All new ideas were, in a way, won over hurt feelings, shattered worldviews – all new ideas generated resistance and opposition.
It seems that the nature of the rejection of atheism has changed, but there still is, so it seems, a widespread condemnation of it.
The postmodern relativistic – or nihilistic – position makes Western societies easy prey for the ideology of radical Islamism.
The critic must be able to place himself or herself over against the religious tradition. That presupposes what may be called moral autonomy.
What should the reaction of open or liberal societies be to the assault we experience on the principles on which they are based?
The fact that Abraham could have made a different choice from the one he actually made does not exculpate the tradition itself.
What should be the state and society’s reaction to these assaults on the principle of freedom of speech by religiously motivated zealots?
Countless books now considered indispensable works of the Western tradition were for a long time suppressed by the Catholic Church.
Is it impossible to say anything about the likelihood of the existence of a personal, eternal, omnipotent, and perfectly good being?
We clearly need a special word for the denial of the orthodox idea of the divine. ‘Atheism’ seems not a bad choice for this word.