### The Paradox of Free Speech: Richard Dawkins and the New Atheism

In recent years, the landscape of atheism has undergone significant changes, particularly with the decline of the so-called “New Atheism” movement, which was prominently led by figures like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris. While these intellectuals once dominated public discourse on religion, their influence has waned, raising questions about the implications of their positions and the potential threats they face for their outspoken views.

Richard Dawkins, a biologist and author of “The God Delusion,” has long been a vocal critic of religion, particularly Christianity. His arguments often center around the idea that religious beliefs are not only unfounded but also detrimental to society. However, in a recent interview with Piers Morgan, Dawkins exhibited a noticeable hesitance when discussing sensitive topics related to Islam, particularly in the context of the controversial figure Shamima Begum, an ISIS bride. This moment highlighted a growing concern among public intellectuals: the fear of backlash for criticizing certain religions, especially Islam.

Dawkins’s reluctance to engage in a discussion about Begum’s potential return to the UK raises important questions about the state of free speech in contemporary society. While he has been unreserved in his critiques of Christianity, his body language and verbal hesitance when discussing Islam suggest a fear of repercussions. This is particularly poignant given the violent history of threats against those who criticize Islam, most notably the case of Salman Rushdie, whose novel “The Satanic Verses” led to a fatwa against him in 1989.

The chilling effect of such threats cannot be understated. Dawkins’s admission that he would prefer not to discuss certain topics reveals a troubling paradox: the very freedoms that allow him to critique Christianity are also the same freedoms that may be curtailed by fear of violent retribution for criticizing Islam. This duality raises questions about the integrity of free speech and the extent to which it is truly free when certain subjects become taboo.

The decline of the New Atheism movement can be attributed to various factors, including a growing awareness of the complexities of religious belief and the recognition that not all religious individuals or communities are harmful. However, it also reflects a societal shift towards a more cautious approach to discussing religion, particularly in the context of Islam. The fear of being labeled as Islamophobic or facing violent backlash has led many to self-censor, which ultimately undermines the principles of open dialogue and debate.

Dawkins’s situation is emblematic of a broader trend in which public figures are increasingly wary of discussing Islam. This is not to say that criticism of Islam should be silenced; rather, it highlights the need for a more nuanced conversation about religion that allows for critique without fear of violence. The challenge lies in fostering an environment where individuals can express their views freely, regardless of the religion in question.

Moreover, the implications of this self-censorship extend beyond individual thinkers like Dawkins. It affects the broader discourse on religion and secularism, as the fear of backlash can stifle important conversations about the role of religion in society. If prominent figures in the atheist movement are hesitant to engage with certain topics, it sets a precedent for others to follow suit, leading to a culture of silence around critical issues.

In conclusion, the evolution of the New Atheism movement and the current state of free speech highlight a complex interplay between belief, criticism, and fear. Richard Dawkins’s reluctance to discuss sensitive topics related to Islam underscores the challenges faced by those who dare to critique religion in an increasingly polarized world. As society grapples with these issues, it is essential to advocate for a culture of open dialogue that encourages critical examination of all beliefs, while also recognizing the potential consequences of such discussions. Only then can we hope to achieve a truly free and open society where ideas can be exchanged without fear of retribution.

Piers Morgan demands apology from The Talk for ‘disgraceful slurs’ against him

Morgan claimed his friend Sharon Osbourne was “shamed & bullied” for defending him on The Talk.

Photo: David M. Benett/Dave Benett/Getty Images

Media personality Piers Morgan continues his antagonistic streak in the aftermath of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry’s interview with Oprah Winfrey.

Morgan tweeted on Friday demanding an apology from the hosts of CBS’ The Talk for “their disgraceful slurs” against him. He wrote this in response to an apology posted by Sharon Osbourne, who co-hosts the show and whom Morgan says was “shamed” and “bullied.”

“Sharon’s been shamed & bullied into apologising for defending me against colleagues accusing me of racism because I don’t believe Meghan Markle’s bullsh*t,” Morgan tweeted. “This is where we’ve reached. I demand an apology from those @TheTalkCBSbullies for their disgraceful slurs against ME.”

Osbourne got heat from a segment that aired on Wednesday’s The Talk in which the hosts discussed the situation with Morgan. Earlier, Morgan, a Good Morning Britain presenter, voiced his disbelief of Meghan’s claims in the Winfrey CBS interview around her feelings of suicidal thoughts. He later stormed off the show’s set when his colleague, Alex Beresford, confronted him about his long dislike of the Duchess, his “personal relationship” with her, and how he continues “to trash her.” Morgan quit his post at ITV shortly after.

“I feel like I’m about to be put in the electric chair because I have a friend who many people think is racist, so that makes me a racist,” Osbourne said of Morgan. (Both previously served as judges on America’s Got Talent.) Both Osbourne and co-host Sheryl Underwood broke out in tears over the discussion, in which Osbourne became combative. “I will ask you again Sheryl… and don’t try and cry because if anyone should be crying, it should be me,” she said. “This is the situation, you tell me where you have heard him say racist things. Educate me.”

“It is not the exact words of racism, it’s the implication and the reaction to it,” Underwood said of Morgan. “To not want to address that because she is a Black woman and to try to dismiss it or to make it seem less than what it is, that’s what makes it racist.”

Osbourne later issued an apology to her followers on social media.

“After some reflection, after sitting with your comments & sitting with my heart I would like to address the discussion on The Talk this past Wednesday,” she wrote, in part. “I have always been embraced with so much love & support from the Black community & I have deep respect & love for the Black community. To anyone of colour that I offended and/or to anyone that feels confused or let down by what I said, I am truly sorry. I panicked, felt blindsided, got defensive & allowed my fear & horror of being accused of being racist take over. There are very few things that hurt my heart more than racism so to feel associated with that spun me fast! I am not perfect, I am still learning like the rest of us & will continue to learn, listen and do better.”