Great Schism Hits British Atheism Over New Temple

[stopdoingstuff]

It was inevitbale in a way, since it is rare that there is a religion without there being some sort of schism, but now it is phasers at Dawn between Alan De Botton and Richard Dawkins over De Botton's idea to have a "temple to atheism" in the City of London. Experts have said that this is the biggest split to have hit the atheist faith since the Kirk V Picard Schism of the early 90s.
The Guardian quotes De Botton as saying, "Normally a temple is to Jesus, Mary or Buddha, but you can build a temple to anything that's positive and good....That could mean a temple to love, friendship, calm or perspective. Because of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens atheism has become known as a destructive force. But there are lots of people who don't believe but aren't aggressive towards religions."
Dawkins however is having none of this idolatory,because he is not the type to put up with worshipping golden bulls, and is decidedly more Protestant in his atheism. In keeping with his consistent sola natura version of the faith,he has said,"Atheists don't need temples.........I think there are better things to spend this kind of money on. If you are going to spend money on atheism you could improve secular education and build non-religious schools which teach rational, sceptical critical thinking."
So far, the project is just at the money raising stage but is hoped to have construction underway in 2013, if they get planning permission from the Corporation, which might not be all that easy. As a believer in religious liberty, whether for followers of the Sky Fairy ( a word that in no way makes its enthusiastic users seem like virgins who have just had the second Existentialism lecture of their Ist Arts course) or the Something-Out-Of-Nothing Fairy, 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.

Discuss.

Alain de Botton reveals plans for 'temple to atheism' in heart of London | Books | The Guardian

[LamportsEdge]

Luckily as an atheist this disagreement between Dawkins and De Boitton doesn't bother me at all. If it were a schism in a religion and I was of that persuasion no doubt I would be expected to shriek 'heretic!' and attack a temple or something for the Greater Glory of St Olaf or some other such buttockry.

Thats the great thing about atheism- the two lads can sort it out between them. Others can have opinions but it is hardly likely to lead to any kind of inquisition or levelling of cities, wondrous in the eyes of the Sky Leprechaun.

[Con Gallagher]

So what? De Botton is a universal atheist while Dawkins is a protesting one.
Shock as two academics disagree.

[Luachara]

What is Enda Kenny doing about this?

Can the project be brought to Irelandas Foreign Direct Investment?

Could an Irish Firm win the Contract to develop the facility?

[eyelight]

I remember hearing Dr. Jonathon Miller on the radio a while back, I think maybe on Desert Island Discs, and he was discussing his atheism.
Said it was something he'd felt since childhood. Compared that to Richard Dawkins, who he described as more of a born again atheist.

Dawkins seems more angry, a bit of an Ian Paisley of atheism, but he probably does have a point about this "temple" idea.
Sounds ridiculous.

[Des Quirell]

It's hardly a "schism" as there's nothing to divide.

It's all treading old ground anyway. After the French Revolution tha Pantheon was rededicated as a secular mausoleum and a tribute to French intellectuals. There was a Festival of Reason, in which Reason was personified at a service in the deconsecrated Notre Dame.

[LamportsEdge]

True ... and those status of the holy mammy in churches acquired red caps I believe and were recast in the public consciousness of the revolution as representative of 'Marianne'... the female symbol of la belle France. Could be a bit of a diplomatic problem these days as I notice those mammy statues are usually posed with one hand out so there might be unfortunate reminders of Thierry Henry....

[statsman]

Atheism isn't a religion.
Atheists are not unified by a set of beliefs. In fact, the whole idea of being unified by a set of beliefs would horrify most atheists.
Neither Dawkins nor De Botton represents me as an atheist. In fact, nobody represents me as an atheist.
Daft thread, all told.

[LamportsEdge]

Yes. It is founded on a misconception or misdirection around the nature of atheism.

[EoinMag]

The thread title is rubbish. There is no religion, there can be no schism. Disagreement would be more appropriate.