A long, meandering article in the Ottawa Citizen attempts to denounce "the new atheism" by arguing the following:
- "new atheism" = "militant atheism"
- militant atheists think western civilization will go up in the flames of religious warfare unless religion is abandoned
- militant atheists don't understand theology
- hey, if we psychoanalyze these guys, we might understand their militancy better
- "the lack of a good or worthy father-figure in an atheist's childhood is the likely source of their future lack of belief" (see: famous atheists without worthy father figures...)
- Ok, that might not explain it all, but did you ever think maybe the "'religious' violence the atheists denounce is in reality the consequence of too little
religion, or, more specifically, of the religious spirit misconceived
and perverted?"
- Conflict is the primal reality of human existence
- Religious rituals make people behave better
- Better think twice about getting rid of religion, militants!
Seriously. See for yourself. (The poor copy editor gave up and pretty much included all of the above in the headline.)
Here's my short response to Robert Sibley's, um, really cogent argument: not necessarily; yeah, but we're not saying man won't find other reasons to rape and pillage; do too; go for it; I have a wonderful and loving father figure, so there; in fact I did think of it, and it kinda depends on your religion and whether you use to justify violence or to justify being nice...what was your point again?; pretty much totally agree on this one; again, not necessarily...see beheadings, terrorism, stonings, etc.; OK--I've thought about it, but would still like to get rid of it.
As exhausting as this author is, he quotes another windbag named John Haught,
a Roman Catholic who thinks he's intellectually superior because he
believes in evolution and argues against Intelligent Design. I went on
a little side expedition and read a long interview with Haught, only to find that after extensive circumlocutions, his arguments all boil down to: science can't say what I believe isn't true.
For the record, here's the source of my militancy: I'm exhausted by the vacuous ravings of the "theologians." I'm worn out by them claiming I'm the head case. Because I don't believe in things--their precious things--for which there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever.
Yes, I am militant. I am militantly against you claiming I'm the one that needs psychoanalysis. Honestly, you are driving me stark-raving mad.
