Atheist evangelism

Atheists learn from Proverbs 22:6:

An atheist summer camp for children is to be held in the UK for the first time this year, offering a “godless alternative” to similar religious events under canvas.

The purpose of Camp Quest UK, supported by the atheist and sceptic author Richard Dawkins, is to encourage critical thinking and provide children with a summer camp “free of religious dogma”.

On the Camp Quest website we find this:

The Amsterdam Declaration:
Humanism is the outcome of a long tradition of free thought that has inspired many of the world’s great thinkers and creative artists and gave rise to science itself. The fundamentals of modern Humanism are as follows:

Humanism is ethical.

Humanism is rational

Humanism supports democracy and human rights.

Humanism insists that personal liberty must be combined with social responsibility.

Humanism values artistic creativity and imagination

Humanism is a lifestance aiming at the maximum possible fulfilment through the cultivation of ethical and creative living

This religious dogma sounds very much as if it has been lifted straight out Judeo-Christian ethics; the difference is, the humanist version really is irrational because it expects adherence to a set of rules whose reason for being has been removed. Without a Lawmaker, what possible reason is there for Kim Jong-il, for example, to embrace democracy and human rights, when it suits him better not to?

It is probably vain to hope that the atheist summer camp will point this out as part of its critical thinking.

Melanie Phillips lays into Richard Dawkins

Read it all Here:

The most famous atheist in the world, biologist Professor Richard Dawkins, poses as the arch-apostle of reason, a scientist who stands for empirical truth in opposition to obscurantism and lies. What follows suggests that in fact he is sloppy and cavalier with both facts and reasoning to a disturbing degree.

Dawkins seems to be more interested in his celebrity status than the truth; I really don’t think he can be in it just for the money, but a combination of cash, fame and glory appear to be what motivates him.

Richard Dawkins: the Elmer Gantry of atheists.

A consistent atheist

Peter Singer is a bioethicist at Princeton University; he favours infanticide, euthanasia and animal rights:

Singer is a mild-mannered fellow who speaks calmly and lucidly. Yet you wouldn’t have to read his work too long to find his extreme positions. He cheerfully advocates infanticide and euthanasia and, in almost the same breath, favors animal rights. Even most liberals would have qualms about third-trimester abortions; Singer does not hesitate to advocate what may be termed fourth-trimester abortions, i.e., the killing of infants after they are born.

Singer writes, “My colleague Helga Kuhse and I suggest that a period of 28 days after birth might be allowed before an infant is accepted as having the same right to life as others.” Singer argues that even pigs, chickens, and fish have more signs of consciousness and rationality-and, consequently, a greater claim to rights-than do fetuses, newborn infants, and people with mental disabilities. “Rats are indisputably more aware of their surroundings, and more able to respond in purposeful and complex ways to things they like or dislike, than a fetus at 10- or even 32-weeks gestation. … The calf, the pig, and the much-derided chicken come out well ahead of the fetus at any stage of pregnancy.”

To his credit, Singer does exhibit more consistency than other popular atheists like Dawkins and Hitchens, both of whom wish to largely retain the ethical framework of Christianity while denying its truth.

Of course, Singer is still holding back somewhat since he isn’t yet advocating the use of discarded humanity for food; I expect that is coming.

Cuddly atheists like Dawkins and Hitchens are determined to demonstrate that there is no God; it is ironic, then, that one of their number has gone a long way to proving that there is a devil.