It sounds like you've found a new vocation, Barry. 

 Go for it.

 Put up posters, or something.  Organize some introductory lectures.

 What do we call it?  "The New Atheism, by Barry W"


---In, <turquoiseb@...> wrote :

 Intelligent and well-written article about the religious apologetics that is 
rampant these days, and why intelligent people shouldn't stand for it. The 
author makes many good points, but among my favorites are the following, in 
which I've highlighted my favorite section in red:

 How are we to rid ourselves of religion? I don’t know a nonbeliever who 
considers it likely that we will. Even Christopher Hitchens likened it to the 
rats of Camus’ “The Plague,” always scurrying about in a city’s sewers, ready 
to spring forth on us when we have forgotten about the pestilence they carry. 
But we can take action to ensure that we do not unwittingly favor religion’s 
continuation by taking stances, both public and private. (I wrote about this 
previously for Salon here
 Nonbelievers need to approach faith as a subject like any other, one we can 
talk about and criticize without fear of causing offense – or, in the case of 
Islam, concern for our physical safety.

 This is in fact our constitutional right. The First Amendment forbids Congress 
from establishing an official religion and protects free speech – including 
speech that offends the sentiments of believers. If we disbelieve what 
religion’s canon tells us, we need to say so openly, and in mixed company, 
pointing out that no rational person could believe it or accept it as true and 
valid, were it not for indoctrination, immaturity, willful abandonment of 
reason, fear, or simple feeblemindedness.

 We can also cease displaying knee-jerk respect for those who propagate faith. 
A priest, rabbi, or imam should merit no more deference than a witch doctor – 
all traffic in gullibility, human misery and vulnerability, and none can prove 
the efficacy of their ministrations. We must point out the inherent 
dangerousness of faith itself – of believing things to be true without 
evidence. The British poet Perce Bysshe Shelley, writing two centuries ago, put 
it bluntly: “God is an hypothesis, and, as such, stands in need of proof: the 
onus probandi” – the burden of proof – “rests on the theist.” Claims made on 
the basis of religion should be met by demands for evidence.

 Reza Aslan’s atheism problem: “Fundamentalist” atheists aren’t the issue, 
apologists for religions are
 Reza Aslan’s atheism problem: “Fundamentalist” atheists ...
 Major religions all contain macabre fables, explicit injunctions for vile 
behavior no civilzed person should accept

 View on
 Preview by Yahoo




  • [FairfieldLife]... TurquoiseBee [FairfieldLife]
    • [Fairfield... [FairfieldLife]
      • [Fairf... [FairfieldLife]
        • [F... [FairfieldLife]
          • ... [FairfieldLife]
            • ... [FairfieldLife]
              • ... [FairfieldLife]
                • ... [FairfieldLife]
                • ... [FairfieldLife]
        • Re... 'Richard J. Williams' [FairfieldLife]
          • ... [FairfieldLife]
            • ... [FairfieldLife]

Reply via email to