It's from Julian Baggini, who seems to be a source of nutty ideas.
1. Athiests are naturalists
Naturalism is a metaphysical thesis. I prefer to eschew metaphysics altogether.
2. First Commitment is to the truth
Our notion of truth should itself be subject to examination and criticism. So it's a mistake to make such a commitment.
3. We respect Scence, Not Scientism
I'm never sure what scientism is, except that it is typically used as a derogatory term. It seems pointless to include this in a manifesto. It may be equally pointless to even have a manifesto.
4. Reason is precious
What does that even mean? The reason that comes from creationists is often worthless.
5. Reject Dogma
I don't have a problem with that. But I am puzzled as to what Baggini takes "atheism" to mean, if he wants to include that in the Baggini manifesto.
6. Accept that Athieism will not have answers and are prepared for that
That's yet another reason to wonder what Baggini takes "atheism" to mean.
7. Are Secularists
I am all for secularism. But you don't have to be an atheist to be a secularist.
8. Athiests can be religious(?)
That one is straight from the Baggini lunatic asylum.
9. Religion isn't all bad.
Why should I be expected to make sweeping generalizations?
10. Are Critical of religion hen necessary
I'll criticize individual acts of religious groups, when appropriate. But why does that require criticizing religion as a whole?
Jesus was a liberal hippie