[downquark1]

I agree that the spotlight on religion has been hijacked by the extremists they is precisely what has caused the rise in the "new atheism". The group feels physically threatened by violent extremists and politically threatened by these new powerful political organisations. While all this has been happening the moderates are running out of reasons to defend the extremists while at the same time being reminded of some of the more goofy things they are suppose to believe. So they end up just saying "well that's not my religion", which is all well and good but they rarely go on to define exactly what is it. The result is that moderate churches are full of people with differing views that never figure out exact what the others believe. Which again is all well and good until a dividing issue arises and they have no unified political group. (I must point out, I hate unified political bickering but I must acknowledge its apparent effectiveness)

I am not convinced religion should be saved, as long as the holy books remain as they are passages to justify extreme behaviour will always be found. The only way to reform it is to discard or completely rewrite the holy books. Which of course they will never do.

I must also add that most philosophies can be intolerant of others. And atheism is not a philosophy in itself no matter how much Richard Dawkins tries to link it with rational materialism (that's materialism in the philosophical sense not the economic sense).