Dawkins and his army of militant atheists
Okay, so back in September I rambled a short short bit about a book that was coming out. Well, since then there have been some small things in the news about how atheist activists (ie, these authors mentioned in my post, folks like those at Rational Response Squad - who I've been MySpace pals with since starting this site - and others).
Well, what makes these people so special? Apparently they've got some people worked up. These authors (Dawkins in particular) more so than RRS... So much that they are being referred to as militant atheists. Militant atheist (fighting wars with pens and typewriters) makes about as much sense as the War on Christmas or people tossing around the word jihad to refer to activist campaigns against different things here in the states...
So... I wrote the following in response somewhere:
I find humor in the use of militant to describe outspoken atheists. Yes, my dictionary does lend one definition to the term militant as vigorously active support of a cause… But, it seems odd that those who are outspoken about Dawkins (and Harris and Dennett and a few other atheist authors) would apply a watered down definition of a term that finds its origins (and true meaning obviously with something stronger and more aggressive than book/essay writing and doing talk show interviews).
It reminds me of some US politicians and other public figures throwing around the term jihad (only after 9/11 of course) for drama’s sake while using it’s watered down definition (see also the War on Christmas – war? What war? Come on, really, a war?).
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for colorful language and I fully understand that languages evolve. It’s just that it seems to me a little contrived. Okay, more than a little.
Why these exact words? I’m sure it’s not to take advantage of (and evoke a stronger reaction from) an audience knowing full well that the audience is aware of REAL militants (and a REAL war) currently fighting over religion and principal (as misguided as it all may be) for the sake of lumping these pen wielders in the same group as those who carry kalishnikovs and hurl RPGs along with their words.
I’m sure both sides are guilty (these militant atheists and their counterparts on the other side of the concertina wire) of this crime though. I’ve only read excerpts of Dawkin’s book so for all I know he is an asshat (along with any of the others in this minority) who is just trying to make a call to arms while using sensationalist vocabulary. To deny though that there are plenty of vocal asshats within the majority is silly. Oops, I think I just committed the foul I’mbattling against pointing out…
Oh, if you made it all the way through this you must have been really bored. If you are still bored, you can visit SelfEducatedIdiot.com and see the new site.
No End Date = eBay Store Item
The God Delusion
Tags: militant atheists, antitheist, richard dawkins, fighting words, war of the words
Well, what makes these people so special? Apparently they've got some people worked up. These authors (Dawkins in particular) more so than RRS... So much that they are being referred to as militant atheists. Militant atheist (fighting wars with pens and typewriters) makes about as much sense as the War on Christmas or people tossing around the word jihad to refer to activist campaigns against different things here in the states...
So... I wrote the following in response somewhere:
I find humor in the use of militant to describe outspoken atheists. Yes, my dictionary does lend one definition to the term militant as vigorously active support of a cause… But, it seems odd that those who are outspoken about Dawkins (and Harris and Dennett and a few other atheist authors) would apply a watered down definition of a term that finds its origins (and true meaning obviously with something stronger and more aggressive than book/essay writing and doing talk show interviews).
It reminds me of some US politicians and other public figures throwing around the term jihad (only after 9/11 of course) for drama’s sake while using it’s watered down definition (see also the War on Christmas – war? What war? Come on, really, a war?).
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for colorful language and I fully understand that languages evolve. It’s just that it seems to me a little contrived. Okay, more than a little.
Why these exact words? I’m sure it’s not to take advantage of (and evoke a stronger reaction from) an audience knowing full well that the audience is aware of REAL militants (and a REAL war) currently fighting over religion and principal (as misguided as it all may be) for the sake of lumping these pen wielders in the same group as those who carry kalishnikovs and hurl RPGs along with their words.
I’m sure both sides are guilty (these militant atheists and their counterparts on the other side of the concertina wire) of this crime though. I’ve only read excerpts of Dawkin’s book so for all I know he is an asshat (along with any of the others in this minority) who is just trying to make a call to arms while using sensationalist vocabulary. To deny though that there are plenty of vocal asshats within the majority is silly. Oops, I think I just committed the foul I’m
Oh, if you made it all the way through this you must have been really bored. If you are still bored, you can visit SelfEducatedIdiot.com and see the new site.
The God Delusion
Tags: militant atheists, antitheist, richard dawkins, fighting words, war of the words
Labels: religion
me said - 9:34:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a CommentLinks to this post:
Create a Link
<- Go back home