[Closed] Anyone for another religion thread?

It's too difficult to call everyone out for it.

I just explain it to you, cos you know, you're worth saving 😉

I still want to know how someone can read a language that they haven't learned. With their eyes closed.

If I said that I could cook a meal blindfolded, from a recipe written in cuneiform script ... someone would probably call me out on it. But you'd really rather expect them to think me deluded.

I can read a foreign language if it's in roman script. Don't always understand it of course.

You only thik you're reading it, Molgrips. In some cases if you heard a native speaker reading it you wouldn't be able to follow the writing. I've experienced this when teaching French and Spanish speaking adults English. They have to be taught the phonetics before they can follow.

Ask a Basque to pronounce Ieuan, or yourself Patxi or Ledeuix.

Be careful with this one. Stating something similar has got me a verbal kicking on here for years

It's just an opinion, i think people who believe in a god are either insane, stupid or ignorant and I include some friends and family members in that statement. It doesn't mean to say I constant mock them but I will do if they bring up their religion/beliefs to explain things that have been already proved by science etc

religious people = dim or dishonest take your pick

Well, this thread is proving the Theists and the OP's article correct.

And I thought we'd grown.

I wouldn't have thought it could reach 10 pages this time. What more is there to be said?

Well, this thread is proving the Theists and the OP's article correct.

And I thought we'd grown.

Fortunately, us mentally ill, dim and dishonest folks are also inclined to be the forgiving sort.

FWIW religion has to be exempt from the DSM* or they would be classed as mentally ill

Its an interesting one.

On the one hand to describe folk as this is rude but on the other hand they converse with , feel the presence of and follow an entity that is not real so its hard to be that respectful of such a belief....free though they are to make it.

TBh I find it as silly as someone saying they do things because the mushroom folk told them and it makes just as much sense.

Yes very bright otherwise sane folk believe but I still find it incredible that they do and not a choice I can respect or value.

It also does not mean that most of them are not wonderful people just like those who dont like cycling can be wrong and yet also nice.

* Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

grown? we are talking about an invisible father figure in the sky, perhaps growing up might be better.

9 o'clock is obviously the witching hour for the bigots.

FWIW religion has to be exempt from the DSM* or they would be classed as mentally ill

This is bigger balls than the guy stating he can read languages he doesn't know via faith.

There is no way religious belief has ever been considered for inclusion in DSM. You'd be medicalising over half the worlds population, mental disorders are by definition outside of the normal expected human behaviour/psychology.

Dysrationalia maybe, but seeing as this seems to be within normal human functioning then I don't see how it can be medicalised. We're just a shit species.

o mefty you cut me.

This is bigger balls than the guy stating he can read languages he doesn't know via faith.

To be fair, it is specifically referred to as exempt ...

What the APA Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM IV-TR, p. 821) says about delusion:

A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everyone else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary. The belief is not one ordinarily accepted by other members of the person’s culture or subcultur [b](e.g., it is not an article of religious faith).[/b]

If it wasn't, no doubt the militant atheists would be campaigning to have every religious person sectioned.

mefty - Member
9 o'clock is obviously the witching hour for the bigots.

No one is being bigoted here

I read many books both by the New Atheists and their Theistic opponents in the late noughties. I then thought I'd check out some churches just to see what the people are like, i.e. are they mad/deluded as I didn't really know any practicing religious believers.
I've attended Catholic churches, Anglican churches, Methodist churches, evangelical churches, and Quaker meeting houses since, some on a fairly regular basis. I tend to ask for a blessing rather than participate in the eucherist and if asked what I believe, say that I'm really not sure and just having a mooch around. (word of warning - it you try to do this, it is a good idea to say you are just visiting/in the area for a short while, as otherwise they will try to hook you in).
The only difference I've observed about the religious people I've met is that they are part of a community, which is quite weird considering most of us these days are not, as we live such atomised lives. And that changes how they behave to a large extent. Although I've met a few nutcases, the majority of the people are responsible, thinking people, with a tendency to introversion.
I've seen people who are great at cooperating, and then I've seen people who are busy-bodies and tend to make things unpleasant all round. People seem to alter their personalities/play up to certain roles, a bit like the Canterbury Tales.
I think a major reason why people don't like organised religion is that they may prefer their own company, as participating in any kind of community requires sacrifices and many times, it isn't worth the trouble. Undoubtedly a lot of people attended church out of a sense of duty as much as religious belief in the past.
I also learnt that vicars put in a lot of work and have to deal with some really upsetting things. My local vicar says the Lord's Prayer for the local people six times a day, and sometimes I reflect on that and find it a source of comfort. He is very much against emotional manipulation and says a lot of the problems he sees with people are issues of guilt, shame and fear (whether religion is the source of those feelings, or whether they just exist, is something I will ask him the next time I see him).

