Great job on the Athiest conference. Who knew? I like the title especially, everybody is searching for something, it seems.

If you have an opinion on Ron Paul I'd like to hear it. It's a topic on The Soccer Mom Vote....maybe you would deign to comment?

http://thesoccermomvote.typepad.com

To listen to these atheists, you would think they were non-determinists in that they believe that a person's religious affiliation, or otherwise, is, to some degree, a matter of choice. I challenge them to prove their position without recourse to free-will-of-the-gaps style arguments.

Well Big John. How about the fact that a person's religion is typically determined by the family in which they were born. If you were born in India, you wouldn't be Big John the christian (if that's what you are). You would likely be something else, a Buddhist or a Hindu. When you grow up, you listen to the dogma of your faith, and decide whether or not to believe it. I was raised a catholic, went to catholic schools, was an altar boy, and realized what a bunch of hooey it all was.

Religion is a choice.

Big John, one more thought. The reason you feel it in your bones is because the universe started responding to your needs as an infant. You grew to understand as you formed your first thoughts that there was something beyond you. Had your parents left your newborn butt out in the woods, you would have learned quickly that the universe didn't care about you.

I am a practioner of critical thinking and believe everyone should be open to criticism, including all rationalists and free-thinkers.

However, I found this article to be very biased and motivated by a clear agenda. This is not journalism, but rather evangelism.

Why is it Michael that the more people thump their bibles and advocate for the decalogue, the more likely they are are to blow off #9 (that's the one about bearing false witness for those readers who have forgotten!)?

It's sad to see so many distortions and ad hominems in one piece of "journalism."

Is it part of the "arationalist" moral creed?

BTW, to a certain extent religion is a choice (even though the childhood indoctrination usually makes it difficult).

Problem is though, when you change your mind, your cult mates get very upset. In many parts of the world they mock you (ring a bell?), and in others they kill you.

Uplifting isn't it?

A cowardly piece. Snide enough to poison the well, half-jokey enough to escape the responsibility that comes with actually saying something in earnest.

Thank you for making me laugh.
I am so scared because of all that religion being shoved down my throat that i trembled when i firsttime admitted on the web that i do not believe in any god.
Now your shrilling makes me feel that i can go one step further and buy a scarletA- shirt.

Your article proves yet again the ridiculous hypocrisy and true tendentiousness of religious apologists. There isn't a single figure in the article that you haven't totally misrepresented or mocked in a facile and utterly childish manner. You should be ashamed of yourself for peddling such contemptible drivel as "journalism".
Until such time as you can face up to not only the patent irrationality of ALL religious beliefs, and the cost that such beliefs have exacted since the dawn of human history, you are quite frankly beyond the pale of any serious or meaningful discussion about the value of secularism, which is expressly predicated on a principal which rejects fundamentalism in all its manifestations. A pitiful piece by a feeble and fraudulent fool.

Ad hominem, is the last resort of theists when fighting skeptical atheists. It shows just one thing. YOU ARE LOSING!

Every time, in any kind of debate, when someone starts using personal attacks instead of rational arguments, it is clear sign he has lost the battle.

You, Mister, are insult to human dignity.

Did you actually attend the conference or are you employing an evangelical spin?

Appallingly misrepresentative dribble. Goebels would have been proud. Congratulations on producing such a hyperbolic hatchet-job. Looks like the "it's okay to lie if it's for Jesus" meme isn't going away any time soon. You should be ashamed.

Religion is not a choice any more than hair colour or the atomic weight of carbon is. The concept of free will or human agency is an irrational meme.

You can take the philosophical stance that the universe is entirely deterministic and there is no free will at all, in which case you may as well abrogate all responsibility and morality, since all the actions we take are completely determined at birth. Since an epiphenomenon of the complex biological processes of our brains is the very convincing illusion of consciousness and free will, it is quite difficult for us to take such a stance. The atomic weight of carbon gives no such illusion, nor does natural hair colour. It would therefore be fairer, and equally acceptable to determinists and those of us who like to think free will exists alike, to compare religion with something which appears to have a similar level of free will attached. Religion is as much a choice as your favourite sports team.

For Big John: Strict determinism is a difficult position to maintain, especially if you want to criticize people's behavior (which you apparently do). That is to say, from a determinist perspective the actions of atheists are no less determined than the religion one grows up in, so why criticize them? (Well, because you can do nothing else, I suppose...nor can I).

Mr. Dougherty: A pretty weak article, I would say. It seems to consist mostly of heaping scorn on atheists via ad hominen attacks and involves no attempt to engage the ideas involved.

I can highly recommend the following response: http://www.rationalresponders.com/secular_fundamentalists_there_is_no_such_thing_and_the_aai_conference_doesn_t_make_atheism_a_movement_either

I believe the author has added one more page to the book of religious immorality. How can you believe in a god such as you do, and then lie and cheat so openly? It's as if your sub conscience, deep down, is telling you that you don't really believe in god, but your programming from birth is just so darn powerful, you keep spewing the same old garbage anyway. You can't believe in god and be so deceitful; it's like preemptive suicide.

Oh Oh, looks like the religious apologists are squealing big time. Might be time to address a single argument rather than this adolescent rant. No wonder the irrational are on the run, as they have no argument other than the usual inane gobbledygook

"The Inquisition at least allowed defendants the chance to recant—often many times." Pratt. So, the choice of being tortured and murdered or the choice of lying. What a nobrainer. Suggest you read "The crucible" by Arthur Miller to see where that line of reasoning leads.

Artice F-.

Once again this piece proves my assertion that an irrational belief held to for purely emotional reasons (in this case Christianity) cannot be defended by rational means. As a result we get this pitiful exercise in ad hominem and irrelevances.