I have some of my most creative thinking moments in the shower. Unfortunately, by the time I get out, dried off and dressed, most of what I had thought of is only a memory, somewhat disorganized and fuzzy at best. I’ve often wondered if others experience this as I do. Anyway, the following is an attempt at reconstructing some thoughts about Atheism that occurred to me during this morning’s shower.

A controversy is brewing over the way Atheists present their case for Atheism by criticizing religious people. It has been said that, in their criticism, Atheists showgreat disrespect for theists. Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris in particular have been accused of being rude and disrespectful in their relentless attacks on belief. These two have even been referred to as militant or Fundamentalist Atheists.

Let me explain why I don’t view either Dawkins or Harris as Fundamentalist Atheists. The members of any group of people can be put on a continuum according to their level of commitment, belief, participation, activism and so on. As an Atheist, I can say to myself, "Yes, I am an Atheist", and go about my business keeping my Atheism to myself. On the other hand, I can say to the world, "Yes, I’m an Atheist and I don’t like the way belief in a deity influences the society that I live in. I’d like to work towards changing that". These two positions are roughly opposite ends of a continuum which can be labelled passive and active. Obviously, Dawkins and Harris operate at the active end of this continuum. They both strongly feel the need to actively promote and increase awareness of the negative influences of irrational belief on the world. They see, understand and have the ability to communicate how the negative influence of belief effects the structure of society. They see the future dangers in allowing control of society to fall into the hands of the religious Fundamentalists. They are the four-star generals in the crusade against the "new ignorance" and the vanguard of the Atheist movement which promotes rationality and truth. It is unfortunate that, when presented with rationality and truth, some will be offended, some will be hurt and some will cling tighter to their irrational beliefs. Should we not present rational thought and truth in order to spare the feelings of those whose minds are shuttered from anything that doesn’t fit within the confines of their belief system? I don’t think so. The Atheist movement needs controversial public figures like Dawkins and Harris to rationally counter the nonsense spewed by the Dobsons, Falwells and Robertsons of the religious right. If someone is insulted in the process, so be it. Some people need to be shaken awake.

One more thing. The basic premise of Atheism is non-belief in a deity. An Atheist cannot half believe or sort of not believe in God. It’s either all or nothing. You’re either an Atheist or you’re not (never mind the obvious George Bush quote that could be inserted here). And, if you are, the fact that you are is going to be an affront to many who believe in God. Thus, the line in the sand is drawn just by you being who you are. So, yes Dawkins and Harris may be perceived as hardliners, but as the most prominent defenders of non-belief, they stand unwavering at the front on the Atheist side of the line and willingly take one for the team.