Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,406
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 46:
Line 46: + + + + Line 52:
Line 56: − − [[Austin Dacey]], a [[United Nations]] representative for [[Center for Inquiry]] and figure in the [[Atheism 3.0]] movement criticized the [[New Atheism]] movement for insisting on the removal of religion from the public square on grounds that doing so would shield religion from criticism and circumvent debate on [[morality]].<ref>Multiple references: − *{{cite book|last=Ledewitz|first=Bruce|title=Church, State, and the Crisis in American Secularism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7xgPUVgEaLoC&pg=PA197&dq=%22Atheism+3.0%22&hl=en&ei=bQ4rTq2qHe_CsQLRqMWjCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Atheism%203.0%22&f=false|publisher=[[Indiana University Press]]|quote=And Burke also refers to Austin Dacey, who wants religion to be free to remain in the public square, in part at least, "to criticize it."|year=2011|accessdate=23 July 2011}} − *{{cite news|last=Burke|first=Daniel|title=Atheism 3.0 finds a little more room for religion|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-10-19-atheism-belief_N.htm|publisher=[[USA Today]]|quote=Atheists who insist that religion be removed from the public square are doing themselves a disservice, argues Austin Dacey, a former United Nations representative for the staunchly secularist Center for Inquiry and author of ''The Secular Conscience: Why Belief Belongs in Public Life''. A godless public square not only shields religion from public criticism, it also circumvents a broader debate on morality, he argues.|date=19 October 2009}}</ref>
Center for Inquiry (view source)
Revision as of 17:09, September 13, 2019
, 17:09, September 13, 2019→Center for Inquiry's infighting and ouster of founder Paul Kurtz
[[File:Paul Kurtz's office at Center for Inquiry.jpg|thumbnail|Paul Kurtz's former office at the Center for Inquiry Transnational, Amherst, NY]]
[[File:Paul Kurtz's office at Center for Inquiry.jpg|thumbnail|Paul Kurtz's former office at the Center for Inquiry Transnational, Amherst, NY]]
Currently, there is an ideological struggle within the [[secular humanism]] faction of atheism concerning how militant the movement should be which primarily arose post [[New Atheism]] movement which is a more militant form of atheism. (see also: [[Militant atheism]] and [[Atheist factions]]). Paul Kurtz was against the secular humanism movement becoming more militant but some newer followers of secular humanism disagree with Kurtz.<ref name="godless">[http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/04/18/1023513/redirecting-a-long-life-of-godlessness.html Redirecting a Long Life of Godlessness]</ref>
Currently, there is an ideological struggle within the [[secular humanism]] faction of atheism concerning how militant the movement should be which primarily arose post [[New Atheism]] movement which is a more militant form of atheism. (see also: [[Militant atheism]] and [[Atheist factions]]). Paul Kurtz was against the secular humanism movement becoming more militant but some newer followers of secular humanism disagree with Kurtz.<ref name="godless">[http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/04/18/1023513/redirecting-a-long-life-of-godlessness.html Redirecting a Long Life of Godlessness]</ref>
[[Austin Dacey]], a [[United Nations]] representative for Center for Inquiry and figure in the [[Atheism 3.0]] movement criticized the [[New Atheism]] movement for insisting on the removal of religion from the public square on grounds that doing so would shield religion from criticism and circumvent debate on [[morality]].<ref>Multiple references:
*{{cite book|last=Ledewitz|first=Bruce|title=Church, State, and the Crisis in American Secularism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7xgPUVgEaLoC&pg=PA197&dq=%22Atheism+3.0%22&hl=en&ei=bQ4rTq2qHe_CsQLRqMWjCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Atheism%203.0%22&f=false|publisher=[[Indiana University Press]]|quote=And Burke also refers to Austin Dacey, who wants religion to be free to remain in the public square, in part at least, "to criticize it."|year=2011|accessdate=23 July 2011}}
*{{cite news|last=Burke|first=Daniel|title=Atheism 3.0 finds a little more room for religion|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-10-19-atheism-belief_N.htm|publisher=[[USA Today]]|quote=Atheists who insist that religion be removed from the public square are doing themselves a disservice, argues Austin Dacey, a former United Nations representative for the staunchly secularist Center for Inquiry and author of ''The Secular Conscience: Why Belief Belongs in Public Life''. A godless public square not only shields religion from public criticism, it also circumvents a broader debate on morality, he argues.|date=19 October 2009}}</ref>
On October 10, 2010, a contentious exchange between members of the [[Secular Humanism]] faction of atheism founded by Paul Kurtz and the atheist Ron Lindsay was caught on tape.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hniP6Ivr5g Video - Part one][https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U22xTou2Wgc Video - Part 2] During the exchange Ron Lindsay said that infighting has been occurring within the Secular Humanism faction of atheism for years.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U22xTou2WgcPaul Kurtz and Ron Lindsay Argument Audio Part Two]</ref>
On October 10, 2010, a contentious exchange between members of the [[Secular Humanism]] faction of atheism founded by Paul Kurtz and the atheist Ron Lindsay was caught on tape.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hniP6Ivr5g Video - Part one][https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U22xTou2Wgc Video - Part 2] During the exchange Ron Lindsay said that infighting has been occurring within the Secular Humanism faction of atheism for years.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U22xTou2WgcPaul Kurtz and Ron Lindsay Argument Audio Part Two]</ref>
Lindsay claimed, however, that Kurtz voluntarily resigned from the organization he founded and Kurtz was never censored. Furthermore, Lindsay said that Kurtz's idea of a "planetary federation" was impractical.<ref name="youtube.com"/> Kurtz countered that he was never allowed to publish why he resigned from the organization and that he was censored by the organization that he founded.<ref name="youtube.com"/>
Lindsay claimed, however, that Kurtz voluntarily resigned from the organization he founded and Kurtz was never censored. Furthermore, Lindsay said that Kurtz's idea of a "planetary federation" was impractical.<ref name="youtube.com"/> Kurtz countered that he was never allowed to publish why he resigned from the organization and that he was censored by the organization that he founded.<ref name="youtube.com"/>
== Criticism of the Center for Inquiry in relation to its financial management ==
== Criticism of the Center for Inquiry in relation to its financial management ==