I’d promised myself that my previous post would be my last on the subject of FreeThoughtBlogs, but they had to go and surpass their already inane nonsense.
It seems that nobody can be a proper atheist unless they are Atheist Plus ®, and agree wholeheartedly with all the dogmatic pronouncements that accrue to that exclusive little club.
I criticised Richard Dawkins for his “Muslima” outburst, and I stand by that criticism. It seems, however, that there was some background to that comment, and that Rebecca Watson isn’t quite the calm and thoughtful person she presented in the “elevatorgate” video. That doesn’t excuse Dawkins outburst of course, but it does serve as mitigation.
Dawkins, along with the other “new atheists”, has been castigated by the FTB/Skepchick crowd for more than his words or actions; his very existence is apparently worthy of blame.
He is described as old (something his critics would presumably aspire to), white (an accident of birth. I blame his parents) and privileged. This last seems to be the most heinous crime, and it doesn’t appear to matter what your background is, nor how much money you have. The easiest way to become privileged, as far as the Atheist Plus ® adherents are concerned, is to disagree with them. That disagreement is profound, even if it’s just a word of caution about the wording of some premise.
I disagree with lots of people. I often disagreed with Christopher Hitchens, somebody I held in high regard. Even so, I felt I could learn something from that disagreement, if only the limit of my own knowledge.
Of course, I now learn, I’m doing it wrong. People I disagree with (so long as they’re not Atheist Plus ® acolytes) are to be treated as pariahs, and drummed out of the movement.
God PZ Myers commanded.