Atheist Evangelism

[Angrboda]

If a talented person invests their time becoming a preacher or apologist rather than scientist or poet because of the influence of universalist xtianity, that's a harm.

If someone gives money to the church rather than a better cause, that's a harm.

If fundamentalist xtians draw upon apologetic arguments created by universalists, that's a harm.

Atheists can suck, but atheism is neutral.  Religion is always false and immoral and harmful in some way.  That's the difference.  The world would be better off without religion.

But let's compromise on one idea: the world would be better off with no religion except universalist progressive xtianity.  Fair?

Your points above only hold true if you assume religion harmful a priori. That's begging the question.

Always harmful? So soup kitchens are harmful? Being happy is harmful?