We don’t know if there are gods, or a God

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

Sure, that's fine, you can make it that simple if you need to. I don't quite see it that way. People who aren't stupid can have stupid ideas and do stupid things. We all do sometimes.

FYI This is not a defense of theism in any way, it is an entirely irrational position with grossly insufficient evidence for it.

It’s not clear, but the PP could have meant that the positions were “irrational = illogical = stupid”. Describing the behavior, not the person.

Someone here thinks that everything is about them. Quoted section used "to me" not "you are" or "they are". They were expressing their viewpoint.

They are probably a Christian. They are taught their life has purpose and meaning and is part of God's special plan for them.

If an atheist were told or thought they were told they were irrational, illogical, and stupid would they find that annoying? Or just relax in their superiority and ngaf?

I will start ngaf.

Ta ta.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are they generally looking for?

Who said they were looking for anything?

Most people have goals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

Sure, that's fine, you can make it that simple if you need to. I don't quite see it that way. People who aren't stupid can have stupid ideas and do stupid things. We all do sometimes.

FYI This is not a defense of theism in any way, it is an entirely irrational position with grossly insufficient evidence for it.

It’s not clear, but the PP could have meant that the positions were “irrational = illogical = stupid”. Describing the behavior, not the person.

Yes, that is exactly what I said - but if you read the thread (and it is not all quoted so you'd have to painstaikingly backtrack, so don't expect you to) but the statements were the opposite - describing the person as stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

Sure, that's fine, you can make it that simple if you need to. I don't quite see it that way. People who aren't stupid can have stupid ideas and do stupid things. We all do sometimes.

FYI This is not a defense of theism in any way, it is an entirely irrational position with grossly insufficient evidence for it.

It’s not clear, but the PP could have meant that the positions were “irrational = illogical = stupid”. Describing the behavior, not the person.

Someone here thinks that everything is about them. Quoted section used "to me" not "you are" or "they are". They were expressing their viewpoint.

They are probably a Christian. They are taught their life has purpose and meaning and is part of God's special plan for them.

If an atheist were told or thought they were told they were irrational, illogical, and stupid would they find that annoying? Or just relax in their superiority and ngaf?

I will start ngaf.

Ta ta.

No one was "told" anything.

If an irrational, illogical, and stupid person "thought they were told" something, then being annoyed is a reasonable reaction. That reaction is on them for their irrational, illogical, and stupid thinking.

As an atheist, I am able to rationalize what the PP was expressing. Thus, it does not bother me.

I am also not trying to represent all atheists. They can speak for themselves, as most do.

[Anonymous]

I am certainly not representative of most believers.
That said I am indeed a physiological hot reactor. Thank you for pointing this out. I can resolve to work on that since it's not good for my body.

Deep gratitude.
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

Sure, that's fine, you can make it that simple if you need to. I don't quite see it that way. People who aren't stupid can have stupid ideas and do stupid things. We all do sometimes.

FYI This is not a defense of theism in any way, it is an entirely irrational position with grossly insufficient evidence for it.

It’s not clear, but the PP could have meant that the positions were “irrational = illogical = stupid”. Describing the behavior, not the person.

Someone here thinks that everything is about them. Quoted section used "to me" not "you are" or "they are". They were expressing their viewpoint.

They are probably a Christian. They are taught their life has purpose and meaning and is part of God's special plan for them.

If an atheist were told or thought they were told they were irrational, illogical, and stupid would they find that annoying? Or just relax in their superiority and ngaf?

I will start ngaf.

Ta ta.

No one was "told" anything.

If an irrational, illogical, and stupid person "thought they were told" something, then being annoyed is a reasonable reaction. That reaction is on them for their irrational, illogical, and stupid thinking.

As an atheist, I am able to rationalize what the PP was expressing. Thus, it does not bother me.

I am also not trying to represent all atheists. They can speak for themselves, as most do.

Atheist here - it would depend on what I was told, whether I felt stupid or not. I generally don't feel stupid, but I am often uninformed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

Why do atheists simply saying there is no god seem militant to you? It's not militant at all. it's a belief that this life is all we have. It's not believing in Gods. Not all atheists are alike any more than all religious people are alike. All atheists have in common is that they don't believe in God and all believers have in common is that they DO. Other than that, they are all regular people, with lots of differences and similarities.

Thanks for responding. Maybe militant isn't the right term, but I guess I would apply it to the posts that basically keep saying there is no god/you are stupid to believe in sky fairies over and over and over. These are one or two lines over and over. Vigilant? Repetitive?

I basically thought atheists were nice people, at least the ones I know of (religion isn't a topic of discussion person to person) or who say so online like a cat video guy, but getting called irrational, stupid, assumed to be evangelical or fundamentalist every time just gets old.

I mean, I don't reply to every "i don't believe there is a god and there is no scientific proof there is" with "god is real i know it in my heart" and if I did that would get old pretty fast too.

