Maybe that wasn't the best description, but I still dislike his ideologically narrow puritanism and I think he sets up a false choice this "accept my interpretation of these tenets or be branded evil and drummed out as a barrier to modern atheism".
To be clear, this isn't an attempt to castigate Atheism plus. I think that positively adhering and attempting to redefine a broader philosophy of atheism that deals with socially progressive causes and their relationship to the world-view is great. I loved McCreight's original article (http://freethoughtblogs.com/blaghag/2012/08/how-i-unwittingly-infiltrated-the-boys-club-why-its-time-for-a-new-wave-of-atheism/ ) and I am really heartened by this concerted effort to finally address and deal with rampant sexism instead rationalizing it away. I think interesting and important discussions should be had about what kind of community atheists have and what they should aspire to, as well as what kind of connected principles and issues make sense to defend.
I also appreciated supportive posts by Greta Christina and Rebecca Watson.
As far as answering to charges of divisiveness, I think Jason Thibeault says it well;
http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2012/09/01/atheism-plus-is-just-like-a-religion/
Richard Carrier, your hero on the other hand....
Maybe I'm being inconsiderate here, but his divisiveness intemperance really does piss me off. He casually castigates Marxism for FSM's sake.
To exemplify, here are some choice quotes from his call-to-arms and subsequent clarifying or edifying remarks that hi-light my gut negative reaction.
“anyone who makes a fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit it, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with.”
"“I do not think it is in our interests any longer to cooperate in silence with irrational people, when it is irrationality that is the fundamental root cause of all human evil. Anyone who disagrees with that is simply not someone we can work with.”
“So either you endorse the values and aims I have laid out, or you do not. If you do, just join the cause and stop fretting over being part of a culture whose values you embrace. But if you don’t endorse these values, then you are our enemy, in one fashion or another–because you will be endorsing, supporting (even if only through apathy and inaction), values that will ultimately destroy or undermine the human good. You are then in our way, the same way Neonazis and Marxists and anarchists and UFO cults and churches and right wing think tanks and so on, are in our way, and what we will denounce and disown. You can be among them, or among us. It’s that simple."
Not only is his ranting pretty intolerant (I mean, make one argument the 'community' deems illogical or insensitive and bam! you're a monster!) but I think it's pretty presumptuous and I don't think it represents what I understand Atheism plus to be about. I think that one can both support vigourous opposition to internal sexism, racism, homophobia etc. whilst simultaneously tolerating disagreement about how best to defend such issues. I think that's more true to what the rest of the crew at ftb were saying.
)
join
)
)
)
