“I’m a cultural Christian”, says Richard Dawkins

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How weak must your conception of faith be if you think his saying “yeah, I kind of like Christmas carols” means “he’s almost accepted Jesus Christ as his lord and savior!”?

His eyes are opened to Christianity’s cultural benefits.


Good things come from good things.

Doubt it. Enjoying music and pretty decorations doesn’t equate to a true believer in Christ rising from the dead.

You enjoy the benefits of living in a society that influenced Christianity. All of our presidents have been Christian, and all our elected officials minus a handful are Christian.

It is against a framework of Christianity that all of our thought has significance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't get it. I'm a research scientist and I'm culturally Christian. It means having grown up in a Christian country, celebrating the major Holidays, reading the Bible at some point, maybe attending Church or a private religious school as a child, or having pious relatives who have perhaps made a positive impression on you, and generally being steeped in the external trappings of your community's religious practices.

It does not mean BELIEVING in God.

But it means that when you hear the bells ring, or step into an old church, or hear the choir, you feel a strong sense of belonging. You are primed to find solace in that form of spiritual practice, and not any other.

It's akin to nostalgia, and it makes sense that older people would feel that pull more, after the drama of a life well-lived.

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Your feelings are not facts. As a research scientist, can you provide a cite?

DP. Do you not understand what PP meant when he started the sentence with "I bet"?

Now if you want to talk about facts and evidence, you will certainly find enthusiastic takers.

Do you?

You don't understand that the post was agreeing with you, because "I bet" doesn't introduce facts.

Then why did you demand facts? Nonsense.

Sure. Show us facts instead of continuing to blather on about it. You see atheists here posting all the time that "even the people who go to church just do it for the community." (As if we didn't all have tons of other community things to do on a Sunday morning, like kids' travel soccer or my nature walk group, and some of this obligatory.)

Again he just said it as an opinion.

Your silly implied threat notwithstanding, I'm fine with whatever the results show.

What, that you can't show any facts for what YOU believe? Not a threat. That's a fact.

It's time you guys backed this up with some quantitative findings. And no, not the usual stuff from Pew you always trot out, about the decline in attendance. In case you need this spelled out: you were talking about the motivations of people who DO attend, and that's what you need to provide stats on.

For the 10th time it's an opinion.

But do us a favor, start a new thread instead of continuing to derail this one.

Are you fricking serious? These posts are 100% germane to what Dawkins said, and the very title of the thread. THEY. COULD. NOT. BE. MORE. ON TOPIC.

Yet again you demand people leave your echo chamber. Why? Can't you handle differing opinions?

What a panty-load of bs and deflection and gish-galloping and nasty aggression that's desperately trying to mask your ignorance. Troll much?

You're so, so wrong. People don't attend religious services mostly for "community." According to Pew, 81% of people who attend religious services say they go because it's "very important" that they "be closer to God." Another 13% said being "closer to God" was "somewhat important" and only 4% said it wasn't important.

Here you go: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1201343.page. You never responded to that brand-new thread. Hmmm, why?

Pew, beloved of DCUM's atheists, has spoken. Maybe we can put this to rest now. And get back to the thread topic of Dawkins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How weak must your conception of faith be if you think his saying “yeah, I kind of like Christmas carols” means “he’s almost accepted Jesus Christ as his lord and savior!”?

"Do not despise the day of small things," as scripture says. Every Christian has been saved from a cosmically rebellious, miserable state. Dawkins would be no different if he converts.

Which God created in the first place. Does that make sense to you?

Should it? If you are hung up on believing only things that "make sense to you" you are in for a bumpy ride.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How weak must your conception of faith be if you think his saying “yeah, I kind of like Christmas carols” means “he’s almost accepted Jesus Christ as his lord and savior!”?

His eyes are opened to Christianity’s cultural benefits.


Good things come from good things.

Doubt it. Enjoying music and pretty decorations doesn’t equate to a true believer in Christ rising from the dead.

