Changes

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:

[[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 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>

*{{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>