This isn't so much a "quest for godless honour" as the title implies, rather a strawman attack on all secular humanists or "new atheists" based on a very vague generalisation.
Many of your claims about atheism are so broad as to be essentially meaningless as they miss as many people as they reach.
Remember, "all people are atheists except for their particular god". So even if you're religious, you're an atheist to all religions except your own. So atheists and non-atheists are 99% similar in their disbelief in other religions.
What is more useful to look at is - the actions taken by new atheists to criticise, and attempt to dismantle, the extremely powerful religious PRIVILEGE afforded institutionally to Christians in the west, Hindus in India, and Muslims in the Middle East, Indonesia and Malaysia. Sam Harris, Dawkins etc, as well as various New Atheist groups, have worked well to draw attention to the extreme power of religious INSTITUTIONS, which actually allows for religious pluralism. And if they mock the frankly ridiculous beliefs of some religions, I don't care. It's not like religious people don't frequently tell atheists "you godless heathen you're going to hell". Yet if we criticise the religious people for saying that, and clap back, we're hypocrites?
I think you will have to go far to find an atheist who thinks they are 100% correct about everything and morally superior in ALL WAYS to ALL RELIGIOUS PEOPLE EVERYWHERE as this article seems to imply.
It also doesn't make sense to castigate atheists for scientific and capitalistic damage to people and environments. No one claims that if religion went away, the world would magically be perfect. One can criticise religion without having to make a disclaimer about all the OTHER bad things also in the world.
Also, regarding "scientism" - it's actually a very humble belief, not an arrogant one. Scientism comes first from the belief that we do NOT know everything, and though we have ways to try and find out truth about the mysterious universe we live in, so far science is the only proven way to try and learn things about the natural world. Is it perfect? No, and that's the point, it's an evolutionary method that winnows out what is false, in an attempt to discern what is true.
Science is a tool. Progress is an ideal. All people have ideals, whether or not they are atheist or religious. Most of the scientists who have ever lives, most of the capitalists who have ever lived, most of the colonisers, abusers, killers etc - have been religious. Any criticism you give of atheists can easily be given to religious people.
It is not an argument against atheism to say "but atheists are flawed, science can be used for ill, evil still exists".
It's also not an argument for the existence of god to say that religion makes some people happy. Good? But an atheist should still be able to ask a religious person to explain the basis for their beliefs, and ESPECIALLY a government should NOT privilege religious belief above secular society. Which happens in many countries. In the US the government directly privileges Christians and Christianity above all other faiths and atheists. In India, the government privileges Hindus above Sikhs, Muslims and atheists. In Saudi Arabia it's illegal to be an atheist.
When these things don't exist, you can tell me New Atheism isn't necessary.
