Atheists that think Dawkins is a bit of an ar$ehole....

tl:dr
But yes. I think he's an a s s hole

Sorry About My Bad English

"Am I the only one?"
No, very many have said similar things, for whatever reason.

"but instead of leaving it there"
Why would you ever want to leave it there? Perhaps in a world where religious belief was benign, you could afford such laziness, but I think it's dangerously negligent to simply allow all of the horrors enabled and encouraged by religious fervor to continue. As presumably compassionate people, we NEED to speak out against these atrocities, and we NEED to be the vocal counterweights to the psychotically focused people who would have their religion permanently married to our governments, and who would rather YOUR children remain as ignorant and confused as their children when it comes to certain basic facts of reality.

"He claims to be an enlightened, intelligent man of science"
He's only claimed to be a man of science, as far as I'm aware.

"who have done nothing but simply chosen to believe a nice story instead of the cold hard facts."
Then you, too, believe a nice story. If only religion were that innocuous...

"A lot of people simply don't have the capability"
Now who's insulting the religious? If anything, Dawkins is trying to shake people he sees as intellectual equals, who are entirely capable of coming to grips with simple facts of nature, from their slumber and fog of indoctrinated delusions. Not an easy feat by any measure, but a respectful one, and an important one.

"Extremists and fundamentalists are indeed very dangerous people"
Yes, they are, and you shouldn't forget that.

"Because he launches personal attacks"
Would you care to present some examples?

"Surely it's a person's right to believe whatever they want"
Simple belief is one thing. BEHAVIOR caused by belief is another. You are stuck on the barbs of the arguments. Dawkins and Friends are not railing against religion JUST BECAUSE. It takes a determined kind of ignorance to deny that religious dogma is, has been, and will continue to be responsible for untold human suffering (to say nothing of animals). You should not pardon religion, on the whole, for its crimes simply because the religious people you happen to know are mostly watered-down, civilized versions of their dangerous, "believe or die" brethren elsewhere in time and space. They come from the same stew, and the stew is poisonous. I think that much should be obvious by now.

"I am condemned by science to an eternity of oblivion that I can't even comprehend."
Poor you. God damn science to Hell for doing that to you.

"but they're also happier and more content"
So, in your opinion, it's better to live with a comforting delusion than to come to terms with truth. That makes one of us. And I have to say, your indictment of science in your discontent says more about YOUR inability to adapt than it does to the facts presented by scientists.

"What kind of person would want to try and convince someone not to be happy?"
Yeah, that's not a straw man...Or is it more likely that he wants to live in a better world, and exposing the crimes and absurdities of religion for what they are is an important step in that process? He would be more than willing to allow people their own fantasies if it were not for the ever-present threats of the religious right encroaching into our lives (this Texas textbook nonsense, to name a very recent example), suicidally fervid extremists (look up "suicide bomber" on a news website...every. single. day.), horrific human rights abuses (if you're genuinely unaware of the penal codes in the Islamic theocracies, then I'll just ask you to google it, because the well is too deep)...on and on. I for one have a difficult time in just letting these nightmares take place, and I wouldn't be able to look at myself in the mirror if I condoned this under the umbrella of relativism. No, these are BAD things. The world is MUCH bigger than your pleasant little town, with nice people and unassuming little clergymen. You're privileged to get to throw stones at people fighting for a noble cause, first, for your very SECULAR right to speak freely, but also for the continued existence of people such as Dawkins who are similarly allowed to speak out against prevailing religious authorities. In another time, this may not be the case. Let's hope that that time is only in our past, and NOT in our future.

[deleted]

Clearly he's reached the end of his rope, the end of his tolerance. He's finished with the "Oh well, they aren't hurting me so I won't bother them" live & let live attitude. He sees that religion *is* hurtful and damaging, and he's had enough. So he's going on the offensive. Therefore, a lot of people, even people who agree with him (e.g. you) are going to be offended by him and call him an "ar$ehole". There's no avoiding that. C'est la vie.

I too think he's an ar$ehole.

Partially for his provocative character, but more for how he's a figurehead for a social atheist movement of his own creation.

Sayonara, not to be confused with cyanide, which is, of course, goodbye in any language.

I don't think he's an a-hole in the slightest bit. To the contrary, I imagine him to be a very mild-mannered and polite person.

Try to use your imagination a bit. How can you avoid being outspoken when no one you're debating actually listens to you? How many people has Dawkins debated who renounced their religion in spite of all the scientific evidence he presented to the contrary? Religious people don't yield an inch to his arguments in spite of the fact that he's the one holding real, measurable, tangible evidence that defies their reasoning.

I'd go absolutely insane if put in the same situation. If you guys think that makes him an a-hole, you haven't seen anything yet.

[deleted]

[deleted]