No one is free from criticism. Harmful ideas should be condemned, when they are demonstrably harmful. But theist beliefs are such a vast range and diversity of ideas, some harmful, some useful, some healing, some vivifying, and still others having served as potent drivers of movements for justice; that to lump all theist religious belief into one category and attack the whole of it, only demonstrates your ignorance of theology, and is in fact bigotry.

By saying that religious and superstitious beliefs should be disrespected, or otherwise belittling, or stigmatizing religion and supernatural beliefs as a whole, you have already established the first level on the “Pyramid of Hate”, as well as the first of the “10 Stages of Genocide.”

If your religion is atheism, that’s perfectly valid. If someone is doing something harmful with a religious belief as justification, that specific belief should be challenged. But if you’re crossing the line into bigotry, you’re as bad as the very people you’re condemning.

Antitheism is a form of supremacy in and of itself.

"In other words, it is quite clear from the writings of the “four horsemen” that “new atheism” has little to do with atheism or any serious intellectual examination of the belief in God and everything to do with hatred and power.

Indeed, “new atheism” is the ideological foregrounding of liberal imperialism whose fanatical secularism extends the racist logic of white supremacy. It purports to be areligious, but it is not. It is, in fact, the twin brother of the rabid Christian conservatism which currently feeds the Trump administration’s destructive policies at home and abroad – minus all the biblical references."

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2019/5/4/the-resurrection-of-new-atheism/

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/2/21/can-atheists-make-their-case-without-devolving-into-bigotry/

  • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    I find Al Jazeera to be an excellent source of news on many topics. It’s funded by a stupid oil state, but their journalism into a whole bunch of topics is actually quite good.

    Anything involving Israel, Jews, or Muslims, less so. Their opinion pieces aren’t great either. Articles about atheism written by people who did Islamic Studies or Iranian Studies on a publication funded by an Islamic oil state provide a window into the mind of the religious, but aren’t very convincing if you’re not already on their side. It’s like asking the Jerusalem Post to write an opinion piece on Islam, even with the best attempt by their most articulate writer you’re going to get a massively biased piece once the end product gets published.