There are a lot of well-known atheist activists out there who I admire. And while I agree with most of them on many things, over time, I tend to discover positions for which I disagree with them on. Usually not major disagreements that would drive me away from supporting them, but little things that just demonstrate how diverse our “community” really is.
For instance, just to name a few, Dawkins was at least at one time a supporter of rebranding atheists as “Brights,” a term that few took very seriously. Sam Harris, as far as I know, continues to prefer we had no label at all and every time he brings up meditation and the “transcendent”, is usually met with groans from myself and many others. And of course whenever Christopher Hitchens talks politics, there tends to be moments where you wonder if he’s been replaced by his evil brother, Peter. Though to be fair, if anyone were ever to actually convince me that the Iraq War was a good thing, it’d probably be Christopher Hitchens. Though that’s still not very likely to ever happen. Then of course there are the libertarians like Michael Shermer and Penn Jillette, whose rationality seems to fly out the window whenever they talk about invisible hands of the free market and, in the latter’s case, cite The Cato Institute as if it were a legitimate source of information rather than just a morally bankrupt think tank for ideologues.
But then there’s Matt Dillahunty of The Atheist Experience. So far, after listening to countless YouTube clips of his show, I have yet to ever find any issue that we disagree on. I’m sure I’ll find something sooner or later, but Matt also never ceases to amaze me in how well he’s able to articulate arguments against religion. While I don’t know if he’s invented any arguments that can be said to be new to the debate, he’s certainly come up with particularly strong versions of arguments. For instance, now whenever I get into the horribly immoral system that forms the basis of all of Christianity, specifically god’s demand for blind obedience, I almost without fail borrow heavily from Matt’s “god as mob boss” argument nearly verbatim because I haven’t heard anyone articulate it as well as he does:
But the reason I’m writing this piece today is because I just saw another great video clip where Matt Dillahunty just knocks it out of the park and actually, arguably, leaves his religious critic speechless.
Skepacabra 
I feel the exact same way about Matt. I can’t find a place to disagree with him.
Atheist are the opposite side of the belief coin. For an atheist to exist they need “something” not to believe in.
For example the believer “believes” with no proof and the atheist “doesn’t believe” with no proof. Each seems to be illogical in my mind. We can’t resort to science because it breaks down with beginnings by getting into an endless regression and ultimately shifts to mysticism.
Open minded skepticism seems to be the only logical approach. Stop seeing things in a black and white fashion and see them probabilistic instead.
“Atheist are the opposite side of the belief coin.”
Nope, we just lack belief in any gods due to insufficient evidence.
“For an atheist to exist they need “something” not to believe in. ”
And for a non-believer in Santa Claus, there needs to be a Santa Claus for them not to believe in. Really? Are silly semantic games really all you have?
“For example the believer “believes” with no proof and the atheist “doesn’t believe” with no proof.”
Nope. You’re really should do some research first before spouting out nonsense. I lack belief in gods because no theist has presented any empirical evidence for any gods. If you could prove your god existed, I’d believe it existed. Why do you disbelief in Santa Claus?
“We can’t resort to science because it breaks down with beginnings by getting into an endless regression and ultimately shifts to mysticism.”
No it doesn’t. Again, you should do some actual research before spouting out nonsense. I suggest you start with Stephen Hawking’s “The Grand Design.”
“Open minded skepticism seems to be the only logical approach.”
Yes, it is. That’s why I’m an open-minded skeptic.
“Stop seeing things in a black and white fashion and see them probabilistic instead.”
Whether a god exists is a binary question. It either does or it does not, regardless of what anyone thinks or how much they want to pretend to be neutral on the matter. Reality is one-sided.
And because I hate when people try to dictate to me what my position is supposed to be and because I really don’t want to get into this any further, here is more on what my actual position is:
And here’s someone else articulating it well in a YouTube clip:
[…] Matt Dillahunty demolishes faith and religion « Skepacabra […]
What’s Taking place i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I’ve found It absolutely useful and it has aided me out loads. I’m hoping to
contribute & aid other customers like its helped me.
Good job.
( See right here )
It’s awesome to pay a visit this web page and reading the views of all mates on the
topic of this article, while I am also keen of getting know-how.
I constantly spent my half an hour to read this web site’s articles daily along
with a mug of coffee.
On the nose, it’s what should be expected for a Double IPA.
Metallic will get sizzling if you polish it with power tools so be careful.
Small, irregular shaped fragments of rocks, minerals and volcanic
glasses are what volcanic ash is made of.
There is definately a great deal to learn about this topic.
I love all of the points you’ve made.