Can believers and nonbelievers get along

[Az]

Politics and Religion are the two big cultural taboos in America. We are not supposed to talk about either of them. But we gather here specifically to violate one of those taboos. Can our society handle the violation of the other taboo? Actual discussions about religion between believers and nonbelievers.

[mhr]

1. Faith Versus Reason - The Eternal Debate - Further Dialog Is Wasted Energy

especially between Fundies and the rest of the world.

[Muddleoftheroad]

3. Faithful vs. Faithless

Actually, both sides have faith. Some put theirs in science, others put theirs in God. Some actually do both. In my mind, God created science, so I have no problem doing both.

However, what I do have a problem with are the anti-religious who paint anyone who believes in God as a fundie and disregard their opinions as such.

[sendero]

5. I have no problem with religious people...

... as long as they don't think they can pass laws based on nothing more than their religious beliefs. And we have that in spades right now.

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. Nothing more?

For religious people, our beliefs are the foundation of EVERYTHING we do. So, if we vote for a candidate, vote for or against a law, etc., it is founded in our beliefs, just as your actions are founded in yours. You can't separate the two.

[Skittles]

11. he's not talking on you voting based on faith

WE DO NOT WANT LAWS BASED ON FAITH.

[Muddleoftheroad]

12. Laws are based on beliefs

Beliefs are based on faith. Again, you can't cut one from the other.

Every single issue ultimately goes back to our beliefs. Every belief ultimately is founded in our faith.

[Skittles]

56. I do not believe that

I don't base my beliefs on any kind of "faith:; I just do what I instinctly know is the RIGHT THING TO DO. I do NOT need a Bible or Koran telling me what is RIGHT or what is WRONG. I have beliefs but they are NOT based on "FAITH".

[Muddleoftheroad]

60. That is you

Millions or Billions of religious folk would answer differently.

[Skittles]

68. And I am saying PEOPLE ARE NOT ALLTHE SAME

nt

[truthspeaker]

61. Laws are based on values. Some, not all, get their values from beliefs

For example, murder is against the law. You may feel murder is immoral because it goes against the laws of god. I feel it is immoral for other reasons that having nothing to do with religious beliefs. But we both share the same value and can support the same law.

[Skittles]

83. exactly

OUR VALUES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION. I am sick of people telling me the world would be chaos without religion. I would argue exactly the opposite.

[blondeatlast]

20. As a Christian, I fight any alignment of faith and state.

ACLU member, GLBT ally, anti-privatization at all levels, and viciously anti-private school funding.

As I say, I probably have more in common with you than I do with Pat Robertson, at least I pray to God that I do. The alternative just ain't Christian, IMHO.

[cosmicaug]

8. Faith in science is an oxymoron.

Muddleoftheroad wrote:

Actually, both sides have faith. Some put theirs in science,...

Come on, you can't even compare the two! That's an easy cop-out. It's making an equivalence, out of a misguided sense of balance, were there is no equivalence.

Faith in science is an oxymoron. With true faith, there's little or no questioning. With true faith in science, there would be no scientific progress. With only true faith there can be no science.

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. Not a copout at all

The two really don't need to conflict at all in my opinion.

Merely having faith is silly. If you walk down the street and step out into traffic without looking expecting God to save you, you are being idiotic.

At the same time, if you only believe science can solve all problems without acknowledging that, at the origin of all things, something was there before that, then you are being equally blind.

[cosmicaug]

14. I never said....

Muddleoftheroad wrote:

The two really don't need to conflict at all in my opinion.

I never said anything about conflict. I just pointed out that faith in science is an oxymoron because thinking that science sometimes can work things out does in no way resemble believing that something is true merely because someone else (or some book) says so.

Muddleoftheroad wrote:

At the same time, if you only believe science can solve all problems

Why would anyone believe that (though it is the best tool we have to deal with reality) and what does that have to do with anything?

Muddleoftheroad wrote:

without acknowledging that, at the origin of all things, something was there before that, then you are being equally blind.

That's an arrogant statement that presupposes a lot of things. Better to admit ignorance. If you think admitting one's ignorance is the same thing as being blind, then I am blind.

[Cat Atomic]

41. ?

