New Atheist Rants Against Religion as a Dragon

Over at Quora, someone has recently submitted my essay, “New Atheism as an Embarrassment to Atheists” and asked, “Does The New Atheist movement embarass some atheists?

So far, one atheist has replied. Let’s have a look:

Not me.

I may sound extreme, but to bring major changes, you have to get your hands dirty.

The moderate have no place in history.

He may sound extreme because he IS extreme. What we have here is the “end justifies the means” mentality. Time to get one’s hands dirty! But does getting one’s “hands dirty” include Lying For Reason? Seriously, would it be wrong for New Atheists to spread lies to help bring about their “major changes?”

Religion is a integral part of human society. The longer an entity lives, the difficult it becomes to eradicate it.

More extremism – note the objective, to be carried out by “dirty hands,” is eradication. So what happens when Reason and Evidence are not powerful enough* to accomplish this eradication?

There is a rule in India where I stay. If a landlord rents his real estate for more than X years (I think 7),the property then, by law, gets into the name of tenant. The owner loses his property just because he let the tenant stay for long.

Same applies with stupidity and idiocy. Our society is based on freedom of expression and freedom of liberty. The reason why absurdities even come to limelight is because we allow all ideas to sprout.

We then clean the useful for the outdated. Religion today is not what it was when it was made.

All religion does today is create non falsifiable argument for taking away human rights, entering in the working of society law, teaching what they call controversy, saying homosexuality is not natural, curbing freedom of press and individuals and what not.

It looks like being anti-religion not only nurtures the “end justifies the means” extremist mentality along with its “dirty hands,” but also entails an abandonment of critical thinking.

A dragon as big as religion needs a special treatment.

Religion is a dragon? I thought it was virus. Anyway, it needs “special treatment.” 😉

Clearly, we can see what the New Atheist movement is accomplishing from this response – it is showing atheists to be people who, motivated by Fear, abandon critical thinking and adopt extremist positions to pursue an extreme agenda where the end justifies the means. In other words, they have become the very thing they are supposedly opposed to.

New Atheism is simply the militant, fundamentalist version of atheism. It is the dogmatic “We must Eradicate” version of atheism.

*We have seen that Reason and Evidence are not even powerful enough to bring about consensus among the New Atheists themselves.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in atheism, closed-mindedness, Gnutopia, militant atheism, New Atheism and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to New Atheist Rants Against Religion as a Dragon

  1. Mark Plus says:

    The obsessives on both sides of the god question don’t get it. People just don’t care about god all that much if they live with existential security. God belief just doesn’t depend on world views, theories about origins or ideological struggles for the allegiance of the human mind, but on whether you live in well run society or not. Otherwise how can you explain why Vermonters and Mississippians can live in the same country, yet the the people in Vermont display about half the religiosity of the people in Mississippi? Could it have something to do with the fact that Vermonters live in a better run society than Mississippians?

  2. Crude says:

    God belief just doesn’t depend on world views, theories about origins or ideological struggles for the allegiance of the human mind, but on whether you live in well run society or not.

    Which is tantamount to claiming that atheism is, for many people, determined by non-rational factors. Yes, you can say that’s the case for theism as well, but that’s one hell of a concession.

    By the way – why is one society versus the other ‘well run’?

    Otherwise how can you explain why Vermonters and Mississippians can live in the same country, yet the the people in Vermont display about half the religiosity of the people in Mississippi?

    You haven’t offered an explanation either – just a correlation. And do you have any idea how many factors you are completely overlooking – population, history, ethnicities, culture, and more?

    Further – you’re saying ‘religiosity’. But statistically even the irreligious in the US believe in God more often than not.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s