Musket, I appreciate and admire your efforts in hatchet burying. Though I am a little taken aback by the continuation of this topic, doing so without personal insults is the better way.

Stringsinger, Are you familiar with the concept of the difference between some an all. I would have thought so, but your behavior indicates otherwise. I have stated several times that I did not mean to say that all atheists are militant. I have even expressed discomfort with the term.

But the term has existed since the French Revolution. and the definition according to the Urban Dictionary is clear enough.

1.         Militant Atheist
        
A militant atheist is one who is hostile towards religion. They differ from moderate atheists because they have the desire to propagate atheism and also hold religion to be harmful. Militant atheism was an integral part of the French Revolution, Soviet Union, Cultural Revolution, and is expresses itself today in the ideas of the New Atheist authors.

To be clear, my thesis, which is essentially the same as Frans De Waal, an atheist that you apparently admired once, is that SOME atheists are just a rigid and dogmatic as the religious zealots they decry. I would consider what you have said on this thread so far, not to mention the reams of comments on other threads and the threads you started yourself to be proof enough to include you in the Atheist dogmatist group. I would think that many of self-described atheists on this form might describe your behavior on this subject to be zealous.

Now Stringsinger, Being a militant Atheist, if you are one, is nothing to be ashamed of or deny. Be proud that you have the desire to propagate atheism and also hold religion to be harmful. It is who you are. The 200 year old label applied to that behavior should not matter. Be proud of who you are.