"At the same time, if you only believe science can solve all problems without acknowledging that, at the origin of all things, something was there before that, then you are being equally blind.

A scientific thinker would never make that claim. They'd say, "I don't know". There's no faith involved in that statement at all. It's only a dispassionate, objective statement of fact.

It's the faithful who claim knowledge on issues like this. If there's any blindness to be found here, it's in faith.

[Muddleoftheroad]

44. No blindness

For anything to exist, something must have always existed. Before the Big Bang, before anything was ever formed, something was always here.

As for scientific thinkers, they make all sorts of claims. Once they claimed the world was flat. Once they claimed the sun and planets revolved around the earth.

[gander2112]

84. Uh, not science...

You will find if you research it, that the ancient greeks knew (proved) that the world was round. The Church got into the argument saying it was flat because if the earth was a sphere, there would be no place for hell to exist in the literal sense.

Again with the planets, stars and sun revolving around the earth. There was evidence that the ancients had figured this out. However, church doctrine made it inconcievable that the earth wasn't the center of the universe, so it was "accepted as fact" that the earth was the center of the universe. For God woudn't have made the universe so impure as to not place us at its focal point.

The beauty of science is that these postulates are put forth, and believed until evidence is uncovered that disprove or support a different postulate. Science then adopts the new postulate as the best theory, until it is disproved.

In religion, when an inconsistency is found, you are told "Because it is god's way" and that is supposed to satisfy curiosity.

Balderdash.

Geoff

[rasputin1952]

15. I would rather think that 'faith' in science...

to continue to investigate situations is more appropriate.

Blind faith in ANYTHING, ends the growing process. The Dark Ages showed us what Blind Faith can do, Europe stalled in critical thinking for generations, leaving nothing but ignorance and fear.
Age old realities, (i.e., the earth revolves around the sun), were
discarded as heresy. Faith in science (pure), is also an anomaly; science changes the playing field, often overturning previous theories, (and supposed 'facts').

Point is, science and religion often work hand in hand, archeology is a science, and quite often, there are religious foundational discoveries as well through that science.

For those who regal in pure science, they are searching; for those that read the Bible, (I am not familiar enough with many of the other religions, but am sure there is a place somewhere that alludes to this same idea), we are told to 'seek' to find answers. We are not to accept things by Blind Faith, we are to search for answers. We must put effort into everything we do; answers will not just spring up before us, we must analyze what information we have, (science), and draw conclusions that we can accept.

Faith in religion has its place, just as faith that we will take another breath has its place. There is a common thread through all mankind, we are inherently inquisitive, some more than others, but we all ask questions.

Absolute faith in ANYTHING, destroys precisely what makes us what we are, human beings, searching for Truth.

Finally, I think that anyone who immediately dismisses another point of view, without hearing the arguments that might merit such a point, shows me that the are entrenched in their belief system, and are running on the very 'faith' they so despise. Ignorance begets fear, regardless of the situation. Only an open mind can come to conclusions. By closing down our minds, we invite ignorance.

O8)

[sangh0]

31. Re:Faith in science

Science proves theories based on the idea that predictability is proof that the theory accurately describes some immutable law of nature. This idea that predictability indicates an accurate description of some immutable property is unproven, and a belief in it can only be sustained by faith.

[mhr]

13. Fundie Is A Sub Class Of Faithful - Typically Most Uninterested In Dialog

Do not misconstrue my comments.

I did not say what you infer.

[blondeatlast]

18. Well said. I've often said that the only religious persecution

I've experienced is here at DU from those (the vast minority, but they are here) who can't seem to distinguish me from Fred Phelps.

I'm closer in personality and temperament to the average Atheist than to Pat Robertson; and far more tolerant of the former than the latter, too.

The average Atheist is more like a follower of Jesus Christ than Pat R is, anyway.

[cosmicaug]

19. And one shouldn't even try to fit fundies in the same box.

And while generalizations about fundamentalists can prove useful, one shouldn't try to make out fundydom to be a monolythic entity. They are not all the same and they do not all think in the same way.

[LeahMira]

24. No dichotomy exists, IMO.

Actually, both sides have faith. Some put theirs in science, others put theirs in God.

