The Raw Uncompromising Courage of the Professional Atheist

Richard Dawkins fearlessly derides a weak, sick old man, not to mention gutsily taking on the followers of a religion that commands them to love their enemies. Moving from that act of courage, he also attacks a tiny global religious minority (who will no doubt pull the hidden levers of InJewCon to destroy him) for their idiotic devotion to the God of the Old Testament.

Then, with supreme courage, he bravely faces the specter of Islam and its long and bloody history, fixes it squarely in his steely gaze, and declares, “Well, um, the God of the Koran I don’t know so much about.”

At least Hitchens had the raw physical courage to confront Islam with the same venom he reserved for Christianity and Judaism. Dawkins, however, is best celebrated in song this way:

  • Subsistent

    Yes, there are atheists and atheists. There are amateur atheists like Nat Hentoff, “who says he believes we are products of chance yet who fights like a tiger for the life and dignity of unborn children”. (Mr. Shea’s article “Eupocrisy” in his own blog “Mark-Shea.com”.)
    Then there are the professional atheists. Why are these latter always talking about religionists, rather that about the issue, “Is there or is there not a Creator?”, and attempting to prove their point? Even supposing that all religionists are either nuts or stupid and/or evil, what does this have to do with the issue, “Is there a Creator of all other beings?”

    • Will

      Which is what none other than Al Sharpton said in debating Hitchens. (Pointing out repeatedly that his book is “Why God Is Not Great”, not “Why Religious People Are Not Great”.) Hitchens actually made him look good.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X