If you plan to be an atheist, you're going to need thicker skin. Try venturing into Bible Belt territory with a t-shirt that says F Jesus.

Why wear such a tee shirt anywhere?

If someone can wear a t-shirt that says, "I "heart" Jesus", then a person should be able to wear a t-shirt that says, "F Jesus".

Do either need to provide a justification for doing so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

As an atheist, I agree with your point that it is completely unproductive (of either side obviously, but here you are talking about atheists), to call names, reduce the arguments to attack of religious people. As someone deeply harmed by religion, I can tell you, though, that there are serious harms coming from religion, not all religious people of course, and that is why some of us hold our positions with what sometimes feels like being militant. I appreciate a thoughtful, philosophical, logical discussion because it is important to me to add to the discourse that could one day change our world for the better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

There may be no good reason to hold to belief in God, except it becomes acceptable when so many people do it. And the promise of eternal life is great!

Some non-believers respect believers' right to hold religious views - even though they've rejected such views for themselves.

Such views are often not held in reverse. That is, believers often think it's acceptable to try to covert their friends to religion, when they've made it clear that they're not religious.

That's a reasonable bone to pick. But the "often" is weird to me but then I don't hold evangelical views. I would say "some" there too. This may lead to nonbelievers scolding me for being a bad believer, but I don't take the Bible literally either. Some believers don't lol.

I cannot imagine trying to convert anybody, especially when they have said they aren't religious. When they do that, I am vey careful to say I am thinking of then and hope they heal when they are injured or sick, never that I offer "thoughts and prayers."

As an atheist whose children and family that were deeply harmed by religion (also a PP), I wish all religious people were like you. However-they are not, and even NON evangelicals hold to some ways of thinking that can be harmful to others let alone themselves. That is why I am the activist that I am. In addition, "moderately" religious people still lend credence to a worldview and belief system that is ultimately caused great harm in this world, and by that measure is indirectly just as harmful. I happen to believe that most religious people (even the ones that caused harm to my familiy) are good people with brains that have been rewired into a system of belief that they are not really in control of. It is a reprogramming that has built in fail-safes, and that is very difficult to escape from

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

As an atheist, I agree with your point that it is completely unproductive (of either side obviously, but here you are talking about atheists), to call names, reduce the arguments to attack of religious people. As someone deeply harmed by religion, I can tell you, though, that there are serious harms coming from religion, not all religious people of course, and that is why some of us hold our positions with what sometimes feels like being militant. I appreciate a thoughtful, philosophical, logical discussion because it is important to me to add to the discourse that could one day change our world for the better.

Not possible unless everyone is working off of the same facts/assumptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

There may be no good reason to hold to belief in God, except it becomes acceptable when so many people do it. And the promise of eternal life is great!

Some non-believers respect believers' right to hold religious views - even though they've rejected such views for themselves.

Such views are often not held in reverse. That is, believers often think it's acceptable to try to covert their friends to religion, when they've made it clear that they're not religious.

That's a reasonable bone to pick. But the "often" is weird to me but then I don't hold evangelical views. I would say "some" there too. This may lead to nonbelievers scolding me for being a bad believer, but I don't take the Bible literally either. Some believers don't lol.

I cannot imagine trying to convert anybody, especially when they have said they aren't religious. When they do that, I am vey careful to say I am thinking of then and hope they heal when they are injured or sick, never that I offer "thoughts and prayers."

As an atheist whose children and family that were deeply harmed by religion (also a PP), I wish all religious people were like you. However-they are not, and even NON evangelicals hold to some ways of thinking that can be harmful to others let alone themselves. That is why I am the activist that I am. In addition, "moderately" religious people still lend credence to a worldview and belief system that is ultimately caused great harm in this world, and by that measure is indirectly just as harmful. I happen to believe that most religious people (even the ones that caused harm to my familiy) are good people with brains that have been rewired into a system of belief that they are not really in control of. It is a reprogramming that has built in fail-safes, and that is very difficult to escape from

First, I am very sorry to hear that you, your children, and family were deeply harmed by religion.

That certainly enables me to understand the logic for your comprehensive activism. I can understand your view that any and all deists contribute to giving credence to harmful systems. I hold that view about self described "middle of the road" adherents to some entities or organizations that are political in nature

My dismay over being reacted to the same way as what I consider "them" is nothing compared to yours. I won't react anymore.

I sincerely do wish you well.

Thank you for posting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

There may be no good reason to hold to belief in God, except it becomes acceptable when so many people do it. And the promise of eternal life is great!

Some non-believers respect believers' right to hold religious views - even though they've rejected such views for themselves.

Such views are often not held in reverse. That is, believers often think it's acceptable to try to covert their friends to religion, when they've made it clear that they're not religious.

That's a reasonable bone to pick. But the "often" is weird to me but then I don't hold evangelical views. I would say "some" there too. This may lead to nonbelievers scolding me for being a bad believer, but I don't take the Bible literally either. Some believers don't lol.