People who, as you put it, have faith in science simply think that, given time and freedom to inquire and investigate, science will discover and come to understand more about the forces that exist and operate in the universe. I don't think any reasonable person believes that science has all the answers right now.

I personally like the "definition" of G-d that Rabbi Mordechai Kaplan gave us. He said that G-d is the force that creates and sustains harmony throughout the universe.

For that reason, I believe scientists must be very close to G-d.

I think that what bothers me about fundamentalist groups is the idea that all the answers are known already and have already been "revealed" by G-d seveal thousand years ago when the Bible was organized and written down. The creation vs. evolution debate is probably the most obvious example of this. Some fundamentalists even go so far as to claim that G-d put dinosaur bones in the earth to test faith. That's ridiculous, IMO, because it lowers G-d to some sort of scheming, tricky manipulator that is really no better than what some humans are. It's man creating G-d in man's own image.

[starroute]

48. Faith and reason are not really in conflict

The idea of a conflict between faith and reason is a modern Western concept. As I recall, it arose only in the later Middle Ages, when it became obvious that the revival of classical philosophy could not be kept subordinate to the teachings of the Church.

Opinions on the matter see-sawed back and forth over the next several centuries. During the early stages of the Italian Renaissance, there was a good deal of hope that faith and reason could be reconciled, but by the end of the 1400's, skepticism was taking hold again. In the 1600's, the tendency was to partition the world into those things that could be understood rationally and those that could not -- a compromise that lasted until Darwin kicked the skids out from under it. Ever since then, the dispute has appeared unresolvable.

But actually, it's only a problem if you define faith to mean "unquestioning belief in traditional Christian doctrines." Real faith is much larger than that. Science is based on a faith that the universe makes sense and that human beings can understand how it works. If you don't have that faith (and the creationists don't), you can't even begin to do real science. But faith in science can't ever be proven logically -- you just have to accept it as a starting point and go on from there.

Christianity, as nearly as I can tell as an outsider, is based on a faith in certain mysteries -- the incarnation, the resurrection, the trinity -- that were never meant to be understood rationally, but rather to be experienced metaphorically, as keys to the nature and the destiny of the universe. That sort of faith is ultimately no different from the faith of scientists: it is a source of understanding, gained through acceptance that certain things cannot be understood.

The fundamentalists have twisted the question of faith around by insisting that their "faith" requires a literal belief in Noah's Flood, the Garden of Eden, etc. But that sort of "faith" isn't real faith at all -- it's simply a stubborn adherence to very bad (or at least very outdated) science.

So by all means, let us come together on the basis of a shared faith in mystery and a shared willingness to reason about truth.

[truthspeaker]

2. yes, as long as no one threatens to burn me at the stake

Hey, it's happened before.

[Maeve]

4. Depends on the debaters and the debate

For example, you and I have been on different sides and the same side--sometimes simultaneously. :hi:

If the discussion is respectful, yes.

[Rowdyboy]

6. I have no interest in converting you to my religion

If you ask questions, I'll answer. Otherwise, I feel it should be a personal matter-as should your lack of belief. Frankly, its no one else's business.

[rasputin1952]

16. Your eloquence in your statement is refreshing...

short and straight to the point! Excellent.

O8)

edited: can't believe I should have used spell check on such a short post, LOL

[skippysmom]

25. My attitude exactly

Live and let live. I have my personal beliefs, and they're just that: personal.

[mopinko]

10. actually met a true christian

and patriot who disagreed with me in every possible way. what a shock. someone on a bird chat, where i posted a link to my buttons. the link was actually to the section "democracy" which has buttons about bbv and big lies. i got reamed. and this person- fundie homeschool mom- said, "jesus told me to love and respect everyone, and the constitution says we have free speech. even though i do not agree with anything mo says, she has a right to say it." i nearly fainted. we turned out to have a lot in common. so, the thrashing was kinda worth it.

[rasputin1952]

17. What separates us from the rest of the life, is that we can discuss...

things and reach a conclusion. Many a 'christian' is a CINO; a true Christian, would not subject you to judgment, it is not their place. It is difficult to walk the walk, but one should at least TRY to, regardless of their religious affiliation.

What Jesus spoke of, is really simple, love, compassion, forgiveness and charity, (that's the base we should live by). There is more, especially about hypocrisy, but the base is LOVE of fellow humans.
I cannot fathom why that would be a problem for anyone. You don't have to accept another's points of view, but if you understand them, you are a better person, how could people miss that.

I'm glad you met someone who is willing to walk the walk.

O8)

[mopinko]

27. yup, me too

rare bird, tho. very rare.

[oneighty]

21. Here is a box of faith

and here is a box of food.

Your children are hungry.

Which would you chose?

180

[blondeatlast]

26. You have a gift with words. Always glad to see your posts!

[sangh0]

33. Both or neither

If charity is dependent on my giving up my freedom to choose my beliefs for myself, then it's not really charity, is it?

[oneighty]

37. I speak only of

food and faith..A black and white question one I would put to the leaders of our country.

180

[sangh0]

53. a difference of no distinction

I spoke of freedom of belief; You speak of faith

As if faith has nothing to do with belief. Your question demonstrates the fallacy of false dichotomies. The truth is, there is no need to choose between faith and food. We can have both.

[oneighty]

58. I did not present a philosophy

I present a choice between faith and food. In Iraq Bush* has chosen food. Where did his faith go?

180

[sangh0]

63. Straw man. Did you read what I wrote?

I said nothing about philosophy. I said you offer a false choice, and all you can say in response is to repeat your false choice (without defending it's appropriateness) and add a straw man to the mix.

[oneighty]

85. False choice?

Not at all. One is offered either faith or food. He is offered a choice between death by faith or life by food. Nothing mysterious about that.

180

[sangh0]

87. Yes, false choice

Faith is not tangible thing so faith can not be "offered".

[Muddleoftheroad]

49. Depends what you ask in return

If you ask me to give up my faith, then you can keep your food.

But if you offer the food without a catch, only a fool would reject. The lord does indeed help those who help themselves.

[supernova]

22. I don't see why not

happens in my off-line life all the time.

It does require acceptance of another's worldview. It makes my life so much richer to talk to people who think differently from me. I have no desire to change them or "convert" them in old-school xtian parlance.

Mostly what I have a desire for is to support what my friend sees as working for him/her. I would hope s/he has the same desire for me.

Everybody has a right to their own experience. Like rowdyboy, I answer questions if asked -- and again I can only speak from my experience --, but otherwise religion is a private thing to me.

And if you asked me, you'd probably be surprised at my theology. My thinking is about as far away from the ignorance twins, Robertson and Falwell, as a person can possibly be.

[ecstatic]

23. yes, as long as we never debate religion

I have several atheist/agnostic friends. Some of their views have made me more skeptical, and vice versa. As long as we don't get into a controversial religious debate, etc., everything is fine. Those dialogues tend to only lead to grandstanding, condescension, and bitter feelings in the end. Even though that type of argument can be brushed off as nothing afterwards, it still leaves a sour taste/impression.

[Blue_Chill]

28. Yes they can but we have to stop insulting eachother

Both sides do it all too often, and to be honest the atheist side on this forum gets away with way too much. On other message boards the christians are sickening. It seems every board has it's more powerful group that loves to take shots at the other.

Stop calling eachother names and start trying to bring people into the party.

[supernova]

29. Absolutely

It requires letting go of the pomposity and egoism that can accompany one's beliefs, once one thinks to "have it all figured out."

The truth is nobody has it all figured out, we can each only speak from our own experience.

But we can help each other along the way, if we let ourselves. From my POV, that is the heart of the Gospels, whether one believes in God or not.

[JitterbugPerfume]

30. I cannot agree with what you say

but I will defend to the death your right to say it

I am agnostic

[JitterbugPerfume]

36. my post is not

directed at you , supernova as a matter of fact I agree with every thing you said <smile>

[supernova]

47. Thank you

JitterbugPerfume, I *was* wondering...

:pals:

[truthspeaker]

46. Report those posts with the alert feature

Personally I have only seen a few posts insulting Christians and Christianity in general, but if you think those posters are getting away with something I urge you to use the "Alert" button to report it to a moderator.

