…is up and running over at Nullfidian’s. Click on the icon over there ——————————> in my widget column, and check out all the good articles.
I’m including a few choice quotes, to whet your appetite. (Note: the fact that I chose a few from the many does not indicate an opinion of the “best”. They are all good. )
In theory, the best solution to the progress of mankind is to have one belief system. Many would suggest that one religion would suit this, but in reality it wouldn’t. The fact that a religion is a following of people to a god defeats the purpose right there. The fundamental duty that an individual theist has to his/her god puts that god before any other human. This creates a society that honors a divine and abstract being before its own kind. When a god is placed higher in importance than humankind, it lowers the value of the society’s ability to be united. That is why atheism is the more beneficial of the two. Atheism vs. Theism
And from Atheist Revolution:
Having an identity is an important source of empowerment. By knowing what to call myself, I have taken the first step toward molding an identity which can bring me strength. I am an atheist. I have something in common with millions of other people in that I do not believe in the gods to which the majority of my neighbors submit. I can read a book about atheism and learn how to better articulate my views. I can meet with other nonbelievers and finally experience the joy of being myself. I can visit atheist blogs, Internet forums, and websites to interact with a global community of nonbelievers, learn more about atheism and secular humanism, obtain support, and translate my passions into activism. Empowering Nonbelievers: The Atheist Revival
I don’t know how P.Z. Myers can remain so prolific. Doesn’t he have a day job?
When the Buddhas of Bamyan were dynamited, it wasn’t an atheist who lit the fuse. These modern atheists that have stirred up so much resentment among the apologists for religion are not destroyers who seek to demolish the past or who want to advance a destructive ideology — they aren’t philistines who reject literature and art and music, and they aren’t monsters who will exterminate people to achieve their ends. We aren’t out to eradicate the world of ideas or obliterate the vestiges of our religious history in art and architecture, although we have been accused of such nefarious plans; such claims are easy to dismiss as the ravings of the delusional. We stand awed at the heights our people have achieved.
Hell’s Handmaiden is raising hell in a tolerant way:
I am not that kind of tolerant, and I suspect that I shall never be that kind of tolerant. Such tolerance really isn’t tolerance at all. Perhaps I should say, such exhortations to tolerance really aren’t about tolerance at all. They are the opposite. They are attempts to silence the opposition, to suppress dissent. They are bullying based in an assumption of privilege, and attempt to shame, embarass, or otherwise pressure dissenting opinions out of the public debate. Tolerance
Finally, one I particularly agree with from Russell Blackford:
For Camus, once we understand this picture of the human situation, we can triumph over it. We can gain a kind of inner freedom when we realise that the universe does not guide us, and that it is up to us to sort out, and live by, our own values. Will God Fade Away: The Future of Religion.