Changes

YouTube's atheist [[Thunderfoot]] said about the atheist movement after [[Reason Rally 2016]] had a very low turnout:

YouTube's atheist [[Thunderfoot]] said about the atheist movement after [[Reason Rally 2016]] had a very low turnout:

{{Cquote|I'm not sure there is anything in this movement worth saving. Hitchens is dead. Dawkins simply doesn't have the energy for this sort of thing anymore. Harris went his own way. And [[Daniel Dennett|Dennett]] just kind of blended into the background. So what do you think when the largest gathering of the nonreligious in history pulls in... I don't know. Maybe 2,000 people. Is there anything worth saving?<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/even-atheists-bash-reason-rally/ Even atheists bash 'Reason Rally']</ref>}}

{{Cquote|I'm not sure there is anything in this movement worth saving. Hitchens is dead. Dawkins simply doesn't have the energy for this sort of thing anymore. Harris went his own way. And [[Daniel Dennett|Dennett]] just kind of blended into the background. So what do you think when the largest gathering of the nonreligious in history pulls in... I don't know. Maybe 2,000 people. Is there anything worth saving?<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2016/06/even-atheists-bash-reason-rally/ Even atheists bash 'Reason Rally']</ref>}}

Professor James W. Jones wrote at a ''Oxford University Press'' website:

Professor James W. Jones wrote at a ''Oxford University Press'' website:

In a letter to the agnostic and [[evolution]]ist Richard Dawkins which was subsequently quoted by ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'', Oxford University atheist and professor [[Daniel Came]] wrote concerning Dawkins' refusal to debate the [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[William Lane Craig]]:

In a letter to the agnostic and [[evolution]]ist Richard Dawkins which was subsequently quoted by ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'', Oxford University atheist and professor [[Daniel Came]] wrote concerning Dawkins' refusal to debate the [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[William Lane Craig]]:

"The absence of a debate with the foremost [[Christian apologetics|apologist]] for [[Christianity|Christian]] [[theism]] is a glaring omission on your [[Curriculum vitae|CV]] and is of course apt to be interpreted as cowardice on your part."<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8511931/Richard-Dawkins-accused-of-cowardice-for-refusing-to-debate-existence-of-God.html Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God], ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'', May 14, 2011</ref>

"The absence of a debate with the foremost [[Christian apologetics|apologist]] for [[Christianity|Christian]] [[theism]] is a glaring omission on your [[Curriculum vitae|CV]] and is of course apt to be interpreted as cowardice on your part."<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8511931/Richard-Dawkins-accused-of-cowardice-for-refusing-to-debate-existence-of-God.html Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God], ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'', May 14, 2011</ref>

One of the frequent criticisms of the New Atheism movement is that it avoids the strongest arguments of its opponents.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFamS4RGE_A Richard Dawkins says he won't debate William Lane Craig]</ref> See also: [[Atheism and cowardice]] and [[Richard Dawkins and debate]]

One of the frequent criticisms of the New Atheism movement is that it avoids the strongest arguments of its opponents.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFamS4RGE_A Richard Dawkins says he won't debate William Lane Craig]</ref> See also: [[Atheism and cowardice]] and [[Richard Dawkins and debate]]

YouTube atheist [[Thunderfoot]] said about the [[atheist movement]] after [[Reason Rally 2016]] had a very low turnout:

YouTube atheist [[Thunderfoot]] said about the [[atheist movement]] after [[Reason Rally 2016]] had a very low turnout:

{{Cquote|I'm not sure there is anything in this movement worth saving. [[Christopher Hitchens|Hitchens]] is dead. [[Richard Dawkins|Dawkins]] simply doesn't have the energy for this sort of thing anymore. [[Sam Harris|Harris]] went his own way. And [[Daniel Dennett|Dennett]] just kind of blended into the background. So what do you think when the largest gathering of the nonreligious in history pulls in... I don't know. Maybe 2,000 people. Is there anything worth saving?<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/even-atheists-bash-reason-rally/ Even atheists bash 'Reason Rally']</ref>}}