On the one hand to describe folk as this is rude but on the other hand they converse with , feel the presence of and follow an entity that is not real so its hard to be that respectful of such a belief.

It's hard to be respectful of such a belief, but should be trivial to be respectful of those who believe it, n'est-ce pas? Unless you're a sociopath, anyway. Play the ball, not the man.

It's a lesson I learned far too late in life, but mocking people for their beliefs is akin to mocking people for how they choose to look or for their lifestyle choices (see the thread on the cosplayer / furry Crystal Maze contestants the other day). Or Reducto Ad Absurdum, see Sophie Lancaster. You can of course choose to ridicule people you see as irrational or whatever, freedom of speech and all that, but that makes you not a very nice person. If you're happy being not a very nice person then fill your boots.

I find organised religion to be an affront to modern civilisation. But I'll defend absolutely an individual's right to believe what they want to believe. I'll engage them of course because I enjoy a debate whether it's about religion, politics or preferences of bicycle tyres. By discussing contentious subjects we rarely change our opinions but hopefully some of us at least learn stuff. I have on this thread.

If it wasn't, no doubt the militant atheists would be campaigning to have every religious person sectioned.

As you say, so idiots everywhere don't go labelling those with faith as mentally ill.

I get exasperated with a lot of religious folk or at least their beliefs, but I wouldn't dream of accusing them as being mentally ill. That isn't really fair at all - and religion does at least give some people a nice warm fuzzy feeling.

It's not exactly a nice universe we live in, as long as the religious don't intrude on other peoples freedoms, then whatever shelters people from the utterly cold horrific nature of the reality we inhabit is fine in my books.

I really just dislike missionaries, terrorists and anti-abortion dick heads.

I usually keep out of religion debates these days, but "stupid", "dim", "ignorant", "insane", "dishonest" etc are pretty strong words. Why can't you just simply say you don't believe in God and don't follow any religion, why use such emotive words and get so worked up? Just let it go, and let folks be!

Well said cougar. As above I have no time for religion organised or not but I go out of my way to ensure those religious people in my care have their spiritual needs met. I go much further than any of my colleagues do (usually its just a referral to the hospital chaplain that is made. I have never seen another nurse take a patient to church although I am sure some must do) but I will take them to services etc even when its hard work or inconvenient to do so if / as its important to them

this is one thing the absolutists on here seem unable to understand. You can dislike the religion but not the person and if one has a good moral sense you can divorce your feelings for the religion from the spiritual needs of the person. I can't count the number of boring hours I have spent sat in churches 'cos a patient wanted to go. None of those people would ever know my true feelings towards the religious.

Its the same to me as taking them to Hearts matches 🙂

Just let it go, and let folks be,what like religions do 😐

I usually keep out of religion debates these days, but "stupid", "dim", "ignorant", "insane", "dishonest" etc are pretty strong words. Why can't you just simply say you don't believe in God and don't follow any religion, why use such emotive words and get so worked up? Just let it go, and let folks be!

To be honest, it is very helpful because it enables us to see them for what they are, one of the great merits of the asymmetric moderation policy.

Just let it go, and let folks be

That would be fine but religion and religious leaders poke their "morals and illogical beliefs" where they don't belong. Just look at the issue of abortion and gay marriage in Northern Ireland or the fact that the House of Lords has 26 seats reserved for Church of England bishops.

I have no issue with people want to worship an imaginary being but it shouldn't have an influence on the country.

Just let it go, and let folks be,what like religions do

The problem is many religions don't. They try to interfere in the lives of the non religious constantly. From the constant attack on abortion rights to the prevention of condom usage in HIV rife areas to prescribing what I can do and when. My biggest bugbear is the insistence that we do not have the right to end our lives in the way we might want.

So it's just Episcopalian Christians you all don't like then?

