Image via Wikipedia
For some reason - I suppose because they are having an impact - writers promoting a secular approach to society seem to be getting a hard time from the god-botherers lately. The idea that secularism is somehow a dangerous thing seems to me to be stretching the bounds of credibility mre than a little, but it hasn't stopped the Pope and various other clerics from sounding off.
Strangely however, some atheists are joining in, arguing that Dawkins et al are too strident. Now if you have read the Butterflies and Wheels blog, you will know that Ophelia Benson is unlikely to give such nonsense an easy ride and you would be right. In response to a particularly silly post by someone called Karla McLaren, described by the blog on which it appears as:
"...a hugely informative and clear-eyed assessment of the state of the atheist movement.”
she forthrightly responds "I don’t agree. I think it’s just the 14 millionth installment of 'new atheists are bad and mean ick.' "
Make sure you read all the comments too.
To be honest I'm not sure why we need 'new (or gnu) atheism'. Old style anti-clericalism and anti-theism does me just fine. I'm happy too to respond to those who argue that atheism is a religion with the riposte that in that case, not collecting stamps is a hobby. That doesn't mean that atheism is empty of values, just that those values are based on a different way of thinking about the world than that applied by theists. An atheist morality is not a house of cards, it is based on a realistic asessment of how people relate to each other in society.
