This is an attempt to state why some of us are objecting to Atheism Plus without resorting to name calling, attacks, etc. Please keep the conversation civil, even if you think I’m being a misogynistic douche bag here:
The blogger at Alethian Worldview says this of Atheism Plus,
Atheism+ is a much needed refinement of the original raw idea. It’s not enough just to disbelieve in God for whatever good or bad reasons you might have. To be part of this new movement, we need to be atheists PLUS we need to be decent people committed to making life better for ourselves and those around us. And that means breaking down all the pernicious vices by which we oppress and destroy one another: superstition, patriarchy, bigotry, sexism, racism—whatever penalizes the innocent in order to profit the privileged.
A commenter asked how anyone could be opposed to this. My reply below is awaiting moderation,
The opposition is simple….if you define Atheism Plus as the subset of atheists who are decent people, you’re saying anyone who is disapproved of by Atheism Plus folks is, by definition, not a decent person.
Which itself wouldn’t be a problem if the bar for labeling people misogynists and racists weren’t so low in this debate.
For example..I don’t see much room in the definition Jen gave of Atheism Plus for a pro-life secularist like Nat Hentoff. But Nat Hentoff is certainly a decent person.
To the extent Atheism Plus is simply a SIG of atheists who are also very interested in social justice no one objects. To the extent it is an attempt to label folks with different values as not being decent people, it is objectionable.