Ooh another fight. This one runs and runs – like any catchy black vs white meme. Of course militant secularism is a threat to religious faith – that’s its point by definition.
Sadly popular secularism has become a one-trick militant pony – whose sole purpose is to attack religion and/or faith in public. The professor for the public understanding of science would do well to focus on his job rather than shooting fish in a barrel – it sets such a poor example of what makes for quality science. It wouldn’t be an issue if science weren’t such a public shambles itself in these days of mass media, public funding and crass sound bites.
Roll on Alain deBotton. Or Zizek; taking sides in a battle to the death is never the best course.
[Post Note : From Zizek’s “Empty Wheelbarrow” –
“… clearly perceived by GK Chesterton who – in the very last pages of his Orthodoxy, the ultimate Catholic propaganda piece – exposed the deadlock of the pseudo-revolutionary critics of religion: they start by denouncing religion as the force of oppression that threatens human freedom; but in fighting religion, they are compelled to forsake freedom itself, thus sacrificing precisely what they wanted to defend: the atheist radical universe, deprived of religious reference, is the grey universe of egalitarian terror. Today the same holds for advocates of religion themselves: how many fanatical defenders of religion started by ferociously attacking secular culture and ended up forsaking religion itself, losing any meaningful religious experience?”
And the “militant” BHA gets one thing right at last;
Andrew Copson quoted in response to Baroness Warsi;
“In an increasingly non-religious and, at the same time, diverse society, we need policies that will emphasise what we have in common as citizens rather than what divides us.”
Let’s focus on the humanity, rather than picking fights. I’m a fully paid up atheist member of the BHA, I support what it’s for – but not for being what it is against.]