good for you, but...

Submitted by Otto (United States), Feb 24, 2012 at 21:50

M. Tovey -

I am impressed. You have obviously put a lot of thought into this area. But my basic position remains, that is, that whatever justification exists for or against a particular god, it applies equally well to all of them. Why not dispense with the mental gymnastics and simply admit that, without being 100% sure, we can be 99.999... % sure that "God" is a mental creation for which no externally verifiable information exists.

This is a logical approach to the topic of religion, and is meant in no way to denigrate whatever belief others may hold dear. You can be equally ignorant of the solution to a calculus problem, and it will mean nothing to most of mankind (as calculus really doesn't play a big part in most people's day-to-day existence.)

As long as the level of proof is what it currently is regarding religion, I provisionally suspend belief. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and I'm still waiting.

That said, as long as you don't insist that I do more than passively, benignly respect your beliefs, and they don't impact my affairs, feel free to select whatever deity or belief system you find comforting. I will smile and nod pleasantly and wish you a happy whatever-holiday-you-are-currently-celebrating.

Just include me out. Respectfully. And don't attempt to convince or convert me. I am happy with a logical life that doesn't include magical thinking.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".