[DinahMoeHum]

32. I've got no problem, unless someone flashes a Bible in my face,

then I'll rip it from his/her hands and ram it up his/her poop shoot until it comes out of his/her mouth.

BTW, I'm Orthodox Xtian; we've been around a helluva lot longer than today's fundies.

Other than that, let's talk.


:evilfrown:

[supernova]

34. I don't recall ever shoving a bible

in anyone's face. :shrug:

Sorry, if you've had that experience.

[DinahMoeHum]

35. Unfortunately, I've had that experience.

Thanks for letting me rant.

:evilfrown:

[Blue_Chill]

39. Other Democrats have shoved bibles in your face?

I think the problem here is on DU we take out some aggression caused by the 'believe me or go to hell' right wingers on common sense christians that reside on our side of the fence.

[truthspeaker]

54. also the reverse

Someone vents their anger at the Pharisees and some regular Christians feel insulted, even though they weren't the target.

[Blue_Chill]

62. If you insult the God people believe in you insult them

If I say something mean about Chomsky I piss off half of DU. Now this people find rational, but if someone gets upset after you've insulted the --GOD-- they believe in they call you oversensative. On what planet does that make sense?

[truthspeaker]

65. I'm not talking about insulting your God

And that's one thing I have never seen, is someone insulting God. I'm talking about insults directed at people who deserve it: Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, Franklin Graham, Fred Phelps, Focus on the Family, pedophile priests, creationists.

Can you give me an example of someone insulting your god?

[Bake]

73. I certainly have seen it

A few months ago there was somebody who insisted on referring to God as "Invisible Cloud Being." The discussion pretty much went downhill from there.

And more recently (like, yesterday) there was a Mel Gibson thread in which somebody dismissed, with an obvious air of superiority, anybody who actually believed the Bible (or apparently any part of it). It was beside the fact that the person knew not whereof he/she spoke, and made gross generalizations.

And those kinds of things are offensive to most Christians. Particularly to the ones here who try to be tolerant and respectful of all opinions here on DU, who are generally liberal or they wouldn't be here in the first place, and who really get tired of being lumped in with the Falwells of the world.

Bake

[truthspeaker]

74. OK, I didn't see those

Did you report the offending posts to a moderator?

[Az]

38. Unfotunately not all have pleasant experiences

I have been assailed in numerous ways by believers including damage done to my car and threats made to my person. I understand that this is not representitive of all religious people. But I have made an effort of delving into the widest possible understanding of belief. Others may not be so inclined. If their experience is limited to those that endevour to press their religion on others then it is likely that their view of all religion will be colored by those experiences.

[Blue_Chill]

40. All Americans the same? All French the same?

No.

When you have a bad experience try to tell yourself "it's not right for me to take out my frustrations on everyone of <insert religious group>" I've learned a lot from atheists (including you) and part of that is that not all non believers are asshats that love to insult my faith every chance they get. Thus I will try to behave in the same manner.

If for no other reason do it to improve the image of left wingers everywhere. Not that we need it but one can never be too appealing in politics.

[supernova]

42. I see your point,

however, speaking specifically to the issue of discussing religion/not religion here at DU, I think some of us in the spiritual camp sort of become the whipping boy stand-ins to let out those frustrations on from the non-religious camp.

While it's perfectly understandable and I can sympathize to a degree, it's also totally unproductive and gets us absolutely nowhere as a community.

It is troubling, not just because it makes me feel bad, but moreso because that's not what I want for DU.

I have much more in common with all of you here at DU, non-believers and believers alike than I do with well, most everyone around me in my off-line life.

We have to be able to talk about religion/spirituality topics as they come up because it is a big part of American life and the more derogatory parts of it do influence politics now. It's it's very hard for me to articulate exactly how much this fact dismays me.

We who are spiritual need your help, you non-believers if we are to fight the political influnce of the RR. We need to be able to say to them, there is a way for everyone to get along. But we have to be able to talk about it ourselves first.

