[peter12]

I know you say this a lot about the 'new atheists' since they obviously by being part of this recent upswing in disbelief are obviously not smart because they haven't read enough philosophy or become deep thinkers like theologians... But I'm so curious as to what do you mean by the atheist nonsense and not actually engaging the ideas, specifically?

The Prospect abstract summed it up quite well. Most atheists subscribe to the sneering nonsense of Hume, Russell, and the rest of the English analytical philosophers. Continental philosophy and the Burkean school are far more engaging with religious thoughts and even if they reject it are far more willing to accept the consequences of their atheism.

So I'll clarify that when I mean "atheism," I really mean this new (but not really new) strain of English atheism which actually owes any serious portion of its thought to Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, and Bacon. Name-dropping sure, but I am trying to really narrow down what I mean by new atheists.

The moral teachings of the church? You mean no condoms for AIDS ridden Africa, the cover up of pedophiles/abuse, the anti-gay stance, the backwards treatment of women being denied positions of power, celibacy, etc..

There's certainly a huge moral divide between the Church's praxis and it's moral theology. I agree. In fact, as I said earlier, that is probably what matters most. It still doesn't change the fact that people write off the good part of the Church (the moral theology) far, far too easily.

I always get the feeling you feel that most of the new atheists (hate that term) aren't sophisticated enough to have arrived at their position or that they have no business debating it since they haven't been reading theology or philosophical takes on the issue of God. I don't imagine you hold those who deny the existence of unicorns as harshly, considering I myself am a a-unicornist without having read deeply the books pertaining to these mystical creatures nor have I pondered deeply about their meaning and existence.

The flying spaghetti monster or the unicorns or the fairies are just such examples of the absolutely weak logical conundrums that new atheists come up with.

It's not that they don't deserve to debate the issue, it's a democracy, everyone can debate any issue. But it also doesn't mean that I can't roll my eyes everytime this humanist moral outrage stuff comes rolling around. It's almost predictable how atheists will react everytime the Pope opens his mouth.