One of the reasons that both atheists and the religous come under criticism is the refusal of mainstream followers to distance themselves from the extremists of their party. When Jerry Falwell said after 911 that "God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve" and then added "The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this" I am not aware that any Christian leader said "Jerry you are NUTS!" (See http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/nov_2000/falwell_911.htm for Jerry Falwell's full speech.) This leads to a feeling of "insanity by association."

Now I feel the same about militant atheists who aver their opinion without supporting evidence as well. Also Jewish religious fanatics who maintain a tribal superiority (I recommend "Postville: A clash of cultures in America's heartland" as a good read), Islamic extremists, in fact anyone that thinks that they have a direct line to wisdom that brooks no questioning.

"Also Jewish religious fanatics who maintain a tribal superiority"

I'm not sure why such people can be considered "Jewish religious fanatics". Jewish belief doesn't say anything about a tribal superiority or even about Judaism being more right than other religions.

In fact, it is quite clear that Judaism as a religion does not define the truth for all but merely the rules for some, namely Jews. Others do not have to follow the Jewish rules (i.e. they can work on Saturday if they wish) and it is Jewish belief that non-Jews are fine if they don't. Jews, otoh, must obey the rules of the Torah (it is my own belief that G-d is not strict about it though).

As for tribal anything, Jewish tradition points rather to a tribal inferiority. The assumption is that G-d chose the Jews not because they were superior but because they were inferior and their success would then be an even greater proof for the might of the highest being.

I am surprised that a poll would generate so much discussion. I'm also surprised at the insults that have been written here. My opinion was that this site was superior to most--in that except for one person, we discussed our points of view rather than insulted other bloggers.

Many of you may know that I am religious. Proving the existance of God is impossible because everyone has to agree on what constitutes proof. Most of us live according to what works best for us. Reason, science and argument has nothing to do with it. I believe in God because I have seen people transformed from criminals to productive citizens. I have seen attitudes changes and hope given to those without it. This is not proof, only evidence.

lol Sherye, people are people wherever you go. Even JoeUser, where's there's a high percentage of very high quality users. But that's not what I've commented to say.

The reason that Christians are pushy about their religion is that we believe that people who haven't adopted those beliefs at the time of death will go to Hell. For an atheist, I think the best idea is to shut up. No skin off their back if other people believe otherwise, and hey, more women for them right? But for Christian's, to remain silent is to essentially be a monster.

So it's the eternal struggle of a Christian to constructively communicate his or her belief without pushing people away at the same time. It's rough.

~Dan

Religion sucks.
That does not mean that "believers" are weak.
That also does not mean that all "believers" are not weak either.

I do not believe that a "supernatural being" exists because I find comfort in it. It actually disturbs me much more than I could ever find comfort in this belief.

There are those who are weak and rely on the idea that their is a "Almight God" that will carry them through tough times.
But there are just as many people of strong nature and convictions that believe as well.

Where belief goes wrong, and enters into hypocracy, is within the organized religions of the world.

You should never confuse belief with religion. Religion is politics in the guise of good will (or bad depending on what religion you adhere to). But beliefs on the other hand, are something that simply are...

I think I'll write a blog on that, Sphere. Thanks.

~Dan

Pam, that's nonsense. Its true meaning is not what it meant in the past anymore than the "true" meaning of "awful" is "filling you with awe" because that's what it used to mean. In fact words largely take their meaning from context - try doing research on "domains of discourse".
regards Rab

I agree with Rab. It's also my opinion that if you start with the commen Pam, that's nonsense. then you should rethink your comment.



~Dan

...why doesn't the quote option work anymore? Watch what happens when I try to quote Rab's post.

Pam, that's nonsense. Its true meaning is not what it meant in the past anymore than the "true" meaning of "awful" is "filling you with awe" because that's what it used to mean. In fact words largely take their meaning from context - try doing research on "domains of discourse". regards Rab

~Dan

In the beginning there was nothing, then George W stepped into the universe and decreed, Let there be WMD.

I think it is fine for those that believe in God to evangelicize (sp?) - just as it is fine for Atheists to spread their belief of the "truth".

Consider: if you thought the sky was red and I knew it was blue - it would be very natural for me to want to convince you it was blue - even if in the end it "didn't matter".

Same goes for Believers, same goes for Atheists.