Opinion of Freedom from Religion Foundation?

[James Monroe]

The FFRF was co-founded by Anne Nicol Gaylor and her daughter, Annie Laurie Gaylor, in 1976 and was incorporated nationally on April 15, 1978. The organization was supported by over 19,000 members in 2012 and operated from an 1855-era building in Madison, Wisconsin, that once served as a church rectory.

In March 2011, FFRF, along with the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, began The Clergy Project, a confidential on-line community that supports clergy as they leave their faith. In 2012, it gave its first Freedom From Religion Foundation and Clergy Project "Hardship Grant" to Jerry DeWitt, a former pastor who left the ministry to join the atheist movement.

FFRF provides financial support to the Secular Student Alliance, an organization that has affiliate groups for nonreligious students on college campuses.

In 2015, FFRF announced Nonbelief Relief, a related organization that obtained and later gave up its federal tax-exempt status. Nonbelief Relief was unsuccessful in a lawsuit against the IRS because it lacked standing to challenge the Form 990 exemption that applies to churches. Nonbelief Relief is a humanitarian agency for atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, and their supporters. Nonbelief Relief was created by the executive board of FFRF to remediate conditions of human suffering and injustice on a global scale, whether the result of natural disasters, human actions or adherence to religious dogma.

This seem like a wonderful group of people who have been battling against the Trump right in our urgent times. Dan Barker has been putting the fight against the American Taliban in their adherence to surpassing the rights of women and science in America.  Look at the charity rating and you know how a secular organization is doing the justice for goodness in the world than the churches have done in a lifetime.

A huge freedom group.

[James Monroe]

I have no problem with atheism although I do not consider myself as such. People who are actively anti-religion are pretty annoying though. Even Richard Dawkins who is a quite intelligent and interesting thinker can get pretty lazy and cringe when it comes to critiquing religion.

Not to mention he has become a grumpy reactionary these days with a unhealthy obsession with Muslims migrants and Trans people

I would not call Dawkins reactionary, the man is just not a fan of the crazed SJW movement. It's a thing with many rational people right now, where they're seeing the religious cult being replaced with the secular cult of cancel culture effecting even sensible liberals. If you think this is being made up read Jeremy Coyne blog post which address the strangle hold the Regressive Left has done to diminish any dissenting viewpoint that is not popular with the woke crowd.

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/02/11/cancel-culture-alive-and-well/
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2020/12/02/is-cancel-culture-coming-for-you/

[James Monroe]

I have no problem with atheism although I do not consider myself as such. People who are actively anti-religion are pretty annoying though. Even Richard Dawkins who is a quite intelligent and interesting thinker can get pretty lazy and cringe when it comes to critiquing religion.

Not to mention he has become a grumpy reactionary these days with a unhealthy obsession with Muslims migrants and Trans people

I would not call Dawkins reactionary, the man is just not a fan of the crazed SJW movement. It's a thing with many rational people right now, where they're seeing the religious cult being replaced with the secular cult of cancel culture effecting even sensible liberals. If you think this is being made up read Jeremy Coyne blog post which address the strangle hold the Regressive Left has done to diminish any dissenting viewpoint that is not popular with the woke crowd.

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/02/11/cancel-culture-alive-and-well/
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2020/12/02/is-cancel-culture-coming-for-you/

You mean the “sensible liberal” position of “Muslims should be banned from entering Europe because the concept of democracy is impossible to comprehend and thus they are a fundamental threat to our way of life”?

Not to take away the Muslims away from their religion, what I feel Dawkins is doing justifiable is not backing down on the backward nature of the Islam religion, because liberals/leftists should ought to be more aggressive about the problematic tenants than acting it's just hick Christians who have it wrong. Women and gay people are far more oppressed in the Islamic faith that it would make Pat Robinson seem like a bleeding heart liberal. The way of Islam is different from the moderate West,  which one can see in how technological advance our nations are compared to the Middle East, which most of the region is straight out of the 1930s.  What we need to see is not banned the religion outright or make it inaccessible for Muslims of entering the country, but we do need a mandate on the extremist who are a national threat to the well-being of all citizens of the world. Our government should let the sensible Muslims into the nation if they want to escape. What we don't need are a group of radicals who are threatening the humanist way of living.

