Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Any good atheist would tear him apart on the idea of knowing when to wear the "right lenses". They would be blind to their own hubris and totally incapable of seeing the point, but they would still wreck him in a straight up debate.
Generalization, and some honestly insulting assumptions about an entire group of people. I think Maher makes the assumption that too many others do about atheism: that being one automatically makes you one of the sterotypical "angry" atheists that command so much attention but actually make up the minority of the group. Just like extremist evangelicals grab Christian headlines but don't represent the majority.
I'm also routinely surprised by the number of people who think atheism means "I know there isn't a God" rather than "I believe there is no God." Few, if any, atheists are the former. It's a position of faith and belief, not of certainty.
And while I can't speak for an entire group of people, all the atheists I know would be in rough agreement with Maher. They, and I, just don't see the need to drop the label, because it doesn't have to automatically mean the dogmatic extremism that Maher and other seem to think it does.
I've seen atheists drop the label for similar reasons though. Some simply don't want to fight the stereotype, so they become agnostic, or non-theist, or some similarly less controversial word.
I'm also not sure how a "good atheist" would wreck Maher in a debate. They'd be essentially in agreement, so there wouldn't be much to argue over.