sometime sun wrote:
I should have said "possible positions".
I did not want to say fundamentalist Atheist because I am not sure they exist.
I am of course not talking about the masses who just don't pray or give to charity, I am talking about those who have actually come to the declaration to call them selves some thing they know of what they speak.
The atheist advocate in other words.
You surly did not think I meant any Tom Dick or Harry who does not go to church and reads the sports page and think God is a load of tosh.
The atheist advocate, that which I can hear speak out about the subject and have a hold upon what he is trying to convince others.
I was not talking about the silent majority who probably don't even care what an atheist is, as they are just that silent and I don't think I fear peace and quite.
Would all these people you know discuss Dawkins with you?
who just don't pray or give to charity,
What on earth are you talking about? You seriously believe atheists don't give to charity? If this is the sort of stuff you come out with, I am not surprised that you meet a lot of angry atheists!
Do you similarly object to angry religious people?
If so, it seems your problem is with heated debate or anger, not atheism.
I had no idea whom you meant, you said atheists...that is who I assumed you meant.
Now you say it is atheists who do not remain silent.
You have a problem with people advocating atheism? Why? What possible reason is there to object to people advocating something which does not demand that others be hurt? Or are you saying that you have atheists coming to your door and insisting they be allowed in to convince you of atheism?
I can see reasons to take issue with Dawkins re some of his logic, but you appear to take issue with atheists having any voice at all.
If people are insisting on pushing atheism down your throat in social situations, I can see you taking umbrage, just as I would if a religious person tried the same with me (as they sometimes do) even when I have politely indicated that I am not interested in the discussion....but for you to take some offence at an atheist in the public domain who is espousing their position...what reason, in rationality, can you have to be offended by that?
That you are fearful of having your ideas changed seems to me to be your issue, I see that having our ideas changed by reasoned discourse is a revelatory and wonderful thing.
I am sorry you fear anger. I don't like it a lot, either...but why is it such a problem for you?
Where exactly are these fearsome atheists frightening you?
In person? On the media? In fora dedicated to robust challenges of ideas?