{{Cquote|I'm not sure there is anything in this movement worth saving. [[Christopher Hitchens|Hitchens]] is dead. [[Richard Dawkins|Dawkins]] simply doesn't have the energy for this sort of thing anymore. [[Sam Harris|Harris]] went his own way. And [[Daniel Dennett|Dennett]] just kind of blended into the background. So what do you think when the largest gathering of the nonreligious in history pulls in... I don't know. Maybe 2,000 people. Is there anything worth saving?<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2016/06/even-atheists-bash-reason-rally/ Even atheists bash 'Reason Rally']</ref>}}

Stephen LeDrew wrote at Oxford University Press's Academic Insights for the Thinking World website:

Stephen LeDrew wrote at Oxford University Press's Academic Insights for the Thinking World website:

Social science in general has not yet fully appreciated the significance of the New Atheism and has tended not to take it very seriously, with the exception of those working in the new sub-discipline of secularity studies. But whatever one might think of the New Atheists’ ideas, an honest appraisal would recognize that they have had a significant and lasting impact.  

Social science in general has not yet fully appreciated the significance of the New Atheism and has tended not to take it very seriously, with the exception of those working in the new sub-discipline of secularity studies. But whatever one might think of the New Atheists’ ideas, an honest appraisal would recognize that they have had a significant and lasting impact.  

They should be remembered for catalyzing a movement for religious dissent and inspiring atheists to come together and find a voice in American public life. But there’s a much darker side to the legacy of the New Atheism that stems from its imperialist and xenophobic tendencies, to say nothing of some thinly veiled Social Darwinism and [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11047072/Richard-Dawkins-immoral-to-allow-Downs-syndrome-babies-to-be-born.html arguments] for eugenics. Sam Harris in particular is now known more for [http://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/why-dont-i-criticize-israel supporting the Israeli occupation of Palestine] and [http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/in-defense-of-profiling ethnic profiling] at airport security than for his science-based critique of religious faith. Richard Dawkins’ personal legacy has taken a heavy hit in the past few years, as his rambling criticisms of feminism and Muslim “barbarians” on Twitter have led to charges of [http://www.salon.com/2014/10/03/new_atheisms_troubling_misogyny_the_pompous_sexism_of_richard_dawkins_and_sam_harris_partner/ sexism], [http://www.salon.com/2013/08/10/richard_dawkins_does_it_again_new_atheisms_islamophobia_problem/ racism], and general arrogance and intolerance.<ref>[http://blog.oup.com/2015/11/legacy-new-atheism/#sthash.6ZTcoHLw.dpuf The legacy of the New Atheism] by Stephen LeDrew wrote at [[Oxford University]] Press's Academic Insights for the Thinking World website</ref>}}

They should be remembered for catalyzing a movement for religious dissent and inspiring atheists to come together and find a voice in American public life. But there’s a much darker side to the legacy of the New Atheism that stems from its imperialist and xenophobic tendencies, to say nothing of some thinly veiled Social Darwinism and [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11047072/Richard-Dawkins-immoral-to-allow-Downs-syndrome-babies-to-be-born.html arguments] for eugenics. Sam Harris in particular is now known more for [http://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/why-dont-i-criticize-israel supporting the Israeli occupation of Palestine] and [http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/in-defense-of-profiling ethnic profiling] at airport security than for his science-based critique of religious faith. Richard Dawkins’ personal legacy has taken a heavy hit in the past few years, as his rambling criticisms of feminism and Muslim “barbarians” on Twitter have led to charges of [http://www.salon.com/2014/10/03/new_atheisms_troubling_misogyny_the_pompous_sexism_of_richard_dawkins_and_sam_harris_partner/ sexism], [http://www.salon.com/2013/08/10/richard_dawkins_does_it_again_new_atheisms_islamophobia_problem/ racism], and general arrogance and intolerance.<ref>[http://blog.oup.com/2015/11/legacy-new-atheism/#sthash.6ZTcoHLw.dpuf The legacy of the New Atheism] by Stephen LeDrew wrote at [[Oxford University]] Press's Academic Insights for the Thinking World website</ref>}}

On November 4, 2015, Elizabeth Bruenig published an article in the ''New Republic'' entitled ''Is the New Atheism Dead?'' which declared:

On November 4, 2015, Elizabeth Bruenig published an article in the ''New Republic'' entitled ''Is the New Atheism Dead?'' which declared: