Ah, a convert.
I was pleased to read this morning that kelly at the rational response squad has come to the conclusion that:
despite what I had come to believe, religion is not the biggest danger to society. Poor thinking is.
But, then, what is 'poor thinking'?
She tells us that we atheism is not bound to a single code of behavior and that it is compatible with people doing different things.
Then she complains that the problem with atheism is that its members do not march in lock-step behind a single drummer - that we are too busy fighting each other rather than uniting against a common enemy.
She writes, with a certainty that she is right and those who disagree are wrong, that the problem is with atheists who write with a certainty that they are write and those who disagree with them are wrong.
She calls the use of words like 'should' and 'ought' offensive in a post filled with protestations on what others 'should' (and 'should not') do.
I do agree that 'poor thinking' is a problem. I believe that the solution is to find instances of 'poor thinking', identify it by name, and demonstrate that it is poor thinking. It does not matter of the person one is writing about is atheist or theist. It only matters whether their reasoning is sound or unsound.