So I was wondering, why this response was so predominant with the arguments supporters make to critics. So I scanned the Atheist+ FAQ and found this.
4. You specifically want to exclude people, so you’re a hatemonger!
You can’t be inclusive to everyone. If you include misogynists, you exclude women – etc, etc. I choose to exclude the assholes. Read Greta’s post on the subject.
So reading though Greta’s blog post, she makes the claim that A+ isn’t exclusive or divisive because if you’re sexist women will leave, if you’re racist racial minorities will leave, bigoted against mental illness, transphobic..etc.
Well here’s the problem; It’s a load of shit just like everything else A+ supporters say about it. Now the FAQ is what people are using here and just using it as gospel. “PEOPLE WHO DON’T SUPPORT A+ WANT WOMEN TO BE CHAINED TO THE OVEN WITH JUST ENOUGH SLACK TO REACH THE BEDROOM! SO IF ANYONE OPPOSES IT, CALL THEM OUT FOR THE SEXIST THEY ARE!” Problem is, A+ isn’t just about feminism and even if it were it doesn’t mean if you don’t support the radical feminist platform (like so many FTB do) that doesn’t mean you’re sexist. It just means they do not agree. …and that’s OK.
The Gretta post is just as disingenuous because racism, sexism, transphobia, xenophobia, …etc are not the only stances of A+. A+ is also for “social justice” which is based on economic egalitarianism and wealth redistribution which is the real issue here. Now most of the people I have read comments from or made videos against A+, except for CobraJones and myself, have been on the left of embraced the concepts of social justice. Now here’s the important part Gretta and the FTB Thought Police are purposely leaving out; they oppose it being linked to atheism because it’s unrelated and excludes conservatives, moderates and libertarians who are necessary to form coalitions.
Another lie of A+ is that they aren’t purging people, but rather just ignoring them until they go away until everyone can hold hands and sing Kumbayah. This is a lie. Richard Carrier says explicitly that he wants ostracize them out of The Atheist Community and then compares them to Nazis and the KKK. Later he tried to backtrack by saying:
For example, PZ Myers takes a more hardline stance against Libertarians and equates Atheism+ with explicitly progressive politics, but though I agree he is probably right (IMO, Libertarianism, on any full and proper analysis, doesn’t hold up as sound, and won’t work to solve most of the actual problems we face), I do not agree that it is any defining characteristic of Atheism+ (which is why, when I wrote an elaborate post about what Atheism+ was, this criterion was nowhere to be seen).
I know many Libertarians who are only Libertarians as an excuse to rationalize the fact that they are assholes and don’t give a shit about other people. But I also know many Libertarians who actually do care about social justice issues, and admit problems exist in that domain, and actually have passionate ideas about how to solve them. They might be wrong (sometimes they are even right), but the defining characteristic here is that they care and acknowledge that we should care, about solving those problems. And they will engage in reasonable and honest debate about how to solve them, without hypocrisy. They just have different ideas about what solutions will work.
Thus, those Libertarians are on board with the core values of Atheism+. They are with us–even though they disagree with PZ and I (often radically) on many matters of how to go about solving the problems of injustice and unfairness in society. So this is the defining feature: Do you give a shit about other people, or not? Do you believe something should be done about injustice and unfairness in society (and in talking reasonably about what should be done), or not? If not, then you are an asshole. And you are definitely thumbing-down Atheism+. We are done with you. You are not one of us. You can go start your own clubs and have your own conferences.
So not only is he admitting that A+ is about progressive politics outright and PZ thinks so, he agrees he’s probably right. Secondly; he’s right that libertarians do care about “social justice” because they explicitly do not support economic egalitarianism or wealth redistribution. That’s kind of the point of being a libertarian. So if you want to find this magical unicorn that is an egalitarian libertarian, by my guest. I do think you’ll have a better time finding the unicorn first. Now before I receive a torrent of left-libertarians trying to show me I’m wrong, save it. Carrier is talking about right libertarians and that’s what I’m responding to. Even then he’s leaving out moderates and conservatives which are important. Thought you may not agree with all of them; they are necessary to form collections to fight against things atheists do care about like getting ‘God’ off money and the pledge.
So please, before you think the reasons why I don’t support A+ is because I won’t buy a girl a watch for there’s a clock on every oven; please take a step back and pull your emotions out of it. I’m not a misogynist. I am not a rapist. I am not a racist. I’m not xenophobic. I am not transphobic. I am not homophobic. I don’t care what your political views are. I don’t care about any of that stuff in my opposition. The problem I have is these issues, mostly political, are being linked to Atheism itself. The point is to expand the tent, not shrink it.