Agnostics and atheists, in other words. I'll let alone the bizarre idea that an entirely hypothetical ' divinely-ordained natural order of things', in your topsy turvy world, is designated as the 'first reality', and point out that this is nothing more than a religiously bigoted attempt to associate with infanticide failure to accept one particular set of values. And yours is simply an account of the history of this pathological fantasy, which interests me not in the least.
Events of last week in Europe have rather convinced me of what I have long suspected, that Islam is simply incompatible with Western Civilization. The intolerant tone of even the thoughtful religious types here on FR makes me wonder if I shouldn't replace 'Islam' with monotheism. If you think we're babykillers, then there's very little you should forgo in trying to stop us; conversely, if we perceive that we're regarded with this level of hatred, we should act accordingly.
Also, how fascinating that you seem to equate Western Civilization with atheism/agnosticism. In my view – and I’m sure many others here – Western civilization is rooted in Judeo/Christian moral values. Jeepers, even the Supreme Court sees this and allows the Ten Commandments and Moses to be displayed for historical content.
It isn't "hypothetical," RWP. Until 150 years or so ago, most people in the West simply took it for granted that there is a Great Hierarchy of Being, which constitutes the dynamic relations that obtain among the participants, God, man, world, and society. This world view began to cystalize with the pre-Socratic Greeks, and was more fully articulated by both Plato and Aristotle; it is fully consonant with both Israelite and Christian understandings. One might say it is the signature "cosmology" or worldview of Western culture. It has been under attack by all manner of "rationalists" over the past 150 years, and has been targeted for outright destruction by every Left progressive since Marx.
You may not be a Marxist or Left progressive, RWP; but you should know the company you keep. For in this matter at least, it is readily apparent that you agree with them.
Is there something wrong with failure to accept failure to accept one particular set of values? It would seem that judgments such as "bizarre", "topsy turvy", "religiously bigoted", "pathological fantasy" regarding failure to accept one particular set of values is self-refuting in that such judgments constitute a failure to accept one particular set of values.
Cordially,