You enjoy the benefits of living in a society that influenced Christianity. All of our presidents have been Christian, and all our elected officials minus a handful are Christian.

It is against a framework of Christianity that all of our thought has significance.

Man I know a whole buncha ancient greeks that would be shocked by your claim.

Along with the people who invented letters and numbers.

As well as Washington, Jefferson and Monroe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't get it. I'm a research scientist and I'm culturally Christian. It means having grown up in a Christian country, celebrating the major Holidays, reading the Bible at some point, maybe attending Church or a private religious school as a child, or having pious relatives who have perhaps made a positive impression on you, and generally being steeped in the external trappings of your community's religious practices.

It does not mean BELIEVING in God.

But it means that when you hear the bells ring, or step into an old church, or hear the choir, you feel a strong sense of belonging. You are primed to find solace in that form of spiritual practice, and not any other.

It's akin to nostalgia, and it makes sense that older people would feel that pull more, after the drama of a life well-lived.

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Your feelings are not facts. As a research scientist, can you provide a cite?

DP. Do you not understand what PP meant when he started the sentence with "I bet"?

Now if you want to talk about facts and evidence, you will certainly find enthusiastic takers.

Do you?

You don't understand that the post was agreeing with you, because "I bet" doesn't introduce facts.

Then why did you demand facts? Nonsense.

Sure. Show us facts instead of continuing to blather on about it. You see atheists here posting all the time that "even the people who go to church just do it for the community." (As if we didn't all have tons of other community things to do on a Sunday morning, like kids' travel soccer or my nature walk group, and some of this obligatory.)

Again he just said it as an opinion.

Your silly implied threat notwithstanding, I'm fine with whatever the results show.

What, that you can't show any facts for what YOU believe? Not a threat. That's a fact.

It's time you guys backed this up with some quantitative findings. And no, not the usual stuff from Pew you always trot out, about the decline in attendance. In case you need this spelled out: you were talking about the motivations of people who DO attend, and that's what you need to provide stats on.

For the 10th time it's an opinion.

But do us a favor, start a new thread instead of continuing to derail this one.

Are you fricking serious? These posts are 100% germane to what Dawkins said, and the very title of the thread. THEY. COULD. NOT. BE. MORE. ON TOPIC.

Yet again you demand people leave your echo chamber. Why? Can't you handle differing opinions?

What a panty-load of bs and deflection and gish-galloping and nasty aggression that's desperately trying to mask your ignorance. Troll much?

You're so, so wrong. People don't attend religious services mostly for "community." According to Pew, 81% of people who attend religious services say they go because it's "very important" that they "be closer to God." Another 13% said being "closer to God" was "somewhat important" and only 4% said it wasn't important.

Here you go: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1201343.page. You never responded to that brand-new thread. Hmmm, why?

Pew, beloved of DCUM's atheists, has spoken. Maybe we can put this to rest now. And get back to the thread topic of Dawkins.

Again he just said it was an opinion.
Again he just said it was an opinion.
Again he just said it was an opinion.
Again he just said it was an opinion.

I'll keep repeating if you need me to.

As for why I did not respond to your link: click it and see why.

Thanks for the belly laugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How weak must your conception of faith be if you think his saying “yeah, I kind of like Christmas carols” means “he’s almost accepted Jesus Christ as his lord and savior!”?

His eyes are opened to Christianity’s cultural benefits.


Good things come from good things.

Doubt it. Enjoying music and pretty decorations doesn’t equate to a true believer in Christ rising from the dead.

You enjoy the benefits of living in a society that influenced Christianity. All of our presidents have been Christian, and all our elected officials minus a handful are Christian.

It is against a framework of Christianity that all of our thought has significance.

