Best Living Spokesman for Atheism

[God of Mr. Hanky]

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?

To begin with, your little poll is insultingly trollish - that you want to establish credibility to your devious fallacy that atheists are religious followers couldn't be more obvious!

On the other hand, every single social movement in human culture has its leaders, religious or not. I won't pretend otherwise, nor will I deny that I happen to have very high respect for Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennet, and others who are not on your list because your prior research is so pitifully weak. No religious proposition here. 

It does so happen that I particularly respect Dawkins and Dennett because they were the first to point out to me the best reasons why I no longer concern myself with religious ideas.

Dawkins in particular has been the most public in confronting theists with what they fear the most in vocal atheism, which is why their hatred (your hatred, and don't think you can fool us on that) has been so visceral. Because he's been so good at this, others under the umbrella of atheism (not pure atheism, but associated ideologies which are loosely associated) envy him, and they hunt him too. I said he's as good as I've seen, or maybe he's just more active at it than most, but hardly the best that I can imagine. If the median-level guys in the Xtian apologist talent pool came over to the atheists side, then Dawkins would have respectable competition - not that we really want quick-witted rhetoric over ethically-observed facts.

Therefore it's no surprise at all to see those who get paid for writing the sort of porn which Christians masturbate to are promoting rumors and outright lies on one of the most dangerous public figures which Xtianity has ever been confronted by.

Doesn't it just burn your ass real good to know that Dawkins himself is just a man, and that not even atheists like me find him infallible in everything he's ever said? Wouldn't it be so much easier for you if you could convince the whole world that he really is the anti-christ, who will rule the entire world and force everyone to wear his (Christard-imagined) 666! Don't you just wish that if you keep on adding more insult to insult, that we would all just melt like ether into the thin air, like the witch before Dorothy in the Wizard of Id Oz?

Too bad for you, Christian Troll! What a sad waste of a life it is to spend it all waiting for that "POOF" which never happens!