> -If theists believe something that does not contradict secular
> morality, then anti-theists have no justification to say it's
> irrational and immoral.
> -This is because they "just believe" in something based on "irrational
> intuition", and if it does not contradict secular morality, then it is
> permissible.

> Let's apply this to the stance of the anti-theist... that religion, in
> and of itself, is immoral. Let's pretend that anti-theists have
> arrived at this conclusion via the same "irrational intuition" that
> theists are allegedly using for their conclusions. Of course this
> isn't actually true and anti-theists do a lot better with their
> arguments, but pretend that it is based on nothing aside from
> "irrational intuition". Now change "theists" in the above sentence to
> "anti-theists".

> -If anti-theists believe something that does not contradict secular
> morality, then anti-anti-theists have no justification to say it's
> irrational and immoral.
> -This is because they "just believe" in something based on "irrational
> intuition", and if it does not contradict secular morality, then it is
> permissible.

> Now, the question remains, does anti-theism contradict secular
> morality?

> Clearly anti-theism does not contradict secular morality more than
> theism (and of course, I believe it contradicts secular morality a
> great deal less, but that's besides the point to this discussion at
> hand). Therefore, based exclusively on this, there is no justification
> that someone should be "anti-anti-theist" for the reasons above. An
> anti-anti-theist can not consistently criticize anti-theists for the
> very thing the anti-theists are criticizing theists for.

> That makes anti-anti-theists hypocritical.