Phew! .....Glad I'm a Presbyterian.

"enables us to see them for what they are", truth cuts both ways.i do believe. 😆

So it's just Episcopalian Christians you all don't like then?

Baptists.....Jehovas Witnesses for being downright annoying...hardcore Catholicism (see the Philippines and South America for how Catholicism can hilariously and utterly **** countries)....

Why can't you just simply say you don't believe in God and don't follow any religion, why use such emotive words and get so worked up?

The great thing about conflict is that it helps to take your mind off other things, like the end of summer/going back to work/existential boredom.

Religion threads on STW are the verbal equivalent of Saturday night punch ups.

My contribution is this - religion is supposed to be about god, but it always ends up being about money, which is the point Jesus made in the temple by throwing out the moneychangers - the event which ultimately got him crucified.

Religion threads on STW are the verbal equivalent of Saturday night punch ups.

I think you need to opposition to turn up for there to be a punch up which they generally don't.

I think you need to opposition to turn up for there to be a punch up which they generally don't.

*waves*

Or maybe their religious beliefs prohibit them getting into fights?

I genuinely don't know whether to be offended or not at being called dim, stupid, ignorant and insane.

There is a real temptation to get into a slanging match with some folks and put those claims to the test by applying my quite obviously deficient intellect to the task of mercilessly ripping the piss out of people but in a less lighthearted and jocular manner than I normally do.

Can't be arsed though, because, as I said in my very first post on this thread, there is no wisdom to be found here.

"enables us to see them for what they are", truth cuts both ways.i do believe.

Indeed I am very comfortable being a church goer, if you are one the the bigots, I glad you are comfortable with that too - everyone needs goals.

Post removed. Pointless and stupid of me to reply

Yeah, that's it, run away 'cos you know you've got no evidence. Typical.
Atheists, the playground is ours!
No theists allowed!

That kind of thing, etc, will be coming up soon.

Can't be arsed though, because, as I said in my very first post on this thread, there is no wisdom to be found here.

You are undoubtedly right there - I take a Falstaffian approach: a bit teacher, a bit jester (though they miss the jokes), and finally I like to be a bit bellicose. The last bit is the best, you get posts deleted, almost as naughty as running through cornfields.

A bit of this, a bit of that. a bit of whinging. It's like being a Christian in modern UK.

So it's just Episcopalian Christians you all don't like then?

Phew! .....Glad I'm a Presbyterian.

What's the difference?

(Not trolling, a genuine request for information, I have no notion of what either of those terms really mean.)

And that's where religion falls down. It sets people up to subjugate others. Inquisitions, ISIs, Crusaders, la Marche pour Tous have power based on submission. Submit to their doctrine and even their presence at you peril. There is no compromise, give them a bit of slack and as they're control freaks they'll start messing up your life.

I think modern Christianity is moving on from that, even Catholicism is changing. As humanity moves on, Christianity will have to move with it to survive, this started when they played "fast and loose" with the old testament.

When Christianity had to ingratiate itself into the heathen populations 😉 it subsumed certain rituals and symbolisms of that culture. Its now having to adapt again, but its not church led, its being led by the people, because without the people, Christianity is dead.

If that article(remember that?) is to be "believed", it would appear that Atheism is stuck in its own cultural dark age, rigidly believing that in the case of Christianity for instance, Christians have to believe in the bible, the whole bible, and nothing but the bible. Its War propaganda, demonizing your enemy.

The Atheist religion 8) will also have to move with the times.

I'm saying this as someone who doesn't believe in a God.

Its War propaganda, demonizing your enemy.

Sorry, it's not clear to me: are you suggesting that it's propaganda by the Atheists in the study, or the Catholic university who funded it?

I genuinely don't know whether to be offended or not at being called dim, stupid, ignorant and insane.

You really shouldn't be.

Just dicks being dicks. No great shock.

Sorry, it's not clear to me: are you suggesting that it's propaganda by the Atheists in the study, or the Catholic university who funded it?

I think he's saying, that Athiests spreading it around that Christians all believe in Creationism is war propoganda.

The study just shed light on it (so it wasn't hidden under a Gary Bushell)

demonizing your enemy.

That sort of thing?

so its seems I am to be censored for reversing meftys insult..dishonest

Criminalising them

It's not really "criminalising" someone to say they will go to a place they don't believe in, for not believing something they don't believe though, is it ?