[James Monroe]

I have no problem with atheism although I do not consider myself as such. People who are actively anti-religion are pretty annoying though. Even Richard Dawkins who is a quite intelligent and interesting thinker can get pretty lazy and cringe when it comes to critiquing religion.

Not to mention he has become a grumpy reactionary these days with a unhealthy obsession with Muslims migrants and Trans people

I would not call Dawkins reactionary, the man is just not a fan of the crazed SJW movement. It's a thing with many rational people right now, where they're seeing the religious cult being replaced with the secular cult of cancel culture effecting even sensible liberals. If you think this is being made up read Jeremy Coyne blog post which address the strangle hold the Regressive Left has done to diminish any dissenting viewpoint that is not popular with the woke crowd.

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/02/11/cancel-culture-alive-and-well/
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2020/12/02/is-cancel-culture-coming-for-you/

You mean the “sensible liberal” position of “Muslims should be banned from entering Europe because the concept of democracy is impossible to comprehend and thus they are a fundamental threat to our way of life”?

Not to take away the Muslims away from their religion, what I feel Dawkins is doing justifiable is not backing down on the backward nature of the Islam religion, because liberals/leftists should ought to be more aggressive about the problematic tenants than acting it's just hick Christians who have it wrong. Women and gay people are far more oppressed in the Islamic faith that it would make Pat Robinson seem like a bleeding heart liberal. The way of Islam is different from the moderate West,  which one can see in how technological advance our nations are compared to the Middle East, which most of the region is straight out of the 1930s.  What we need to see is not banned the religion outright or make it inaccessible for Muslims of entering the country, but we do need a mandate on the extremist who are a national threat to the well-being of all citizens of the world. Our government should let the sensible Muslims into the nation if they want to escape. What we don't need are a group of radicals who are threatening the humanist way of living.

As I have said here before, there is no real fundamental difference between Muslim-bashing over "islamogauchisme" fearmongering and this warmed-over Pim Fortuyn-type Muslim-bashing. Both are expressions of a sort of bigotry that people like you vociferously deny in your aim to appear Supremely Rational (when we are not fundamentally rational beings) but cannot escape. You surely must also recognize how much of the "backwards" nature of the Islamic world that you deplore, insofar as it actually exists outside of the mind of those with agendas to push, is the result of a long tradition of the Enlightened Rational Secular Western Powers meddling there.

Anyway, the Freedom from Religion Foundation represents exactly the sort of smug sophistry that we should've left in the Bush era. The evangelical right wing in this country is not an singular institution that can be neutralized through litigious assholery and one-liners. Atheists, contrary to their belief, are not a virulently oppressed people in this part of the world and should not claim the victim mentality, especially compared to the religious minorities that you were justifying bigotry against above.

And yeah, as a trans person that sours my opinion on Dawkins and much of his cohort as well.

Our species are named Homo Sapiens for the element you pointed out against, which is Man is not rational but the name implied "Smart Man." Beyond the point, my take on the Islamic religion is that many of the forfeiters have pushed an aggressive reactionary agenda that would make the Evangelical Wingnut right blush. The education in those nations have been worse than the West through the control of theocracy. Liberals have been battling for the "Islam as religion of peace" for so long that it needs combating from the rational community, which I am glad Dawkins takes it on equally as Christianity. It's all superstitious junk anyway, all just a contest of my invisible man in the sky is better than your invisible man in the sky. We need more Dawkins and Sam Harris engaging the public on tell the truth about a religion that has gripped the Middle East for centuries but has been defended by the liberals and left-wing.

You can act the Freedom from Religion Foundation has been an non-entity in the years after the Bush administration, it's impact couldn't be more justifiable. Ron Reagan provocative ad gives a good dose of satirical humor that launches agains the absurdity of Hell. Fighting against the Religious Right is a institution that is still needed when half of the country is gullible to superficial supernatural elements ranging from the all-mighty religion to telepathy.

Dawkins comment was not the best use of words, to address it lightly. What I wouldn't put up is he and many rational people would treat you more fairly than just about any major religion in the world.