Flaws also? Witch hunts, crusades, terrorism, the inquisition? It's all good, but sorry about the flaws. Such criticisms aren't amoral or immoral, they are moral. Shouldn't we question an institution that hides its flaws behind the good it does? Isn't this similar to a father that hugs you and says sorry after beating you? Should we settle for an institution capable of creating bigotry such as WBC and stupidity such as Creationism? Perhaps we should, if we don't have anything to replace it with for the masses that need belief.What ultimately amounts to Amorality is to dedicate yourself to being an active critic of an institution that although not perfect has at the very least committed itself to something that has contributed to the greater good - flaws and all.
There are many brands of atheism. Which brand were you referring to again? Instead of comparing the worst brand of atheism(whatever it is that has your panties in a bunch) with the worst brand of theism(ISIS/Al Quaeda/WBC), why not compare the best brands of each? Wouldn't that be more productive?As Ive said before, this brand of atheism is ultimately self defeating.
How about comparing Secular Buddhism to (what brand of theism do you think is the best?)