In response to:

The Atheist Response to Sandy Hook

Dyoung Wrote: Jan 16, 2013 11:31 AM
This is very demonizing and generalizing. I disagree completely that atheist have nothing consoling to offer at a time like this. Why is it necessary that god be mentioned for someone to offer comfort in a time like this. Aside from that, the second page of your article, where you write your own version of an atheists letter, is just plain idiotic.
Laura500 Wrote: Jan 16, 2013 1:06 PM
Dyoung - I don't believe the author is saying atheist have nothing to offer someone if they're hurting in some way such as being supportive or loving . His point is that atheist's belief that death is the 'end' - there is nothing more, nothing less - would not be as comforting as one who believes in the afterlife. Remember also, this article is in response TO an article by an atheist who makes the claim that atheist's perception of death can be comforting. Prager shows how it is not.
It is not 'necessary' that God be 'mentioned', its simply the argument that Christianity, by believing in life everlasting, is more comforting than atheism - it all ends here.
The Original King Wrote: Jan 16, 2013 11:46 AM
dyoung.............IMHO, you're 100% correct on all of your points.
Last week the New York Times published an opinion piece that offered atheism's response to the evil/tragedy in which 20 children and six adults were murdered at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut.

What prompted Susan Jacoby to write her piece was a colleague telling her that atheism "has nothing to offer when people are suffering."

She wrote the piece, "The Blessings of Atheism" ("It is Here and It is Now!" screams the subhead) to prove her colleague wrong by offering a consoling atheist alternative to religion's consoling belief in an afterlife. Atheists cannot believe that there is any...

Related Tags: Guns Atheists Sandy Hook