DP. This is actually a line of academic argument. We may be increasingly secular as a society, but our values, especially the progressive values that are shared by increasingly secular people, are still very Christian. https://www.amazon.com/s?k=tom+holland+dominion&crid=2DV4IY9SNWYSZ&sprefix=tom+holland%2Caps%2C83&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_3_11

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't get it. I'm a research scientist and I'm culturally Christian. It means having grown up in a Christian country, celebrating the major Holidays, reading the Bible at some point, maybe attending Church or a private religious school as a child, or having pious relatives who have perhaps made a positive impression on you, and generally being steeped in the external trappings of your community's religious practices.

It does not mean BELIEVING in God.

But it means that when you hear the bells ring, or step into an old church, or hear the choir, you feel a strong sense of belonging. You are primed to find solace in that form of spiritual practice, and not any other.

It's akin to nostalgia, and it makes sense that older people would feel that pull more, after the drama of a life well-lived.

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Your feelings are not facts. As a research scientist, can you provide a cite?

DP. Do you not understand what PP meant when he started the sentence with "I bet"?

Now if you want to talk about facts and evidence, you will certainly find enthusiastic takers.

Do you?

You don't understand that the post was agreeing with you, because "I bet" doesn't introduce facts.

Then why did you demand facts? Nonsense.

Sure. Show us facts instead of continuing to blather on about it. You see atheists here posting all the time that "even the people who go to church just do it for the community." (As if we didn't all have tons of other community things to do on a Sunday morning, like kids' travel soccer or my nature walk group, and some of this obligatory.)

Again he just said it as an opinion.

Your silly implied threat notwithstanding, I'm fine with whatever the results show.

What, that you can't show any facts for what YOU believe? Not a threat. That's a fact.

It's time you guys backed this up with some quantitative findings. And no, not the usual stuff from Pew you always trot out, about the decline in attendance. In case you need this spelled out: you were talking about the motivations of people who DO attend, and that's what you need to provide stats on.

For the 10th time it's an opinion.

But do us a favor, start a new thread instead of continuing to derail this one.

Are you fricking serious? These posts are 100% germane to what Dawkins said, and the very title of the thread. THEY. COULD. NOT. BE. MORE. ON TOPIC.

Yet again you demand people leave your echo chamber. Why? Can't you handle differing opinions?

What a panty-load of bs and deflection and gish-galloping and nasty aggression that's desperately trying to mask your ignorance. Troll much?

You're so, so wrong. People don't attend religious services mostly for "community." According to Pew, 81% of people who attend religious services say they go because it's "very important" that they "be closer to God." Another 13% said being "closer to God" was "somewhat important" and only 4% said it wasn't important.

Here you go: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1201343.page. You never responded to that brand-new thread. Hmmm, why?

Pew, beloved of DCUM's atheists, has spoken. Maybe we can put this to rest now. And get back to the thread topic of Dawkins.

The gish-gollop troll! We couldn’t trash atheists without you.

Dawkins is some random guy who is an atheist. Why do you care so much about what he says?

[Anonymous]

I get it. I am an atheist who enjoys not only Christmas hymns but the entire Christmas holiday. And, as a woman, I’d choose a Christian nation over a Muslim nation hands down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't get it. I'm a research scientist and I'm culturally Christian. It means having grown up in a Christian country, celebrating the major Holidays, reading the Bible at some point, maybe attending Church or a private religious school as a child, or having pious relatives who have perhaps made a positive impression on you, and generally being steeped in the external trappings of your community's religious practices.

It does not mean BELIEVING in God.

But it means that when you hear the bells ring, or step into an old church, or hear the choir, you feel a strong sense of belonging. You are primed to find solace in that form of spiritual practice, and not any other.

It's akin to nostalgia, and it makes sense that older people would feel that pull more, after the drama of a life well-lived.

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Your feelings are not facts. As a research scientist, can you provide a cite?

DP. Do you not understand what PP meant when he started the sentence with "I bet"?

Now if you want to talk about facts and evidence, you will certainly find enthusiastic takers.

Do you?

