The author of the article seems to suffer from the same type of thinking I see in many atheists that want to distance themselves from the New Atheist movement, and that is that any critique of religion inherently ignores the benefits that religion can provide. It's easy to make that mistake with images of a seething Richard Dawkins running through your mind, but just because someone criticizes religion does not mean that they can't acknowledge that people have benefited from religion.
I realize that the New Atheist movement ended up simplistic, emotional, and reactionary, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We could have endless threads about how religion harms us and holds us back as a species, so I think the benefits of religious ceremony and talk of psychological comfort are all secondary when compared to the legitimization of irrational thinking for which religion is responsible.
I realize that the New Atheist movement ended up simplistic, emotional, and reactionary, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We could have endless threads about how religion harms us and holds us back as a species, so I think the benefits of religious ceremony and talk of psychological comfort are all secondary when compared to the legitimization of irrational thinking for which religion is responsible.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
