Hmmmm.

Quite an angry, frightened article in my view. I haven't read any of these atheist writers he speaks of except for Richard Dawkins, so I can only comment on him, and to be honest, i didn't find much to take issue with in "The God Delusion". I actually found him to be a good writer, with interesting ideas. I certainly don't agree with all of them, but none of them struck me as 'dangerous'. Pretty benign stuff.

Dawkins makes it VERY clear in his introduction that his argument is against the idea of a personified God - as in Old Testament, Man-with-a-long-white-beard supernatural guy.

I have to say I agree with him there - I personally find the idea of God as an actual dude to be pretty bizzarre.

Hedges writes in the above article "They [atheists] propose a route to collective salvation and the moral advancement of the human species through science and reason" !

As though that is an horrific idea!

Shock, horror!!!! Science and reason!!!!!! (Why, because there are so many scientists and secular humanists out there strapping bombs to themselves?)

Maybe I'm not well-read enough (and i haven't read any of those other guys) but Dawkins certainly is NOT advocating killing people who have religious beliefs, or going to war against religious governments.

"[Harris'] assertion that the war in the former Yugoslavia, for example, was caused by religion was ridiculous..... The war had far more to do with the economic collapse of Yugoslavia than religion or ancient ethnic hatreds."

Atheist writers (as well as writers of all other leanings) are right to argue against religous nutterism, and point it out where they see it, and there is certainly plenty of it to be seen in most war zones, including Bosnia.

I can't see why that freaks this guy out so much.

Anyway, I could spend all night sitting here picking out quotes from this article to disagree with, but the basic gist for me is that I think science and reason are good things to base a society on. I'm actually passionate about the concept of separation of church and state, of secular government. Spiritual beliefs should be personal and private. It is pretty much ONLY in secular societies that people have that freedom. Including the freedom to not believe in anything.

I know where I'd rather live. So in those respects, I'm with the atheists.

I appreciate that Richard Dawkins has at least really thought hard about why he doesn't believe in God, unlike alot of religious leaders and gurus that advocate "Blind Faith". He obviously hasn't had any supernatural experiences (that he knows about, or remembers anyway), so why should he believe?

I would probably think less of him if he believed blindly.

rant, rant, rant.......

Anyway I'm convinced that science will eventually explain supernatural phenomenon, and already has to some extent. And I feel very strongly that humanity most certainly is moving towards SOMETHING. Not neccesarily "Utopia", but evolution is heading somewhere, even if our societies aren't. I think the natural human drive to become more, to learn more, to think more, to experiment more, is speeding up that evolution.

Maybe that could be called a drive towards 'utopia' but isn't that a good thing?