I think he's saying, that Athiests spreading it around that Christians all believe in Creationism is war propoganda.

So atheists think all Christians believe in creationism and Christians think all atheists spend their time spreading propaganda about Christians believing in creationism. I know it's been eleven pages, but war propaganda?

Just to be clear, I never said it was war propoganda.
I was just trying to help cougar understand what EB said. 😉

I was just trying to help cougar understand what EB said.

Just about to edit when I realised that but you've saved me from having to 🙂

so its seems I am to be censored for reversing meftys insult..dishonest

Nowt to do with me, I have only ever reported spam (and I am not sure I have even done that). I think calling people idiots is far less egregious that calling them mentally ill.

It's not really "criminalising" someone to say they will go to a place they don't believe in, for not believing something they don't believe though, is it ?

Granted i dont think I am going to hell, because it does not exist, but they do think this and its not all that nice.

Like suggesting they will burn in the eternity of hell if they disagree and dont do as you say ?
Criminalising them for blaspheming against a god they dont believe in ?
That sort of thing?

Do all christians believe this to be the case Junkyard?

I think he's saying, that Athiests spreading it around that Christians all believe in Creationism is war propoganda.

I'm still not entirely clear where the propaganda actually lies here, TBH.

so its seems I am to be censored for reversing meftys insult..dishonest

That would seem unlikely, I'm sure I remember reading several pages back that religion-bashing is a subject tolerated and encouraged on STW.

That would seem unlikely, mmm dyslexia then?

My point is the religious are not very tolerant of those who disagree...we all go the place reserved for the sinners, infidels and non believers.
Granted i dont think I am going to hell, because it does not exist, but they do think this and its not all that nice.

My mum is an Irish Catholic. She's one of "the religious" you speak of.

She's massively tolerant of those who disagree, in fact she's so tolerant, she often invites me and my brother for dinner. She even lets me bring my Mrs (who I'm not married to) and my little boy (who isn't baptised and was born out of wedlock!)

Also, She doesn't think that You will go to hell.
If fact she thinks you're a nice bloke.

Hope that helps 😉

For Cougar....

Episcopalian churches have a hierarchy of clergy , priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, popes etc. Kinda a top down management structure where rules are set and passed down to the punters at the bottom of the tree. The principal example is the Catholic Church although the Cof E follows a similar type of structure. The Classic organised religion.

Presbyterian churches, like the Church of Scotland, are decentralised. The congregation owns the Church and employs the minister to lead the in worship as an equal. The Administrative roles in each church are carried out by Elders who form a committee, the Kirk Session. each individual Church is responsible for its own affairs but there is a larger group of local churches, the Presbytery who share ideas and occasionally pool resources if required.
Religion by local committee if you like.

It's obviously a lot more complex and nuanced than that but that's the general gist of it.

Whats more interesting, historically speaking is how the west whilst spending several thousand years at war with the middle east managed to adopt not one but three Arab religions.

500 yrs ago Martin Luther pointed out the madness and it remains bonkers now IMO, others obviously disagree.

Just to add to pp's post, the Episcopalian Church in Scotland (and in the US) is a member of the Anglican Communion, so no Pope or Cardinals.

Whats more interesting, historically speaking is how the west whilst spending several thousand years at war with the middle east managed to adopt not one but three Arab religions.

500 yrs ago Martin Luther pointed out the madness and it remains bonkers now IMO, others obviously disagree.

aaaaand..........you stumbled into why a lot of nazis are into celt and nordic mythology.....next up on singletrackworld........Esoteric Nazism.

For Cougar....

That's really helpful, thank you for taking the time to reply.

Am I right in thinking that the Presbyterian approach is similar to Islam, in the UK at least? (Not to be inflammatory, I'm meaning in terms of the decentralised bottom-up approach, from previous discussions about the so-called "Muslim community" I was led to believe that that was broadly how Muslim mosques worked over here?)

Sorry, it's not clear to me: are you suggesting that it's propaganda by the Atheists in the study, or the Catholic university who funded it?

I'm still not entirely clear where the propaganda actually lies here, TBH.

Both. One side has learned from the other.

And they say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

500 yrs ago Martin Luther pointed out the madness and it remains bonkers now IMO, others obviously disagree.

