Yes, I prefer my online culture to be entirely Christian, or failing that, trauma-free ex-Christians that have no desire to talk about how fucked the US is because of evangelicalism. High five, buddy.
Here’s where I’m at - at the local level, the US is already a de facto theocracy in many places. If you have the privilege of being unexposed to this, great. The issue I have with Dawkins is that he’s an asshole that got called out for being an asshole by his own admirers and he doubled down on being an asshole to his own popular detriment. I have no issue with loud pissed-off atheists in a rabidly conservative USA. If the issue is that old school atheists kept their mouths shut, while new atheists are out and proud, you and I are not going to see eye to eye.
If the issue is that old school atheists kept their mouths shut, while new atheists are out and proud, you and I are not going to see eye to eye.
If you think ‘new’ means modern, as in present day, then you’ve been arguing with me for hours for no reason. Because ‘new atheism’ refers to a specific movement, around the 2010s. It’s not simply ‘atheism’ now.
I don’t care about shouty atheists or quiet atheists, it literally doesn’t matter to me. I am wary of people congregating around easy targets like broadly religious people, when religious people can mean anybody. It can be a white supremacist American, or it could be a Yemeni Muslim getting genocided by Saudis using American and UK bombs. And I don’t see that very important distinction made when those low iq anti-theist posts are spammed on c/all.
Yes, I prefer my online culture to be entirely Christian, or failing that, trauma-free ex-Christians that have no desire to talk about how fucked the US is because of evangelicalism. High five, buddy.
There are countries other then the US.
Yup. There are. And if they have governments that are dominated by religious activists, the same message applies.
New atheism cringe is different to being pro abortion, women’s autonomy, and advancing marginalised people’s rights. Completely different.
If you specifically identify with new atheism and the thinking of Dawkins and his brigade, I’d seriously reconsider.
Here’s where I’m at - at the local level, the US is already a de facto theocracy in many places. If you have the privilege of being unexposed to this, great. The issue I have with Dawkins is that he’s an asshole that got called out for being an asshole by his own admirers and he doubled down on being an asshole to his own popular detriment. I have no issue with loud pissed-off atheists in a rabidly conservative USA. If the issue is that old school atheists kept their mouths shut, while new atheists are out and proud, you and I are not going to see eye to eye.
If you think ‘new’ means modern, as in present day, then you’ve been arguing with me for hours for no reason. Because ‘new atheism’ refers to a specific movement, around the 2010s. It’s not simply ‘atheism’ now.
I don’t care about shouty atheists or quiet atheists, it literally doesn’t matter to me. I am wary of people congregating around easy targets like broadly religious people, when religious people can mean anybody. It can be a white supremacist American, or it could be a Yemeni Muslim getting genocided by Saudis using American and UK bombs. And I don’t see that very important distinction made when those low iq anti-theist posts are spammed on c/all.