You don't understand that the post was agreeing with you, because "I bet" doesn't introduce facts.

Then why did you demand facts? Nonsense.

Sure. Show us facts instead of continuing to blather on about it. You see atheists here posting all the time that "even the people who go to church just do it for the community." (As if we didn't all have tons of other community things to do on a Sunday morning, like kids' travel soccer or my nature walk group, and some of this obligatory.)

Again he just said it as an opinion.

Your silly implied threat notwithstanding, I'm fine with whatever the results show.

What, that you can't show any facts for what YOU believe? Not a threat. That's a fact.

It's time you guys backed this up with some quantitative findings. And no, not the usual stuff from Pew you always trot out, about the decline in attendance. In case you need this spelled out: you were talking about the motivations of people who DO attend, and that's what you need to provide stats on.

For the 10th time it's an opinion.

But do us a favor, start a new thread instead of continuing to derail this one.

Are you fricking serious? These posts are 100% germane to what Dawkins said, and the very title of the thread. THEY. COULD. NOT. BE. MORE. ON TOPIC.

Yet again you demand people leave your echo chamber. Why? Can't you handle differing opinions?

What a panty-load of bs and deflection and gish-galloping and nasty aggression that's desperately trying to mask your ignorance. Troll much?

You're so, so wrong. People don't attend religious services mostly for "community." According to Pew, 81% of people who attend religious services say they go because it's "very important" that they "be closer to God." Another 13% said being "closer to God" was "somewhat important" and only 4% said it wasn't important.

Here you go: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1201343.page. You never responded to that brand-new thread. Hmmm, why?

Pew, beloved of DCUM's atheists, has spoken. Maybe we can put this to rest now. And get back to the thread topic of Dawkins.

Again he just said it was an opinion.
Again he just said it was an opinion.
Again he just said it was an opinion.
Again he just said it was an opinion.

I'll keep repeating if you need me to.

As for why I did not respond to your link: click it and see why.

Thanks for the belly laugh.

At least you and the "research scientist" now understand how wrong your "opinion" really is. That is, we can only hope you understand it. And we can only hope you'll have enough self-respect to stop posting fake facts.

Also, the link works fine and you apparently have no response. Are you proud of that?

Still, it's been amusing seeing how childish you can get when you're proven so very wrong. Thanks for the laughs!

Back to Dawkins....

[Anonymous]

Oh are we voting on which religion we’d pick if we were forced to pick one?

I vote for Peyotism.

I don’t choose Christianity so stop trying to force it on me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't get it. I'm a research scientist and I'm culturally Christian. It means having grown up in a Christian country, celebrating the major Holidays, reading the Bible at some point, maybe attending Church or a private religious school as a child, or having pious relatives who have perhaps made a positive impression on you, and generally being steeped in the external trappings of your community's religious practices.

It does not mean BELIEVING in God.

But it means that when you hear the bells ring, or step into an old church, or hear the choir, you feel a strong sense of belonging. You are primed to find solace in that form of spiritual practice, and not any other.

It's akin to nostalgia, and it makes sense that older people would feel that pull more, after the drama of a life well-lived.

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Your feelings are not facts. As a research scientist, can you provide a cite?

DP. Do you not understand what PP meant when he started the sentence with "I bet"?

Now if you want to talk about facts and evidence, you will certainly find enthusiastic takers.

Do you?

You don't understand that the post was agreeing with you, because "I bet" doesn't introduce facts.

Then why did you demand facts? Nonsense.

Sure. Show us facts instead of continuing to blather on about it. You see atheists here posting all the time that "even the people who go to church just do it for the community." (As if we didn't all have tons of other community things to do on a Sunday morning, like kids' travel soccer or my nature walk group, and some of this obligatory.)

Again he just said it as an opinion.

Your silly implied threat notwithstanding, I'm fine with whatever the results show.

What, that you can't show any facts for what YOU believe? Not a threat. That's a fact.