Also, Luther was partly responsible from the bout of rampant murderous idiocy in the 20th century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_and_antisemitism#Debate_on_influence_on_Nazis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_aspects_of_Nazism#Nazism_and_Christianity

Alfred Rosenberg was influential in the development of Positive Christianity. In The Myth of the Twentieth Century, he wrote that:[19]

Saint Paul was responsible for the destruction of the racial values from Greek and Roman culture; the dogma of hell advanced in the Middle Ages destroyed the free Nordic spirit; original sin and grace are Oriental ideas that corrupt the purity and strength of Nordic blood; the Old Testament and the Jewish race are not an exception and one should return to the Nordic peoples' fables and legends;

Sounds a lot like what you were saying.

Are you a Nazi? 😛

I remember once my mum telling me about a conversation she had with a couple who are/were members of the (very) extended family, and who were regular church-goers.
They asked her if my brother and I went to Sunday School/church, and she said no, we were brought up to be able to make our own minds up, to decide for ourselves whether we wanted to believe or not, upon which she got a rather pitying look, and the reply, "oh, I [i]do[/i] feel so sorry for you".
My own, considered response to this, from my adult point of view, is 'patronising bitch!'
It's this sort of attitude that I find deeply insulting, but I would never, ever deny anyone the right to believe in whatever they wish, [i]provided[/i] they allow me the same right.
I'm not an atheist as such, I describe myself as a pantheistic humanist, the [i]only[/i] thing that really offends me is the sort of person who believes, not only in a deity of one flavour or another, but also in their divine right to make it their business to tell everyone else that [i]they[/i] should believe in the self-same being.
Well, no, actually; it sodding well doesn't!

pantheistic humanist

[img] [/img]

Countzeros portrait, after his Pantheistic Humanist sainthood.

religion is supposed to be about god, but it always ends up being about money,

Always? I think you need to pay more attention and stop making huge generalisations.

As for religion being irrational - rationality is a pretty fluid concept. That's why we have rationalise as a verb.

Junkyard's view of the world seems irrationally simplistic to me in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Always? I think you need to pay more attention and stop making huge generalisations.

As for religion being irrational - rationality is a pretty fluid concept. That's why we have rationalise as a verb.

Junkyard's view of the world seems irrationally simplistic to me in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Yeah. I'm slightly amused to be honest - in this thread we have anti-materialism, occult leanings 😆 , Positive Christianity (cutting out all the old testament Jewishy bits) and the "arab religions" dig and quoting of Luther that could be seen as an anti-semitic dig. All we need now is a bit of good old fashioned Israel bashing!

It's like I've drunkenly stumbled into a Munich Beer Hall or Bayreuth Festival circa 1928. 😮 😀

They asked her if my brother and I went to Sunday School/church, and she said no, we were brought up to be able to make our own minds up, to decide for ourselves whether we wanted to believe or not, upon which she got a rather pitying look, and the reply, "oh, I do feel so sorry for you".

I don't think this is a problem with religion per sé, so much as insular life experience.

I once went to a country pub in the middle of nowhere to get some lunch. when faced with a wholly carnivorous menu I questioned the landlady about options. Met with confusion I told her I was vegetarian and she sincerely replied, "oh, I [i]am[/i] sorry" like I'd just told her I had cancer.

As for religion being irrational - rationality is a pretty fluid concept. That's why we have rationalise as a verb.

Well, it's not, is it. It's more of a sliding scale. "Rationality" is pretty well defined.

When we rationalise something we make it more rational rather than redefine what 'rational' means.

thanks Mr degree in Physics 😉 what is this other world I am missing out on that is so complex? The one you dont believe in either 🙄

Do all christians believe this to be the case Junkyard?

religion-bashing is a subject tolerated and encouraged on STW.

TBF if you are going to believe in imaginary friends as an adult then getting the piss ripped out of you seems fair and just. It's no different to an adult thinking fairys or Santa clause is real.

honestly if you use the "you have to believe to belive" lines then again it gets harder to keep a straight face.

Well done you have a religion, please accept that to a lot people it's all made up bollox. Please keep it out of politics, keep it out of business and away from impressionable kids 😉

On top of that perhaps spens a little more time agreeing what you do or don't belive in, which bits you think are true etc.

