The agnostic (AG), while sympathetic to the atheist's arguments, still wants to accommodate other belief systems and confronts the atheist (Ath) for attacking religion. The atheist attempts to respond to the challenge.
Regardless of the role of individuals, governments, and organizations in generating terrorism, there seems a pathological preoccupation with fitting religion in as the prime mover. Following the attacks in Brussels the same tired old refrains are flying again.
You pass through the long security line at the United States Capitol building in Washington, DC. While the line of tourists streams forward into the Exhibition Hall, you turn right, and head to the Senate appointment desk.
Unlike classical atheists like Bertrand Russell and George Bernard Shaw who advocated their views and advanced the critique of religion with wit and erudition, the "new atheists," seek to ply their trade through the economy of outrage.
For anti-Christian snarksters, there's absolutely nothing good that can be said about Christianity, so they encourage a blanket dismissal of centuries of Christian thought, literature, art, culture, and science.
In today's world, I get inspiration from the American Muslims who abhor all the violence and who host and invite me and Jews and other Christians of my kind to their hyper-peaceful Iftar dinners during Ramadan. These are small beginnings, but they are beginnings.
I picked up Amir Aczel's book, "Why Science Does Not Disprove God," with eager anticipation, hoping that he might make peace between contending factions. Alas, I sighed, upon finishing the book, the chasm remains unbridged.
While I hope not, it is likely that some Islamophobia deniers will continue to demonize Muslims who claim they've been discriminated against. Such demonizing is a slanted narrative devoid of common sense. Don't fall for it.
There's another current in our American culture that runs deep and is seriously problematic, probably even the worm that will eventually lead to the fall of the American empire: We are profoundly anti-intellectual.
Religion has once again become the "opiate of the people." But this time, instead of seducing the proletariat into accepting its position in a capitalist society, it lulls atheists into believing that abolishing religion would bring about utopia.
Dawkins and his fellows may remonstrate that what they object to is a belief system, freely adopted by its holders, but they are still participating in the unhealthy marginalization of a minority group.
A new breed of theist is emerging around the globe. We are religious naturalists: Reality is our God, evidence is our Scripture, integrity is our religion, and contributing toward a healthy future is our mission.
Nobody should be mistreated simply because they believe or do not believe in certain ideas. But if you can't identify with people around you, if they won't accept you for who you are, then ditch them. It's not always easy, but nobody is stopping you.
In presenting the secular rationalist versus the religious fanatic, Hitchens obscured the fact that the greatest slaughters of human history were not the result of religious wars, but the result of secular or non-religious ideologie
Divinity of Doubt will have no friends of the kind who want to be comfortable in a group, no ready-made groups looking to be further validated by the one-way bias that passes for communication these days.