Best Living Spokesman for Atheism

[TheRocketSurgeon]

You said, 

And as best I can tell, there are apologists on both sides of the divide...cranking out books to try to persuade people that their view is correct. Are Hitchens and Dawkins any different than Craig or McDowell? Haven't they banked a fair bit of money over the past few years? Are they simply "fooling" a different target market into handing over that cash?

This strongly implies that we would follow the beliefs of Hitchens or Dawkins, as churches formulate their creeds and use apologists to explain why that's the right way, effectively shaping doctrines for the church. It's how the Billy Grahams of the world get to the positions they attain, in their Christian fame. Except we have no such organization. I might find it interesting to go see Dawkins speak, as I respect him as a science-writer, but I'm not going to take anything he says as part of my doctrine with any more weight than I assign to any other source. We have no "pastors" telling us what to think.

You forget that many of us were former die-hard Christian fundamentalists/evangelicals, myself included. If you expect to slip implications of that nature into the conversations, do not expect us to miss them. I'm certain you'll cry foul now, and say that no such implication was intended, but I'm afraid I won't believe you. I spoke the language of the shibboleth, and I recognize it and its direction of tone, now.

Take your umbrage elsewhere.

By happy coincidence, I did come across this interesting article which discusses the "followers" of Dawkins:


The bizarre – and costly – cult of Richard Dawkins
It’s like a church without the good bits. Membership starts from $85 a month
Andrew Brown
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/08/the-bizarre-and-costly-cult-of-richard-dawkins/

In the article, Brown writes:

At this point it is obvious to everyone except the participants that what we have here is a religion without the good bits.

Last year he tweeted a recommendation of comments collected by one of his followers at a book signing in the US. Among them were: ‘You’ve changed the very way I understand reality. Thank you Professor’; ‘You’ve changed my life and my entire world. I cannot thank you enough’; ‘I owe you life. I am so grateful. Your books have helped me so much. Thank you’; ‘I am unbelievably grateful for all you’ve done for me. You helped me out of delusion’; ‘Thank you thank you thank you thank you Professor Dawkins. You saved my life’; and, bathetically, ‘I came all the way from Canada to see you tonight.’ With this kind of incense blown at him, it’s no wonder he is bewildered by criticism.

So, while I want to be clear that I did not claim that you or anyone else "follow" Dawkins, it seems that such atheists do exist. In which case one might ask: Are they still technically freethinkers?

You know that Brown is a religion writer, right? That what he does, professionally, is advocate on behalf of Christianity and against "weird" religions, in an attempt to sell copy for The Spectator, right? He was also former Religion Section Editor for The Guardian.

Regardless of how he has (or hasn't) skewed his coverage of that event and the weirdos/fanboys who attended it, you're still missing the fucking point. Still! So let me spell it out for you one last time, and then I'm done with you:

I. Don't. Give. A. Flying. FUCK. What. Richard. Dawkins. Says. Or. Does. Neither do most of us.

So is that the best you can do? Pointing out that Dr. Dawkins (the author) has some fanboys is hardly surprising. How many times a week do you think JK Rowling hears the phrase "Your books changed my life!" from some eager fanboy/girl?

But by comparison, right-quick, why don't you look to see what similar authors charge, for speeches and for being able to be around them, without being called "cults" or cult-leaders or any of the other things that Religion Writer Brown wants to attach to Dr. Dawkins because of his hatred for atheists?