I genuinely don't know whether to be offended or not at being called dim, stupid, ignorant and insane....Can't be arsed though, because, as I said in my very first post on this thread, there is no wisdom to be found here.

Quite,if a little harsh in the conclusion.

(but still amusing to watch [s]mods[/s] just another forum user justify what gets posted. )

Anyway must "bugger off" to work now. Have a nice day!

Not to be inflammatory, I'm meaning in terms of the decentralised bottom-up approach

I'm pretty sure both Islam and Presbyterianism are are strongly against that kind of thing.

On top of that perhaps spens a little more time agreeing what you do or don't belive in, which bits you think are true etc.

If you're going to claim there's a divine guiding hand "behind" (whatever [i]that[/i] means) everything, you're going to have to come up with something better than "just have faith" to explain away the then evidently sadistic urge to inflict bone cancer in children.

Also - as there is clearly no evidence for the existence of any sort of god (hence the final redoubt of the faith position) , one has to ask, why do the religious, having been presented with this and reduced to the "faith" argument, feel the need to worship a patently non-existent ultimate power anyway?

I don't much see the point.

Junkyard's view of the world seems irrationally simplistic to me in the face of evidence to the contrary.

what evidence is that ?

If that article(remember that?) is to be "believed", it would appear that Atheism is stuck in its own cultural dark age, rigidly believing that in the case of Christianity for instance, Christians have to believe in the bible, the whole bible, and nothing but the bible. Its War propaganda, demonizing your enemy.

Herein lies the fundamental problem with these discussions. If even Christians cannot agree even amongst themselves what is and isn't part of their beliefs (and they really can't) then those of us on the outside can't really be criticised for getting it "wrong".

When we rationalise something we make it more rational rather than redefine what 'rational' means.

No - rationalisation outside of mathematics means coming up with reasons to justify something to yourself.

it would appear that Atheism is stuck in its own cultural dark age

There really isn't an atheist creed though is there? So you can't really talk about Atheism like that.

but the point remains blasphemy was illegal here

So? Society has changed a lot over the years, of course it has. As has its interpretation of Christianity. Not sure of your point. Are you trying to hold modern Christianity responsible for things that happened in the past? Despite the fact they've changed over the years?

what is this other world I am missing out on that is so complex?

The world in which other people can have different points of view.

You are saying that you know intelligent people who believe. So rather than thinking 'hmm, interesting - I wonder what that intelligent person sees in this idea that I don't?' you think 'well they must have a stupid spot in their brain'.

You don't have to believe in an idea to understand its merit. I don't listen to Beethoven, for example, but I can appreciate it's complexity and value. And I don't think less of people who do like it just because I don't.

People probably think I'm mad for going on a 2 hour bike ride in the rain at 9pm. But it means something to me. I don't try and persuade other people that they'd enjoy it, because they won't. But to me it's important.

You're basically thinking you're cleverer than everyone else, aren't you?

The world in which other people can have different points of view.

You are saying that you know intelligent people who believe. So rather than thinking 'hmm, interesting - I wonder what that intelligent person sees in this idea that I don't?' you think 'well they must have a stupid spot in their brain'.

I like all kinds of "credible" (tongue in cheek) music but hey, I also love S-Club. I compartmentalise it in the same way that intelligent people who "believe" can. Except what they're doing isn't quite so ridiculous or embarrassing. 🙂

Atheism is stuck in its own cultural dark age, rigidly believing that in the case of Christianity for instance, Christians have to believe in the bible, the whole bible

That has nothing to do with Atheism. That's just limited perception of the nature of religion. You don't have to profess Atheism to be hitched into this mis-perception. There is a significant tranche of the Christian religion that would claim exactly that as a prerequisite, for instance.

As wearisome as it is to have to continually re-state the case, Atheism is simply the absence of belief in any sort of a god.

Atheists, however, exhibit "non-rigidity" in terms of the question by being perfectly happy to accept rationally-based evidence in the existence of a god if such were produced.

To date, none is available.

People probably think I'm mad for going on a 2 hour bike ride in the rain at 9pm. But it means something to me. I don't try and persuade other people that they'd enjoy it, because they won't. But to me it's important.

that's not the same as telling people not to use condoms or genitally mutilating baby boys as well as being homophobic, sexist or other discrimination hidden behind a wall of religious freedom.