I like Sam Harris's views on determinism and morality, but that has nothing to do with atheism.
Also, I don't hate Dawkins, I think he's rather patient all things considered. He may be a bit strident and outspoken, but really, when things like "Good without God" are seen as immoral and possibly damaging to children, I can see where he feels the need to become a "spokesman".
However, there is not person who defines atheism, nor speaks for it. There is no pope of atheism. Do we need people standing up for our rights? Absolutely. Do we need people pointing out the absurdity of religion? Perhaps. The religious themselves do it all the time. Yet without the early pioneers, and even more recent pioneers like Charles Bradlaugh, where would we be? Still in the dark ages, sitting quietly and not speaking our minds, that is where.
Also, I don't hate Dawkins, I think he's rather patient all things considered. He may be a bit strident and outspoken, but really, when things like "Good without God" are seen as immoral and possibly damaging to children, I can see where he feels the need to become a "spokesman".
However, there is not person who defines atheism, nor speaks for it. There is no pope of atheism. Do we need people standing up for our rights? Absolutely. Do we need people pointing out the absurdity of religion? Perhaps. The religious themselves do it all the time. Yet without the early pioneers, and even more recent pioneers like Charles Bradlaugh, where would we be? Still in the dark ages, sitting quietly and not speaking our minds, that is where.
“Eternity is a terrible thought. I mean, where's it going to end?”
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
