I found this review of it. What does everyone think? Maybe we should go set this guy straight?

http://arizonaatheist.blogspot.com/2009/10/answering-new-atheism-by-scott-hahn.html

As I see it, there are very many belief systems all over this planet, and if you want FREEDOM and LIBERTY for yourself, then you also should permit others to have a different belief system than yours. Make sure that ALL those who are members of YOUR belief system OBEY all of its rules and regulations at all times!
..... Is somebody crooked? You want to straighten out all the crooks?

In the hope that maybe you had learned some civility and humility, I cut and pasted your link and gave you twenty seconds of my time.

After having read your introduction, I see that's more than you deserved.

Fair use quote:

Honestly, to be blunt, this book was horrendous. No, it really sucked. Their logic was horrible, their supposed facts were even worse, and this is probably the first book I've read arguing against the New Atheists that throughout the entire book, I can honestly say that only about two things I agreed with in the entire book [sic]. Usually most apologists aren't this disconnected from reality, but the authors did make a few interesting arguments - ones that I hadn't come across before, though that didn't make them any better. They were still lame; just interesting.

To save on time and space I cited several blog posts I have previously written on a variety of subjects, which I cited for my references (which can be found at the end of this refutation). I've written so much about several of these topics in the past I didn't feel the need to rewrite all of that here.

So you're NOT even going to review it? You're giving us the oh so incredibly insightful "It stinks!" for an introduction and all you're promising is the militant atheist version of a cheasy clip-show?

Why would I bother reading this? And this is before we're getting into arguments about theism and atheism and whatever. As a reader of stuff on the Internet, why would I bother?

Keltoi

I have never understood why this argument
stirs up so much emotion. Why does it
bother a Theist that some don't believe?
Why does it bother an Atheist that some
believe?

In both cases most of it seems like a few
extremists on both sides are trying to
force their view on the other and have
turned it into a win or lose personal
grudge match.

Personally I am not interested in the
argument. I don't care why a person
believes or does not believe. It is just not
an important question in my life. Who cares?
Who wastes times tuning into to these
arguments. They are not winnable on either
side and most people just don't give a damn
in the first place.

I have a very good friend in England who is
an atheists and he sends me articles on the
latest religious silliness. And he is right
some people do carry religion to a silly
extreme. Of course in reverse I can show
you atheists who are just as bad in their
yelling and screaming.

But as I said this argument will never be won
by anyone because everyone will continue to
believe what ever they want to and will never
change. People only change their view when
they want to and not one second before.

Blessed Be,

Christopher



Wisdom is what is left after you have done all the dumb stuff.

God if you're a theist, the laws of science if you're an atheist, or maybe you've made your peace with not knowing as an agnostic. These are foundation beliefs. They answer questions most human beings NEED answered as part of our natural curiosity. And I think that once people make this choice, there's a certain amount of philosophical inertia that sets in. Hence all the vitriol. My 2 cents.