It's time you guys backed this up with some quantitative findings. And no, not the usual stuff from Pew you always trot out, about the decline in attendance. In case you need this spelled out: you were talking about the motivations of people who DO attend, and that's what you need to provide stats on.

For the 10th time it's an opinion.

But do us a favor, start a new thread instead of continuing to derail this one.

Are you fricking serious? These posts are 100% germane to what Dawkins said, and the very title of the thread. THEY. COULD. NOT. BE. MORE. ON TOPIC.

Yet again you demand people leave your echo chamber. Why? Can't you handle differing opinions?

What a panty-load of bs and deflection and gish-galloping and nasty aggression that's desperately trying to mask your ignorance. Troll much?

You're so, so wrong. People don't attend religious services mostly for "community." According to Pew, 81% of people who attend religious services say they go because it's "very important" that they "be closer to God." Another 13% said being "closer to God" was "somewhat important" and only 4% said it wasn't important.

Here you go: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1201343.page. You never responded to that brand-new thread. Hmmm, why?

Pew, beloved of DCUM's atheists, has spoken. Maybe we can put this to rest now. And get back to the thread topic of Dawkins.

The gish-gollop troll! We couldn’t trash atheists without you.

Dawkins is some random guy who is an atheist. Why do you care so much about what he says?

Why don't you get out your white flag and fly it. You have zero response to the Pew survey that shows you're wrong. So you insult the messenger. Could you be any more of a pathetic troll?

[Anonymous]

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't get it. I'm a research scientist and I'm culturally Christian. It means having grown up in a Christian country, celebrating the major Holidays, reading the Bible at some point, maybe attending Church or a private religious school as a child, or having pious relatives who have perhaps made a positive impression on you, and generally being steeped in the external trappings of your community's religious practices.

It does not mean BELIEVING in God.

But it means that when you hear the bells ring, or step into an old church, or hear the choir, you feel a strong sense of belonging. You are primed to find solace in that form of spiritual practice, and not any other.

It's akin to nostalgia, and it makes sense that older people would feel that pull more, after the drama of a life well-lived.

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Your feelings are not facts. As a research scientist, can you provide a cite?

DP. Do you not understand what PP meant when he started the sentence with "I bet"?

Now if you want to talk about facts and evidence, you will certainly find enthusiastic takers.

Do you?

You don't understand that the post was agreeing with you, because "I bet" doesn't introduce facts.

Then why did you demand facts? Nonsense.

Sure. Show us facts instead of continuing to blather on about it. You see atheists here posting all the time that "even the people who go to church just do it for the community." (As if we didn't all have tons of other community things to do on a Sunday morning, like kids' travel soccer or my nature walk group, and some of this obligatory.)

Again he just said it as an opinion.

Your silly implied threat notwithstanding, I'm fine with whatever the results show.

What, that you can't show any facts for what YOU believe? Not a threat. That's a fact.

It's time you guys backed this up with some quantitative findings. And no, not the usual stuff from Pew you always trot out, about the decline in attendance. In case you need this spelled out: you were talking about the motivations of people who DO attend, and that's what you need to provide stats on.

For the 10th time it's an opinion.

But do us a favor, start a new thread instead of continuing to derail this one.

Are you fricking serious? These posts are 100% germane to what Dawkins said, and the very title of the thread. THEY. COULD. NOT. BE. MORE. ON TOPIC.

Yet again you demand people leave your echo chamber. Why? Can't you handle differing opinions?

What a panty-load of bs and deflection and gish-galloping and nasty aggression that's desperately trying to mask your ignorance. Troll much?

You're so, so wrong. People don't attend religious services mostly for "community." According to Pew, 81% of people who attend religious services say they go because it's "very important" that they "be closer to God." Another 13% said being "closer to God" was "somewhat important" and only 4% said it wasn't important.

Here you go: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1201343.page. You never responded to that brand-new thread. Hmmm, why?

