Changes

. . . The point is not that a coherent morality requires theism, but that the moral language taken for granted by liberal modernity is a fragmented ruin: It rejects metaphysics but exists only because of prior metaphysical commitments.<ref>[http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2014/07/atheists_the_origin_of_the_species_by_nick_spencer_reviewed.html Know Nothing: The true history of atheism] By Michael Robbins</ref>}}

. . . The point is not that a coherent morality requires theism, but that the moral language taken for granted by liberal modernity is a fragmented ruin: It rejects metaphysics but exists only because of prior metaphysical commitments.<ref>[http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2014/07/atheists_the_origin_of_the_species_by_nick_spencer_reviewed.html Know Nothing: The true history of atheism] By Michael Robbins</ref>}}

[[File:Jerry Coyne at The Amazing Meeting - 2013.jpg|thumbnail|left|300px|The atheist [[Jerry Coyne]] speaking at a 2013 [[Atheist conferences|atheist meeting]] entitled The Amazing Meeting (TAM). TAM is an annual meeting.]]  

[[File:Jerry Coyne at The Amazing Meeting - 2013.jpg|thumbnail|left|300px|The atheist [[Jerry Coyne]] speaking at a 2013 [[Atheist conferences|atheist meeting]] entitled The Amazing Meeting (TAM). TAM is an annual meeting.]]  

 

]]

In 2011, Coyne said about atheist meetings which he attended that they had an [[Atheism and arrogance|air of self-congratulation]].<ref>[https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/are-there-too-many-atheist-meetings/ Are there too many atheist meetings?] by Jerry Coyne</ref>  He also indicated about atheist meetings: "But to me the speakers and talks have often seemed repetitive: the same crew of jet-set skeptics giving the same talks."<ref>[https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/are-there-too-many-atheist-meetings/ Are there too many atheist meetings?] by Jerry Coyne</ref>]]

Commenting on New Atheism and morality the [[Shadow To Light blog]] declares:

Commenting on New Atheism and morality the [[Shadow To Light blog]] declares:

{{Cquote|A veneer of secular morality rooted in subjective preferences hardly counts as “foundational authority,” meaning that [[Jerry Coyne|Coyne]] again fails to refute Robbins’s point. In fact, that morality is anchored to such a subjective foundation means that secular morality is not significantly different from a cultural dress code. The “veneer of secular morality” is just a way for the collective to impose order and conformity on a population of individuals. And if secular morality is nothing more than that, we get to the core problem with atheism – the dress code known as morality simply ceases to be important. That is, if an atheist believes X is wrong, they can easily ignore and dismiss it if it becomes inconvenient to refrain from doing X.

{{Cquote|A veneer of secular morality rooted in subjective preferences hardly counts as “foundational authority,” meaning that [[Jerry Coyne|Coyne]] again fails to refute Robbins’s point. In fact, that morality is anchored to such a subjective foundation means that secular morality is not significantly different from a cultural dress code. The “veneer of secular morality” is just a way for the collective to impose order and conformity on a population of individuals. And if secular morality is nothing more than that, we get to the core problem with atheism – the dress code known as morality simply ceases to be important. That is, if an atheist believes X is wrong, they can easily ignore and dismiss it if it becomes inconvenient to refrain from doing X.