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.
Because old-fashioned atheists do view religion as unequestionable? 
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.
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.
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.
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.
Are you talking to me?
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.
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:
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.
Yep, that’s communism for you, picking fights with rival ideologies.
No, sorry – Just added on to your post – to use it for extra emphasis. I should probably been more clear about that. Sorry. :smack:
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?
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).
No problem - I suspected as much - but I thought I’d check.
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.)
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:
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.
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.
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.
Ah, but they do so to promote and secure atheism or to promote and secure communism?