Pew, beloved of DCUM's atheists, has spoken. Maybe we can put this to rest now. And get back to the thread topic of Dawkins.

The gish-gollop troll! We couldn’t trash atheists without you.

Dawkins is some random guy who is an atheist. Why do you care so much about what he says?

Why don't you get out your white flag and fly it. You have zero response to the Pew survey that shows you're wrong. So you insult the messenger. Could you be any more of a pathetic troll?

You are confusing posters.

Dawkins is some random guy who is an atheist. Why do you care so much about what he says?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Agree

You're wrong, quite the opposite in fact. Pew says 94% of those who attend religious services do so because they want to become closer to God. https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/0/1201343.page#27364139

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't get it. I'm a research scientist and I'm culturally Christian. It means having grown up in a Christian country, celebrating the major Holidays, reading the Bible at some point, maybe attending Church or a private religious school as a child, or having pious relatives who have perhaps made a positive impression on you, and generally being steeped in the external trappings of your community's religious practices.

It does not mean BELIEVING in God.

But it means that when you hear the bells ring, or step into an old church, or hear the choir, you feel a strong sense of belonging. You are primed to find solace in that form of spiritual practice, and not any other.

It's akin to nostalgia, and it makes sense that older people would feel that pull more, after the drama of a life well-lived.

I bet that the immense majority of people in the world are CULTURALLY affiliated with their religion, but don't actually think deeply about whether they truly believe or not.

Your feelings are not facts. As a research scientist, can you provide a cite?

DP. Do you not understand what PP meant when he started the sentence with "I bet"?

Now if you want to talk about facts and evidence, you will certainly find enthusiastic takers.

Do you?

You don't understand that the post was agreeing with you, because "I bet" doesn't introduce facts.

Then why did you demand facts? Nonsense.

Sure. Show us facts instead of continuing to blather on about it. You see atheists here posting all the time that "even the people who go to church just do it for the community." (As if we didn't all have tons of other community things to do on a Sunday morning, like kids' travel soccer or my nature walk group, and some of this obligatory.)

Again he just said it as an opinion.

Your silly implied threat notwithstanding, I'm fine with whatever the results show.

What, that you can't show any facts for what YOU believe? Not a threat. That's a fact.

It's time you guys backed this up with some quantitative findings. And no, not the usual stuff from Pew you always trot out, about the decline in attendance. In case you need this spelled out: you were talking about the motivations of people who DO attend, and that's what you need to provide stats on.

For the 10th time it's an opinion.

But do us a favor, start a new thread instead of continuing to derail this one.

Are you fricking serious? These posts are 100% germane to what Dawkins said, and the very title of the thread. THEY. COULD. NOT. BE. MORE. ON TOPIC.

Yet again you demand people leave your echo chamber. Why? Can't you handle differing opinions?

What a panty-load of bs and deflection and gish-galloping and nasty aggression that's desperately trying to mask your ignorance. Troll much?

You're so, so wrong. People don't attend religious services mostly for "community." According to Pew, 81% of people who attend religious services say they go because it's "very important" that they "be closer to God." Another 13% said being "closer to God" was "somewhat important" and only 4% said it wasn't important.

Here you go: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1201343.page. You never responded to that brand-new thread. Hmmm, why?

Pew, beloved of DCUM's atheists, has spoken. Maybe we can put this to rest now. And get back to the thread topic of Dawkins.

The gish-gollop troll! We couldn’t trash atheists without you.

Dawkins is some random guy who is an atheist. Why do you care so much about what he says?

Why don't you get out your white flag and fly it. You have zero response to the Pew survey that shows you're wrong. So you insult the messenger. Could you be any more of a pathetic troll?

You are confusing posters.

Dawkins is some random guy who is an atheist. Why do you care so much about what he says?

I'm not OP and I disagree with her about Dawkins' imminent conversion. I was just dealing with a troll who wanted to deflect the whole thread into some fake facts.