1 As an athiest, I am not sure if I should post a comment here because on one hand you are aking a question of athiests (assuming it is not rhetorical), and on the other you have told us to "Butt the fuck out" (no help with interpretation needed here!). Oh well, I'll give it a shot anyway. I cannot answer for others, but I can tell you that as an athiest I always feel that the people who know me are trying to change my mind. I find this insulting, especially when it is done with an air of superiority and with the premise that I am just misguided and they are obviously right. I guess that I have studied the bible and religion as a defense mechanism. It is very effective too because in a discussion of facts, I can now back every theist I know into "Well, I'll just pray for you". Lots of inconsistencies in the bible to work with. I also join discussion groups with other athiests because I enjoy the discussion about philosophical questions you must address if you say there is not a god (meaning of life type stuff). What I don't enjoy is the thiest bashing that always seems to creep into the dicsussion. Just a few thoughts, sorry if they are not welcome here.

2 I'm an atheist, but I don't preselytize and I don't lecture about atheism or the evils of religion. What I do, however, is hold open dialogue with people of faith. I am open-minded and willing to listen--and also inhesitant to point out when those in some faiths attacks the faith of others. As for why do it: first and foremost, because more than 90% of the population professes some religious faith. We are involved in a war which directly involves religious faith. It would thus seem that such discussions should be had, wouldn't you?

3 Spurius: But I asked you to butt the fuck out politely. Doesn't that count for something? Of course your thoughts are welcome here. I'm the one to blame if I gave off mixed messages. I had a hard time writing this post and I undoubtedly screwed a few things up in the meantime. I apologize. Thank you for taking the time to answer. I appreciate it. Dean: Thanks for stopping by. I take your points, yet I read your post as one big long educational message to us Christians about what Jews really think of us and you, the athiest, chose to act as the neutral mediator between religions. I didn't take it in reference to the war, and although your points about 9/11 were valid, forgive me if I missed that they were the central tenet of your post. It just didn't come across that way, and that's why I reacted the way I did.

4 I actually thought Dean's post was interesting, but did have a couple of unintended flaws. Perhaps the most obvious is one of unintended consequence. Suggesting that Jews are hiding secrets from Christians and secretly loathe them is probably not a message Dean's Jewish friends would consider helpful. Then again, a point Dean doesn't seem to appreciate, is that Christians aren't terribly bent out of shape when learning non-Christians disagree with them about the meaning of things in the Bible. That stuff is far more heated when Christians disagree with other Christians.

5 I generally enjoyed Dean's post, but I had another thought about it: he states that in 9/11 many Jews were concerned that "Americans would blame them" for what happened. Some Americans did blame them: but for the most part, they weren't Christians: they were people on the Left who are at odds with any sort of faith. Seemed to undermine his point....

6 Yanking the tiger's tail again, love? "If they don't believe in God, or organized religion, why are these people so bloody interested in matters of faith? Could someone explain this one to me, because I'm not getting it." Once again (we've had this discussion before, dear readers), you are presuming that my disdain of organized religion precludes me from having ANY faith whatsoever. My faith - and this is the basic premise of being an agnostic for me - has nothing to do with the Catholics, the Jewish People, Islam or the Presbyterians. My faith, or spirituality, is as important to me as yours is to you. Am I not allowed to participate in the discussion? Apparently not, because once again you presume that the word "faith" can ONLY be used to refer to faith in Jesus Christ as proscribed by Mother Church. To you and the entirety of the Catholic Church: get over yourselves. You have no lock on use of the word "faith". Faith describes confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. The person, idea or thing in question here is whether or not there is something greater than ourselves. "...are as pious in their disbelief as are the most faithful members of any religion. They choose to prostelytize about reason and logic instead of a God." Once again, you seem to misunderstand the concept that agnostics can believe in a god that is not by your definition "the" God. Atheists may argue logically and reasonably against the concept of god, but agnostics will argue that reason and logic have led us to the conclusion that God is not an old man with a white beard who lives in the clouds and will only love us if we do what the men in the funny hats protecting the pedophiles tell us to do. "What I would like to know is why do these athiests and agnostics keep harping on about religion and God when they don't believe in any of it? Why does it interest them so? Because, I have to tell you, it smacks of overcompensation, like they have to continually justify their decision not to believe in God." Two things here: 1. Why? Because we're CONSTANTLY BEING PUT IN THE POSITION TO DEFEND OURSELVES IF WE DON'T HAPPEN TO KOW-TOW TO WHATEVER NONSENSE IS BEING SPOUTED "IN THE NAME OF JESUS" THIS WEEK! If we, as people who don't fall in line, weren't constantly attacked as being "part of the problem", you wouldn't hear a peep out of us. Frankly, we believe those of you who are still worshiping the invisible on the words of the village holy man aren't ready for the discussion. 2. "..don't believe in any of it" For crying out loud! Third time I'm going to tell you in this piece - just because we don't belive YOUR version of it, does not mean we don't believe that there is something in the universe greater than ourselves. Our spiritual fulfillment is just as important to us as yours is to you, but we don't need the paid intermediary to get there. If you're going to open this can of worms again, you had better learn to slow down when you make these posts, and realise that of the world population of over six billion, the Catholics are, even in the developed world, a minority. Stop arguing from the assumption that there is only "one true faith", because you see evidence every day that that is not the case. We, those whose minds are not clouded by the promises of people claiming to speak for god, are here waiting for YOU to see the light. There is more to your spirituality than some friggin priest who doesn't think you can possibly be his equal because you don't have a dick can give you. Find it for yourself.

7 Heh. Do you see, my devoted Cake Eater Readers, what it's like being married to the husband? Usually we have this discussion from midnight to three a.m., so it's rather nice to have some daylight shone on the discussion. Oh, I do love him so. (And, yes, I really do mean that.) I have very few problems with your argument, my dear. The fact that you conveniently skipped over the portion where I said it was all right to defend yourself, and yet blasted me anyway for it is the least of them. The only serious problem I have with your argument is this: Frankly, we believe those of you who are still worshiping the invisible on the words of the village holy man aren't ready for the discussion. So, if we're not worthy of taking part in the discussion, why do you bother gracing us with your presence in discussions about religions? Hmmmm? If you're really so above and beyond it, why do you bother? If, for you, it's really comparable to a person with a PhD in microbiology taking part in a third-grade science class discussion on tadpoles, why do you waste your time with it? Isn't it beneath you?

8 Because, and this goes to your original question of why we make any noise at all, if we don't speak up for those who have differing beliefs, who will? Case in point (to finally acknowledge the elephant in the corner we've been ignoring): the Terry Schiavo case. Is this a question of religion? or is a question of the law? I already know you believe it to be a question of law. As such, it has been adjudicated many times over by many different courts even going so far as to have the rules bent repeatedly so that it can be heard again and again. The decision, every time, has been clear. Yet there is vociferous dissent from a specific faction that has made political hay and much news by keeping this issue alive. It is the christian right that is forcing this issue to the front and in the process attempting to force their singular viewpoint of an acceptable outcome upon us all. Please don't get onto the discussion of that case, it was only an example to show that if there is no voiced dissent to the very loud christian right, the system would become unbalanced. We speak up because if we don't we lose our right to. Second point: be careful - very careful - of commenting on what another blogger does or does not have a "right" to post about. I've got a nice bucket of smooth river stones you can consider as you stand in your glass blogger house. Love you, babe. Happy Easter. Did you get the sweet potatoes in the oven yet?

9 The sweet potatoes are in the oven.