Harris and Dawkins have been labelled “New” atheists. According to Aslan, “they give atheism a bad name”. He then does his best to find quotes from both men that show them in a bad light, or are at least likely to offend religious people. Instead of repeating Aslan’s quotes, I thought I’d introduce a couple of different ones:
Hmmm. Why doesn’t Hastie want to repeat the quotes? Let’s take a look. Aslan writes:
To be sure, there is plenty to criticize in any religion and no ideology – religious or otherwise – should be immune from criticism. But when Richard Dawkins describes religion as “one of the world’s great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus,” or when Sam Harris proudly declares, “If I could wave a magic wand and get rid of either rape or religion, I would not hesitate to get rid of religion,” it should be perfectly obvious to all that these men do not speak for the majority of atheists.
Dawkins says religion is as evil as the smallpox virus and Harris argues religion is worse than rape. These are the beliefs of closed-minded, wild-eyed extremists. I myself could add many other examples of wild-eyed extremism from New Atheist leaders, but why bother? These two alone completely neutralized Heather, such that her only defense was to sweep them under the carpet and pretend they don’t exist. I’m sooo impressed.
Oh, but it gets better. In her attempt to sanitize the documented rhetoric of her extremist heroes, Heather tries to subtitute the “nicer” side of the Two Horsemen.
First, she quotes (meme-style) Harris about society not suffering from people being too reasonable. LOL! Heather tries to sweep away Harris extremist views about rape being preferrable to religion but offering up….a Sam Harris deepity!
Clue to Heather/Harris – New Atheists have shown no superior ability to be “reasonable.” Was it reasonable for Harris to oppose Collins’ nomination to head the NIH? Is Dawkins being reasonable when he routinely mocks religious people as “faithheads?” Or perhaps we should explore the reasonable behavior of the Gnus when one famous Gnu accused another famous Gnu of rape?
Then she quotes (meme-style) Dawkins, asserting that faith is a cop-out and how we need to think and evaluate evidence.
So Heather wants us to ignore Dawkins equating religion to a deadly virus by offering up one of Dawkins hypocritical talking points.
Sorry Heather, but we have seen too many instances of Dawkins refusing to think and evaluate evidence and instead wanting us to accept his claims on faith. Let me give you an obvious one – Dawkins claims he was molested as a young boy. Well…..where is the evidence? Dawkins won’t even say who supposedly did this. We are just supposed to accept his claim on faith.
In the end, Heather can’t bring herself to deal with the truth of her idols’ hateful extremism. She hides from the evidence and instead tries to replace it with a Sam Harris deepity and a Richard Dawkins cliche. The problem is that neither the deepity nor the cliche have anything to do with New Atheist reality.
The bigger problem is that Hastie unknowingly demonstrates how New Atheists deal with evidence that conflicts with their self-image – they purposely ignore it.