure atheism or to promote and secure communism? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/best-responses-to-new-atheists/555682.md?page=5)