How the atheists fell for fundamentalism

[Mark1031]

I don't consider it very helpful, or even very honest, to pretend that these debates exist in isolation from the secularisation debate, as you seem to be doing. Yes, you can argue in an abstract, academic fashion about whether or not a god or gods exists. But that is not what people are actually doing

Well if I understand what the secularization debate is then I think this whole thread creates a catch-22. As I understand it, the secularization debate is about the role of religion in public life. The OP complains that atheists or any others who argue for secularization do so on the grounds of fundamentalists, yet they are the only ones who are opposed to secularization, as far as I can tell, wanting to bring these beliefs into public education, science and politics. There is no secularization debate to be had with the more mainstream religious or vague spiritualists. My guess is that the moderates are stung and a bit offended by the simple critique of fundamentalist beliefs fearing that it indirectly taints their own more sophisticated beliefs and therefore want to discredit both sides as unreasonable, leaving them as the sober rational middle. I’m sorry but I don’t accept this sophistry. As I said before if you don’t want to look absurd don’t make absurd arguments and better yet join in the arguments against said absurdity. A critique of the grounds of debate advances nothing, this is what I consider dishonest.