I cannot imagine trying to convert anybody, especially when they have said they aren't religious. When they do that, I am vey careful to say I am thinking of then and hope they heal when they are injured or sick, never that I offer "thoughts and prayers."

As an atheist whose children and family that were deeply harmed by religion (also a PP), I wish all religious people were like you. However-they are not, and even NON evangelicals hold to some ways of thinking that can be harmful to others let alone themselves. That is why I am the activist that I am. In addition, "moderately" religious people still lend credence to a worldview and belief system that is ultimately caused great harm in this world, and by that measure is indirectly just as harmful. I happen to believe that most religious people (even the ones that caused harm to my familiy) are good people with brains that have been rewired into a system of belief that they are not really in control of. It is a reprogramming that has built in fail-safes, and that is very difficult to escape from

I recently contacted someone because we have a mutual friend, who lives in another country and who has been strangely silent for a while - not answering emails. Turns out he's very ill and the mutual friend (MF), whose name I found in a group email, then asked me to pray for our friend. I told him I did not pray and asked for his phone number. MF then gave me a long sermon about the value of prayer, but no phone #. I asked again for the phone #. (this was all done on email), which he gave me, with another admonition to pray, which I ignored completely this time.

This to me is an example of Christian privilege. The mutual friend put getting me to pray above me communicating with our ill friend, even after I said I didn't pray. I didn't mention that I was an atheist and he apparently doesn't know - or doesn't care, and cares more about getting me to pray than me talking to our friend and offering him the comfort of knowing how much I care about him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

Are you done whining? Would you like to join the discussion of ideas?

Better yet, go back and read through threads. There have been more than enough examples and reasons provided of the ongoing harms of theism.

Greta Christina:

[Even] moderate religion still does harm. It still encourages people to believe in invisible beings, inaudible voices, intangible entities, undetectable forces, and events and judgments that happen after we die. And therefore, it still disables reality checks… making people more vulnerable to oppression, fraud, and abuse.

What’s more, moderate religion is in the minority. The oppressive, intolerant, reality-denying forms of religion are far more common, and far better at perpetuating themselves.

And moderate religion gives these ugly forms credibility. It gives credibility to the idea that believing in things there’s no reason to believe is valid, and actually virtuous. It gives credibility to the idea that invisible worlds are real, more real and important than the visible one. It gives credibility to the idea that our seriously biased personal intuition is more trustworthy than logic or verifiable evidence. It gives credibility to the idea that religious beliefs, alone among all other ideas, should be beyond criticism; that the very act of questioning religion is inherently intolerant.

[Anonymous]

Some harms of believing:

The discouragement of rational, critical thought.

Vilification of homosexuality, resulting in discrimination, parents disowning their children, murder, and suicide.

Women treated like second class citizens based on religious teachings.

Children growing up to hate and fear science and scientists, because science disproves their parents' religion - leading to appalling scientific illiteracy.

People aren't making the most of this life because of their belief in an afterlife.

People dying - and letting their children die - because their religion forbids accepting medical help.

Women having septic abortions -- or being forced to have unwanted children they resent -- because religious organizations have gotten laws passed making abortion illegal or inaccessible.

Censorship (often destructive) of speech, art, books, music, films, poetry, songs and, if possible, thought.

Children spending the period of their lives when the brain is most receptive to learning new information reading, rereading, and even memorizing religious texts.

Holy wars - followers of different faiths (or even the same faith) killing each other in the name of their (benevolent, loving and merciful) gods.

The destruction of great works of art considered to be pornographic/blasphemous, and the persecution of the artists.

Slavery condoned by religious texts.

School boards having to spend time and money and resources on the fight to have evolution taught in the schools.

Hardship compounded by the guilt required to reconcile the idea of a fair god with reality ("why is God punishing me? What have I done wrong? Don't I have enough faith?").

Human achievements - from skillful surgery to emergency landings - attributed to gods instead of to the people actually responsible.

Billions spent to build, maintain, and staff houses of worship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

Are you done whining? Would you like to join the discussion of ideas?

Better yet, go back and read through threads. There have been more than enough examples and reasons provided of the ongoing harms of theism.

Greta Christina:

[Even] moderate religion still does harm. It still encourages people to believe in invisible beings, inaudible voices, intangible entities, undetectable forces, and events and judgments that happen after we die. And therefore, it still disables reality checks… making people more vulnerable to oppression, fraud, and abuse.

What’s more, moderate religion is in the minority. The oppressive, intolerant, reality-denying forms of religion are far more common, and far better at perpetuating themselves.

And moderate religion gives these ugly forms credibility. It gives credibility to the idea that believing in things there’s no reason to believe is valid, and actually virtuous. It gives credibility to the idea that invisible worlds are real, more real and important than the visible one. It gives credibility to the idea that our seriously biased personal intuition is more trustworthy than logic or verifiable evidence. It gives credibility to the idea that religious beliefs, alone among all other ideas, should be beyond criticism; that the very act of questioning religion is inherently intolerant.

Absolutely correct