Exposing the Intellectual Bankruptcy of Atheists Criticizing Religion

[Esquilax]

On a side note, WTF is a "New Atheist" supposed to be, really? Is there any way in which the bomb-throwing of guys like Hitchens and Dawkins is distinguishable from an "old atheist" who delighted in torturing the common believers with THINKING, like, say, Robert G. Ingersoll?

A "New Atheist" is any atheist who won't grovel at the altar of apologists from centuries past. If you won't confer automatic respect to those who tried for a long ass time to define god into existence with weasel words and self serving definitions, if you have the gall to point out that all the "great thinkers" of christianity were just skipping step one and primping up their unevidenced deity with ultimately insubstantial reasons why he must exist, rather than showing that he does, then you are a "New Atheist," whose biggest crime is seeing through the veneer of respectability that religion demands by fiat, and thus must be dismissed out of hand with jeering and mockery as "unsophisticated" in theology, because the most important thing is to keep theology looking sophisticated and scholarly, rather than what it really is: not even smearing lipstick on a pig, but pretending that the pig is there to be made up in the first place.