It is a good thing I believe in tollerance and making allowances for the intelectual/ emotional capacities of people or else I might start wondering how some posters manage to send their crayons on the wall scribbles to a digital site.. Ahhhh That feels better.
Now to the more sensible posts.
Grey and Xenithrys The first law of serious debate is be able to back your claims with PROVEABLE facts. Merely stating it or refering to a web site isn't a argument it is merely assertion.
It can be demonstrated that more more people have died in conflict based in religion than any other single cause. Many territorial disputes are aided and abetted by ideas of religious superiority. Atheism isn't a religion in that it fails the organization, common goals, ceremonial, mythology, central entity focus tests. In fact atheism like all gereralizations is vague and inprecise. Much like me saying all religions are the same. Or even All Chritian variations are the same. They're smimply not.
Morals are defined by the individual and there extensive cross over between religious and non religious. Cultures are also a defining factor as are circustances.

Great post, Grey (12.55). I can't imagine a more reliable source of comparitive atheist/Christian statistics than magicstatistics.com, a website run by a born-again Christian, which lists "British churches and Christian sites" and "Prayers of the Saints" on the page banner.

Completely unbiased and reliable. Take that, nonbelievers!

David – atheism simply means believing that there is no God. Nothing more, nothing less.

So when you say things like, “atheism does not endorse acts of violence, encourage others to do so, or attempt to subvert those in disagreement, and, “atheism promotes all persons as being equal before the law”, you are making completely unwarranted and unsustainable assertions.

By what right do you set yourself up to speak for all atheists? The most you or any other atheist can say is “I, David Nicholls (or whoever else), who happens to be an atheist, believes the above things.” Or are you saying that if an atheist should endorse violence and say that some people are inferior to others that they therefore cannot call themselves an atheist? How so?

As the President of the Atheist Foundation of Australia do you see yourself as some sort of secular pope who infallibly speaks on behalf of all atheists? Surely atheists can believe whatever they want. No David, in an atheistic universe it is every man/woman for himself and your ethical pronouncements, humbly propounded on behalf of all atheists, are just hot air.

Dear Newhouse.....

having arrived at that 'remarkable grasp of the obvious' conclusion :) (i.e..the conclusion of the lecturers)

we might well consider what the next logical step is....

1/ No basis for ethics.
2/ Nothing is essentially 'ethical'..
3/ Thus.. we can do what we like.. restrained only by the law...
4/ and we can change that too if we get enough support.

thus comes true the nihilism that Neitzche predicted....

Humanity.. game over.

Of course there were those like my namesake who took another view :)

Thanks to the author, David Nicholls, for bringing the facts to the table!

Many religious have been told things about atheism that are not true, yet they uncritically believe what they are told to believe. This is their way, it seems, and we should be kind but firm in our defence of atheism.

I wonder what society would be like if we moved away from superstitions altogether, and poured more energy into reason, science, and discussions of ethical decision-making. We might have a rocky start, but so does the alcoholic who rids himself of the crutch of alcohol. We'd be better off in the long run...

Think about it, modern advances in human rights, quality of life, medicine, and food production did not come about because of religion. If anything, religion was a hinderance (as in the south who used the bible to support it's position on slavery).

Ethics also do not come from religion, it's the other way around! We can have a fully ethical society where values and laws are discussed, reasoned, and decided upon democratically. We're already part way there - we just need to recognize there is no invisible hand guiding us.

The stark and beautiful fact about atheism that believers fail to appreciate is that WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OURSELVES. It is OUR responsibility to make ethical decisions to improve the world we share - because who (but the dogmatic believer) does NOT want to live in a peaceful world?

I say, instead of being "born again", why not just grow up? I for one want to live in a society of moral adults!

SWEJ

My kudos to David Nicholls for this article. Straightforward, clear, and unapologetic.

What I find disturbing is the need for other atheists (i.e. commentators here at OLO) to be apologetic for being atheist. The main reason religious folk are so upset with atheism today is the fact that we are speaking out more than ever before. The arguments are the same (and always will be), it's the simple public expression of why we are and what we are that is upsetting everyone.

The simple fact is that we were "accepted" as long as we kept our mouths shut and didn't make our argument in public. And for that public expression we're now ridiculed, even by our fellow atheists including the likes of P. McGuinness (now passed on).

Enough already. We will continue to speak, write and make our arguments in public; and I for one am happy with the likes of Dawkins, Harris, Dennett and Hitchens for playing such are large role in this new found freedom to express ourselves.