David Silverman’s book, Fighting God: An Atheist Manifesto for a Religious World was released today. Amazon describes Silverman as
one of the most recognizable faces of atheism. . . . a walking, talking atheist billboard.
The Amazon blurb says
Silverman argues that religion is more than just wrong: it is malevolent and does not deserve our respect. It is our duty to be outspoken and do what we can to bring religion down. Examining the mentality, methods and issues facing the firebrand atheist, Silverman presents an overwhelming argument for firebrand atheism and reveals:
– All religion is cafeteria religion and almost all agnostics are atheists.
– American society grants religion a privileged status, despite the intentions of the Founding Fathers.
– Christian politicians have adversely (and un-Constitutionally) affected our society with regard to science, health, women’s rights, and gay rights.
– The notion of “atheist Jews” is a lie forced on us by religion.
– It is not “Islamophobia” to observe dangerous teachings and disproportionate violence in Islam.
– Atheists are slowly but surely winning the battle.
Fighting God is a provocative, unapologetic book that takes religion to task and will give inspiration to non-believers and serve as the ultimate answer to apologists.
Since Silverman is the President of American Atheists, he probably doesn’t discuss Canadian society or Canadian Christian politicians in Fighting God, but this does not mean that some of the points above cannot be adapted to apply to Canada as well:
- Canadian “society grants religion a privileged status,”
- “Christian politicians [try to and] have adversely affected [Canadian] society with regard to science, health, women’s rights, and gay rights.
If Canadian “[a]theists are slowly but surely winning the battle,” there is no indication that they are winning the battle (is battle even a Canadian word?) for secularism. Most atheist, humanist and secular organizations pay lip service to secularism but fall short of advocating for a completely secular and religiously neutral society.
What part of the word Christ in Christmas is ambiguous to that particular humanist organization? Even Cutaia knows what the word Christmas means,
The annual Christian festival celebrating Christ’s birth, held on 25 December in the Western Church.
but she forgets that atheists can’t celebrate the birth of Christ when they don’t believe in Christ. Cutaia says the Christmas
makes me have hope for humanity. It’s a great story. A little baby born to save a world that is unworthy of being saved.
Baby Jesus has had 2000+ plus years to save the world; he hasn’t yet, and by the way, the world is worthy of being saved.
What are humanists, secularists and atheists thinking when they ask asinine questions like “do you celebrate Christmas?” Do they think secularism and religious neutrality is just for governments and publicly-funded schools? Do they think that a few days in December are the best and only days to get together with friends and family? There are numerous other days during the year to celebrate with friends and family!
If secularism can be defined as “no discrimination against anybody in the name of religion,” it should also be defined as no favouritism