Militant Atheism

Hey folks... 
Do you think this new wave of atheism spearheaded by "aggressive and militant" atheists like Monsieurs Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennet is a good thing?

I certainly do!

It's about time we stand up for ourselves and against the barbaric practices of religions.
Lets share our views.


Tags: Atheist, Christopher, Daniel, Dawkins, Dennet, Harris, Hitchens, Militant, Richard, Sam

Views: 6

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ashish Shetty on February 19, 2010 at 4:02am
@ T.A. Dahar...

Coincidentally - that was the topic of my last blog post @ http://freedomfallen.blogspot.com/

I have a few friends who were muslim but are now atheists - but none of them have publicised it to their families.
Permalink Reply by Gecko, Seth...brother of Richie! on February 20, 2010 at 3:31pm
This is a point all to true.
Permalink Reply by Staks Rosch on February 19, 2010 at 8:24am
I support more vocal atheism, but I wouldn't call that militant.
Permalink Reply by mojo5501 on February 21, 2010 at 8:50am
Exactly. Me too.
Permalink Reply by Kalypso on February 19, 2010 at 9:36am
I'm all for it. I am a newbe atheist. If it wasn't for stumbling across the Atheist Experience tv show on youtube I'd still be an ignorant theist!
Permalink Reply by Goz on February 20, 2010 at 3:04pm
"I am a newbe atheist. "

Hi Kalypso! Welcome aboard...I'm quite pleased your mental immun e system killed the religious brain virus you carried...
Enjoy your new freedom.
Permalink Reply by Sonny Mobley on February 20, 2010 at 3:53pm
Very awesome, Kalypso. :D
Permalink Reply by mojo5501 on February 19, 2010 at 12:36pm
Using the term "militant" isn't really fair...we're letting the opposition define us. There is nothing militant about being reasonable. Being educated is nothing to be ashamed or defensive about. And why the aggression? I think the term assertive is much more acceptable. Aggression seems to give an impression of violence. There is really no need to be violent. Let's leave that to the religious nutjobs.

I think Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins produce thought-provoking arguments in defense of atheism. They don't resort to name-calling or knee-jerk reactions against "the opposition"; they explain, step-by-step, in a logical fashion, all the ways religion "gets it wrong". And the fact that religion can be studied and investigated just like any other social phenomenon or psychological subject matter. And from an evolutionary perspective even. Religion does not need to remain some sort of mystical, unknowable, off-limit subject.
Permalink Reply by Ashish Shetty on February 19, 2010 at 9:29pm
@Mojo5501
Brilliantly said mojo and I agree completely :-) - If you noticed, I put the aggressive and militant parts within quotes for exactly that reason. But the question was whether this new wave of atheism is a good thing.

@ Kalypso
It's always heartening to see one more person break free from the shackles of religion. Cheers :-)
Permalink Reply by mojo5501 on February 21, 2010 at 8:49am
Yes, I think the new wave of atheism is a VERY good thing...but it's only NEW because it's suddenly on the radar of evangelicals and conservative pundits. We have them worried!

I think the discussion needs to be continued. And expanded to the sleepy American public. It's a sensible alternative to the conservative voices of Christians and fundamentalists that seem to be shaping policies and decisions in Washington DC.
That group certainly doesn't represent ME and I sure hope moderates don't sit back and let the militant Christians squeeze their agendas through.

I am a feminist, but not a militant feminist. I am an atheist, but not a militant one. I think the term scares people away. I'm glad there are people that are confident and can be spokespeople for atheists...I'm just not ready for the militant voice to take over the definition of what it means to be unaffiliated with any religious dogma.

I will speak up when necessary, but I'm not forcing anybody to see my path as the ONLY path to take. It's just not in my nature to bully people into seeing things MY way, which is the connotation of "militant". There's a sensible, step-by-step way to discovering the joy of being a non-believer and sharing my experiences with others if they question me and my blasphemous ways.
Permalink Reply by Gecko, Seth...brother of Richie! on February 20, 2010 at 3:40pm
Most atheists being rational thinkers, and having a workable IQ ultimately seems to lead to debates over word usage and definitions. I like and prefer the term "militant" and within the context of your question I think its about damn time. I consider myself militant. I rarely pass up an opportunity to engage religious types. And Im very strident about separation of church and state .
The right wing in this country led by Limbaugh and Beck, refer to serious activists for many different causes on on the left of the spectrum as "militant" and within that context I am militant! In your face. Here to offend your sensibilities. Here to upset your theistic world.
I see Dawkins, and especially Hitch as the models for the new wave of atheists. Being that we are all atheists here I look forward to reading others opinions and thoughts. Thanks for the question.
Permalink Reply by mojo5501 on February 21, 2010 at 9:12am
If you define militant as anybody that's opposed to the right wing, I guess I'm willing to be called militant. In that context. But usually it has a more negative connotation. Just because I'm a liberal doesn't mean I'm militant or "in your face" about it.

I don't agree that Dawkins is purposely provocative just to be in the media spotlight or to be a publicity hound...Limbaugh and Beck are two great examples of "celebrities" in the right wing media. They are money makers for the network, getting good ratings because they are purposely reactionary.

Dawkins is not hostile in his approach. Dawkins is simply arguing from the point of evolutionary meme theory the case that religion can be studied and understood from that perspective. Religion is not "off limits" to scientific inquiry. And this stand upsets A LOT of people that think religion is a protected domain, free from critical thought or rational discussion. The more debates that can occur, the better. I truly think education is power and that most people will be capable of thinking for themselves, given the opportunity to THINK.

RSS

© 2013   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service