Are the "new" atheists really anti-theists?

I again would maintain that we need some new language to discuss these things.

We continue to have the debate about agnostic being a category or a modifier. It's silly. People can categorize themselves however they want, and I believe that agnostic is a legitimate category all by itself. But if those that wish to discuss the distinctions can't agree, it's very hard to move the discussion forward.

The concept of "atheists" was defined and is totally controlled by theists. Even if all atheists were wiped out, the empty set would still exist, is ever a danger, and could only disappear when there are no theists.

I belong to an atheists group. Our ritual is weekly gathering for burgers and beer, and conversations rarely center on religion, or god, cause why beat a dead horse?

Our main annual events are celebrations of Carl Sagan and Charles Darwin. There is plenty to do there, and religion never gets mentioned. It's called education. That's a good opposite for religion.

--imm

There was no word for people who didn't believe in gods until people started believing in gods and had to find something to call these different people they still don't understand.
edit: removed redundant words.

It seems to me he is writing from a generational stance, not a theist stance.

he makes a few good points I agree with and I don't like to put the label "atheist" on myself, which he sums up in the paragraph after 3). I am an atheist by the definition, but to me it means I am in a group of some sort, when in reality I don't feel that I am, nor do I want to be.

I religiously practice not going to church.
I stay blessedly free of prayer.

They reason I am an Atheist (or Tooth Fairy Agnostic, if you prefer) is because religion make no sense whatsoever. I know of no Atheist leaders. I know of prominent Atheists. The two are separate. (Albert Pujols is a promenant Christan, but I know of no Christians that consider him a Christian leader.)

I also practice not stamp collecting. You will notice that "Not Stamp Collecting" necessarily uses the words "Stamp collecting" and therefor promotes a philately mindset.

Who ever wrote that blog is trying awfully hard (and failing miserably) to assert a point that isn't there.

""""I also practice not stamp collecting. You will notice that "Not Stamp Collecting" necessarily uses the words "Stamp collecting" and therefor promotes a philately mindset.

Who ever wrote that blog is trying awfully hard (and failing miserably) to assert a point that isn't there. """""
Yep!

In addition, it is my impression that when atheists get together, it is not to reassure themselves about atheism, but rather to address the way theists insist on trying to intrude and inflict.

A link to a blog about Catholic numbers, which doesn't mention 'atheists', 'nones', or any form of non-believer; and a link to a report on religious and non-religious numbers, but which says nothing at all about numbers for 'millennials', despite what he claims.

So it's just his own assertions. He asserts that "Hitchens-style" atheism is institutionalized. Meh. I see no 'prescribed practices', rituals, or orthodoxy. "Venerated leaders" may have a smidgen of truth in it; what Hitchens and Dawkins especially, but others like Dennett to a lesser extent, said/say does get more publicity than it would if said by others, and the tributes to Hitchens when he died were rather "we shall not see his like again", it seemed to me - but not on the scale of Princess Diana, say. More akin to what a politician might get (Edward Kennedy, for instance).

Yes, the word 'atheist' does get its meaning from 'god'. But I don't see how that's a 'hole' in 'traditional, Christopher Hitchens-style atheism'; and I just can't see what his 'atheism is a new thing' has got to do with this at all. I can't see what he's comparing it to (let's remember that Socrates was sentenced to death for what was basically an accusation of atheism).

I'd like to see some evidence that there's a difference in the amount that people with no religion under 30 think about gods, as opposed to those over 30. Ticking a box of 'none' rather than 'atheist' doesn't indicate much; untangling the images each invokes thanks to the media from any actual meaning about their thoughts just can't be done for one word.

"Institutionalized"..."rituals"...lolz

Julie

Honestly, the failure of my generation was raising them under the illusion that they could be anything they wanted to be. And their failure is believing it into adulthood.