Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)

5. Two things stuck out to me

Reply to rug (Original post)

Thu Apr 11, 2013, 06:19 PM

Apr 2013

This seemed more like "New Age Atheism" the author is discussing, and

I call serious bullshit on this:

In previous generations, the atheist was keen to insist that non-believers can be just as moral as believers. These days, this is more or less taken for granted.

We fight that thought here on a progressive liberal website. You think it is gone from the general population? That author needs to get out from under the rock, or the ivory tower, or that high horse, or where ever it is they reside.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

29 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new new atheists [View all] rug Apr 2013 OP

ha jollyreaper2112 Apr 2013 #1

That's always the case, including posting on a website. rug Apr 2013 #2

yeh it doesn't work that way.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #3

US readers aren't likely to know Mary Whitehouse, suffice it to say she is what we would call dimbear Apr 2013 #4

Substutute religion for pornography and similarities emerge. rug Apr 2013 #8

Two things stuck out to me Goblinmonger Apr 2013 #5

Sheesh, you could close your eyes skepticscott Apr 2013 #7

You're read on DU that nonbelievers are less moral than believers? rug Apr 2013 #9

Yes and so have you. gcomeau Apr 2013 #12

I didn't read that as stating that nonbelievers are less moral. rug Apr 2013 #13

Just that they don't *have any basis* for morals? gcomeau Apr 2013 #14

Well, since he abandoned the thread, it's hard to know exactly what he was saying. rug Apr 2013 #15

i agree, to a point. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #18

I never heard of the Santa Fe Institute. rug Apr 2013 #19

i'd love to get a fellowship there.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #20

Yes I did. I'm looking through their videos. rug Apr 2013 #21

i suspected there might be something relevant from SFI.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #22

I've bookmarked the video, it's over an hour long. rug Apr 2013 #23

A more generally true truth is just as true no matter how anyone arrives at it, but the differences patrice Apr 2013 #28

Well, it is written from a British point of view muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #16

This is shocking to me. Religion is his ricebowl and somehow he's against those who would do away dimbear Apr 2013 #17

Another imbecile who doesn't even know the difference skepticscott Apr 2013 #6

Substitute antitheist then. rug Apr 2013 #10

That won't make the author skepticscott Apr 2013 #11

My brother lives in the deep South edhopper Apr 2013 #24

Dawkins scares believers... MellowDem Apr 2013 #25

Some think all belief should be doubtful, otherwise it isn't belief. nt patrice Apr 2013 #29

Bwah! What a load of broad-brushed, self-serving generalizations. djean111 Apr 2013 #26

The new Messiahs of atheism? Buzz Clik Apr 2013 #27