Introduction

Allow me to introduce myself!

I’m Pete, a complex evolved mammalian creature full of contradictions and lot of other interesting things. I’m originally from the UK (Scarborough, North Yorkshire) but have been living in The Netherlands for the past eight years and think I’ve found the place and person (hi Rich !) I’d like to be with for the rest of my time on our insignificant little planet. I have varied interests including photography, reading, history, travel, languages, equal rights for all, techie stuff including all things Canon and Apple, Sci-fi, walking my dog Molly, good food and good conversation with friends. I’m a bit of a polymath and jack of all trades and flit from one interest to another, but always seem to come back to the ones above.

Why do a blog ? Well I’ve been toying with the idea for the past few months and have been inspired to finally get it off the crowd by some of the wonderful people I know and have met on Twitter. I’m regularly to be found there twittering away and more on that will certainly follow. The main thing I twitter about is, as you’ve probably guessed already from the title of this blog is Atheism and the damage that I believe religions of all types inflict on children, society and our world today. This damage has wide ranging implications and those will frequently be pointed out in further entries !

I consider myself one of the “New Atheists’. I’m not keen on the title but it’s the one that’s used (as well as “Godless Heathen” which I quite like actually!).

Us “New Atheists” are typically concerned with defending (at least) the following theses:

• It is almost certain that there is no God.
• Religions are dangerous and do not automatically deserve respect.
• Religious belief has a genetic or evolutionary explanation/excuse!
• Belief in God and evolution are not compatible.
• Religion tends to subvert science.
• Secular morality is possible; believing in God does not automatically give you morals or moral superiority.
• Life is not meaningless without belief in God.
• Religious education of children is a form of child abuse.

Much has been written about the growth of “New” Atheism as more and more people are “coming out” and being more open about their non-belief and consequently this contemporary atheist “backlash” (as the fundamentalist Christians term it) can be seen as an attempt to achieve at least two goals: firstly, to guarantee the integrity and safety of science in society ; and secondly, to strongly discourage religion and encourage its obsolescence (or at least privatization) in order to safeguard the rule of secular law, to which we New Atheists believe religion poses a serious present threat. My main concern is that all organized religions seem to be anti-intellectual, irrational, authoritarian, and violent, thus posing a threat to liberty, equal rights and now personal security.

Another term that is bandied about by our religious friends is “militant atheist”. These terms, though very new sounding, as everything seems to be “militant” since 9/11, has a history going back to at least 1894.Recently, the term has been used to describe atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris amongst others.

Julian Baggini defines militant atheism as “Atheism which is actively hostile to religion”, which “requires more than strong disagreement with religion – it requires something verging on hatred and is characterised by a desire to wipe out all forms of religious belief. Militant atheists tend to make one or both of two claims that moderate atheists do not. The first is that religion is demonstrably false or nonsense and the second is that it is usually or always harmful”^. I find myself in complete agreement with those statements from Julian and hence call myself the “Rabid” Atheist, as my righteous ire from reading the lies, misconceptions, evil deeds, greed and other heinous acts spewed out and perpetrated by theists of all types literally makes me foam at the mouth!!!!

I recently read a quote about militant atheists that resonates

“The term militant atheist is sometimes used pejoratively by theists to describe people believed to campaign actively or outspokenly for atheism and against religion. The linguist Larry Trask suggests that the word militant “is used all too freely in the feebler sense of ‘holding or expressing views which are unpopular or which I don’t like’.” He notes that Richard Dawkins is “accused by tabloid newspapers and other commentators of being a ‘militant atheist'”

If Richard Dawkins et al are termed militant atheists then I am happy to count myself amongst them, their reason, patience and willingness to stand up to organized religion in all it’s many flavours makes them almost heroes of mine.

So welcome to my blog, all comments, reasoned arguments, feedback are welcome !!!