My biggest problems with the hard-core new atheists are:
1) It becomes like a religion itself and ends up with the same intolerance that they accuse others of.
2) It ends up as a rationale for neo con foreign policy. The Euston manifesto group justified bombing Iraq based on secular liberal values. Chris Hitchens was connected with them. Sam Harris said Ben Carson had the best foreign policies of any US candidate in the last election.
P. S. Just as the west of colonial times used the idea of 'civilising' the less fortunate, New atheism has become the new white man's burden and unfortunately a lot of liberals take it seriously.
Maybe the OP doesn't take it quite that far tbf, though I've seen this happen with others.
@plinkplonk Comparing the political divides and scandals in places like the USA, Canada, the EU, Brazil, and Japan to the oppression in Saudi Arabia and Iran is like comparing a grain of sand to the vastness of the Sahara. And yeah, I agree that we should adress those countries' respective problems, but why does everyone seem to be under the delusion that we can't do both?
Also, human rights is everyone's business. 'Nuff said.
@Burnley123 I had honestly never known about the Euston policy, and I thank you for bringing it to my attention. I was never sure about Hitchens, and that's a pretty huge mark on his honor. I should point out, though, that this is more the exception than the rule, as irreligious folks were [i]more likely[/i] to oppose the invasion than the general population, in the USA, that is. But having read about the Euston Manifesto, there's no denying that it's a very distinct and uniquely pro-liberal-democracy form of imperialism that has to be addressed as such.