How would you distinguish the atheism of Christopher Hitchens from that of Richard Da

(Or do you consider their beliefs to be basically the same?)

Dawkins is more of an optimistic biologist while Hitchens comes off to me as a cranky old man.

Atheism is not a belief, so it's the same for both.

Atheism only has one meaning, the lack of belief in gods, it can't factionalism like religions.

If they're trying to attach anything other than "non belief in God" to the name of Atheism, they are both lying or misguided.

There should be nothing to distinguish one Atheist from another because to be an Atheist is but one thing: non belief in God.

Does it matter? Atheism is atheism

Hitchens is a drunk,Dawkins is an egomaniac

Atheism just means that you don't believe in any god(s)...
Atheism is not a belief system.

Well, one of them doesn't believe in any gods while the other doesn't believe in any gods.

That said, Hitchens is not actually an atheist but an anti-theist. Dawkins on the other hand is an atheist.

One is an A hole.
the other is an annoying A hole.

Dawkin's atheism is centered on evolution. That is what lies at the heart of his arguments and such.

Hitchen's atheism is centered on autonomy. He simply doesn't want there to be a God telling him how to live his life.

EDIT
What's with all the TDs? I was simply stating facts. I answered the question concisely and accurately.

Christopher Hitchens is orders of magnitude more intelligent that Richard Dawkins.

Richard Dawkins uses science to substantiate his case (as a bio chem/molecular bio major I am sympathetic to this). Hitchens has the much harder task of using pure logic and reason. I was never smart enough for philosophy or journalism. I took one class in each, and realized I belong in the lab.

In short: It is extremely hard to make a coherent, concise, logical argument when all you have is reason. I respect Hitchens for his is proficiency is such an abstract task.

I would not even try. I do not think either one of them are distinguished. ;-}

They believe the same thing.....

-Bill

Dawkins makes his case using science and reason. He's like a brilliant computer that runs on logic. Hitchens is more of an atheist that panders to atheists. He uses history and politics more to come to his conclusions I think. Both guys make good points, I like Dawkins more out of the 2