Is modern atheism just dressed up bigotry? Yes.

I think my opponent needs to realize that a response is already in the comments section - it got cut off from a cut and paste while dodging potential UXO explosions. So, brief summation to lead up the point: A. Dawkins and Hitchens are bigots (Dawkins is at the very center of the genesis of agnostic atheism's sillier claims). B. There are atheist websites that educate atheists about the results of 'New Atheism', and these facilitate both the education of bigotry and serve as the 'source' so often provided by atheists on these forums to justify their positions. C. The results of bigotry are easily seen in this forum. For the record, Albino appears to be conceding each and every one of those points. And only then do I turn to Albino's contention: Even Albino here displays the effects of organized bigotry. You see, he uses the concept of agnostic atheism in justifying his belief. http://www.atheists.org...? As you read through that explanation, do not be at all surprised by the confusion it generates. It begins with, "Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." --- as if this is a point of legitimate contention, and ends after meandering all over the place with, "The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings." Which appears to be the exact same thing does it not? The entire thing hangs on the pretense that there is no God matters whether you state I believe that or simply disbelieve there is no God. Well, fortunately, we have little standards of logic and reasoning with to test this claim with. In order for a position of have any kind of validation, it must be a claim that is supportable. Just because you use the word "dis" in front of belief doesn"t mean you haven"t made up your mind, particularly in light of the way that atheists act. Atheists do not believe there is a God " period. Certainly, just like religious people, there can be good and bad reasoning in support of that claim " but the idea that no claim is being made and thus needs to support whatsoever fundamentally violates the tenets of logic. Indeed, the entire premise exists to provide excuse to atheists for one simple thing: their burden of support for their position. Instead of having to lay down their line of reasoning, they are handed an excuse " a reason to avoid having to lay out the support for their claims. Do you think groups like the KKK are envious that all they had to do to avoid the scruples of their position was to claim they merely "dis"believed that black men were their equals and it would fine? What my esteemed challenger fails to realize is that even he has been swept up in the maelstrom of New Atheism"s bigotry, that he himself has bought into many of the premises of New Atheism, and has bough the excuse to avoid really examining the claims hook, line, and sinker. It really doesn"t matter where an atheist sits in this mess. If we start from the intellectual roots, we can follow it down through the various communities of atheists all the way to the individuals. And we don"t need particularly egregious examples to find its effects. There is a perniciousness of modern atheism that has taken even the pretense of reasonable disagreement and changed it into what appears to be open disrespect of religious people. The pretense that this derision is born of a rational process is simple false. As my opponent picked the definition: "One who regards or treats [all] the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance" Its pretty clear that we all poison everything, that we should all be classified as mental health cases, or that we should ALL accept "disbelief" as an excuse to abandon logic " so we can get back to claiming all religious people are irrational, and sociopathic is something very clearly something meant to knock down people in hatred and intolerance " simply because they hold a different position about God than you do (which oddly, you can"t even clearly state what is obvious, that you do not believe in God.) It is the specific claim that Albino makes here that is preventing him questioning his own actions and intense dislike of religion - that he cannot explain, because he does not have to. As Albino attempts to prove that basis of this contention with sources, you will quickly see the veracity of claim B.