Great Schism Hits British Atheism Over New Temple

[Mitsui2]

Relax, Atheists. If you cannot laugh at yourselves and take youselves that seriously, then you may as well be a religion. The substantive question is whether you side more with DeBotton or Dawkins.

Hmmm... in a hissy little spat between two opinionated and not infrequently twee UK intellectuals, which side should one take?

What a poser!

You're definitely not afraid to ask the hard questions, stuff!

[Con Gallagher]

Modern atheism (includes that the masks itstaft as secularism) shares all the characteristics of religion.
.

Apart from a belief in a god or gods, that and no singular belief system, no prayers, no congregations, no good book, no holy days, no fasting, no requirement to give to the poor which is ignored, no messiah, no faith required but apart from that you may have a half analogy.

[LamportsEdge]

Relax, Atheists. If you cannot laugh at yourselves and take youselves that seriously, then you may as well be a religion. The substantive question is whether you side more with DeBotton or Dawkins.

Luckily atheists don't have to. Sympathies on the OP, though. A nice try but no cigar, Groucho. All you've done is revealed you don't actually understand what atheism is.

[Des Quirell]

Relax, Atheists. If you cannot laugh at yourselves and take youselves that seriously, then you may as well be a religion. The substantive question is whether you side more with DeBotton or Dawkins.

False dichotomy. It's possible to see them both as clowns. And yes, it is quite amusing.

[Des Quirell]

Dawkins is an arrogant bully and no different in his hectoring and bullying to religious fundamentalists. Both have a tone of 'I'm right. Everyone who disagrees with me is damned' whether it is damned to hell or damned to be a weakminded fool.

Couldn't agree more. The thing is is he went through the 'atheism" barrier a long time ago and became an antitheist.

[LamportsEdge]

Completely up to Dawkins what way he chooses to express atheism. It should be remembered thought that this was the theme of his Professorship of Science and Society....

There are many rooms in atheism's mansions and Dawkin's room was the public speaking room. But lets not divert too far into accuracy as I find it hugely amusing to see the ripples of panic among the faithful faced with an enemy that is multitudinous and yet gathers under no flag... they'll be awake worrying for many a night yet. The sound of many hooves and yet no cavalry in sight... terrible, terrible....

[FrankSpeaks]

The problem is that the behaviour of some atheists has made it easy for theists to categorise them in this way.

For instance, you have the evangelising atheists such as Dawkins popping up at every juncture to offer "the" atheist perspective of things.
You have the figureheads as represented by The Three Horsemen, to whom some atheists for knowlegde and direction.
You have the advertising on buses in the UK.
You have the atheists organisations arranging meetings ans speakers (why, of why?)

I don't really see what is wrong with any of these categories of atheists:

I think it is only right that somebody expounds the atheist view point, I think it is right that people get to find out that there is an alternative to religion, I think it is right that people can talk and listen to other like minded people.

[SideysGhost]

, I hope Mr. De Botton can be accommodated in the same way as we would accomodate anyone else with something to say about the nature of human existence.

de Botton is a frickin loony. How do you build a temple to ...ummmm....something that by definition doesn't exist? Down that road madness lies. Beware the agents of confusion and apathy, this is just the sort of swamp of meaningless posturing all-things-to-all-men relativistic piffle that they thrive on.

And all that drivel about atheism being another religion was just that...drivel...all atheism is, is the absence of belief in all this superhero invisible god hocus-pocus nonsense, no matter which tribe of primitive barbarians originally came up with the idea.

[Des Quirell]

Completely up to Dawkins what way he chooses to express atheism.

It's up to him what way he chooses to express his atheism.

It should be remembered thought that this was the theme of his Professorship of Science and Society....

His what? had a theme? Please illustrate.

There are many rooms in atheism's mansions and Dawkin's room was the public speaking room.

Not in my mansion it isn't.

But lets not divert too far into accuracy as I find it hugely amusing to see the ripples of panic among the faithful faced with an enemy that is multitudinous and yet gathers under no flag... they'll be awake worrying for many a night yet. The sound of many hooves and yet no cavalry in sight... terrible, terrible....

Some might, but I won't.

[LamportsEdge]

Sidey ... its a stage they are going through. They'll grow out of it eventually. They haven't any choice. A bit like adolescence.