Webs’ Random Ideas

This discussion pertains to this Op-Ed in the LA Times: “Atheists: No God, no reason, just whining. Superstar atheists are motivated by anger — and boohoo victimhood.” By Charlotte Allen

Before I start the deconstruction I would first like to speak about this Op-Ed and maybe atheism in general. First off the tone of the article is such that readers start with a premise that atheist are pretty big assholes and like to complain about their situation. Which could be true, I can’t really argue that premise as there likely exists atheists that act as such. But in general I wouldn’t chalk up most of the statements atheists make as “whining” but rather speaking out. I think there exists a clear distinction between the two.

Secondly, I am not necessarily complaining about Charlotte’s tone. I can’t really do that as that would be hypocritical of me. How could I support atheists such as PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins with their strong tones and denounce Charlotte’s? But I think if you are going to use such strong tones and words than your arguments should stay focused on the issues rather than personal attacks. Something that Charlotte’s piece falls short of in my opinion.

Lastly, the atheists Charlotte’s thesis focuses on are the ones that are very outspoken and very critical of religion. Which is fine, but she doesn’t mention this as an assumption starting out. But rather professes that all atheist are lumped into this group together. I’m not trying to be the “semantics police” here, but I feel that doing such is duplicitous.

If Charlotte really wants to know an atheist, all she needs to do is have a conversation with one… besides the online websites where discourse can be rather ostentatious.

On to the review and highlighted sections are of my doing…

[UPDATE]: Just missed PZ Myers’ reply in the LA Times…

Read the rest of this entry »