[Az]

51. Yes, its unfortunate

And part of the reason I started this thread. I wanted a religion thread talking about how we can get along instead of how we differ. This taboo we have about discussing such matters simply makes the camps become increasingly distant. Each side paints pictures of the horrors of the other side and the truth is lost in time. Dialog must take place to break this barriers. Whatever we each believe we are in this world together. We need to break down that which seperates us and build up that which brings us together.

[supernova]

55. Totally agree

with everything you just said.

So, what does that mean? Do we need to have a different language for discussing these topics here on DU? I mean different from the normal words that are used to discuss these topics, since they seem to carry such heavy baggage for everyone.

Suggestions, anyone?

[Muddleoftheroad]

50. If someone shows you a Bible, you attack them?

[derby378]

75. If someone wields the Bible against me...

...as though it were a weapon, he goes down. I don't mind the occasional battle of wits with an unarmed person.

[Bake]

79. There you go. Right there.

Battle of wits with an unarmed person! So any person with religious convictions is "unarmed" in a battle of wits. That's exactly the kind of snobbish superiority that is absolutely offensive to many of us here. How dare you!

Bake

[truthspeaker]

81. No, not ANY religious person

Just people who use the Bible to intimidate people, or who rely on it instead of thinking for themselves.

There YOU go, taking an attack personally that clearly was not aimed at you or at Christians in general.

[onebigbadwulf]

43. I can get along with them,

but believers can't get along with anyone.

[supernova]

45. Try me

:hi: ;-)

[Smirnoff]

52. Both of my room mates are "religious"

They don't go to church, we drink every weekend, have pre-marital sex, but hey they say they're religious. That gets on my nerves. One of them even reads those spiritual books that tell you how to be a better person... a lot of good that does her. :shrug:

[JNelson6563]

57. Most people in my life are believers

We just respect each other's views and there's no problem. I realize that as a former believer without resentment toward religion I am a bit unusual though.

The key is to not try to force opinions on each other or to state your opinion as fact.

Julie

[dawn]

59. It also depends on what you mean by a believer..

Are believers just Christians, or does that term include people of other faiths?

[Az]

64. The intent

is can beliefs be discussed in a positive manner. Any beliefs.

[kaitykaity]

66. Just so long as the believers don't try to

convert me, I like them just fine. The minute they get in my face and tell me that "if you don't believe in Jesus, you're going to hell", I'm like, "okay, see you there!".

[PVnRT]

67. I understand that

And as long as atheists don't get into my face and tell me that I'm stupid, unreasonable, have no free thought, etc., I like them just fine.

Unfortunately, we have proselytizers on both sides who absolutely refuse to leave well enough alone.

[kaitykaity]

69. There is one difference.

Christianity is by it's nature a proselytizing faith. Believers are instructed to go out and preach to the unconverted. Atheists aren't a part of such an organization, so their numbers are radically smaller than the preaching proselytizers.

But you have a point. :-)

[Snow]

70. No. There's a group of believers who believe they're right,

and everyone else is wrong/sinners and in need of conversion, not dialog. Their intolerance and bigotry is astounding, and their minds are closed. Can't talk with 'em, unless it's to be convinced of their rightness. Myself, being a Quaker works fine for me. Might not for you, and that's okay. If you really want to hear about what quakers are about, I can do that, but it still might not suit you. That does not make you wrong, in my eyes.

[Maeve]

72. True, there is no discussion with some people

The term I like is "True Believer"--one who is totally convinced of their own perfect rightness.

But many of us on either side (all sides--there are more than two, here) aren't like that and we can discuss things reasonably if we want to. Some of us even want to! (BTW, the first college I went to was Quaker-founded..cool folks!)

[eagler]

71. I am a strong believer and I am also a democrat .

You would be very hard pressed to find anyone More ANTI-BUSH. I have spent years trying to convince other Christians how phony this administration really is. No self respecting Christian could be knowingly involved with the spiritually subversive things that this admin. is involved with. There are even some conservative ministers who are speaking out from their pulpits,but few are being heard,although some things do seem to be changing.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[truthspeaker]

77. that's the kind of insult people are complaining about

There are plenty of Dems who are believers and we need to work together.

I partially agree with your sentiment, but this isn't the forum for discussing it. Now, if you want to go over to Internet Infidels we can talk! (I'm Godless Dave over there)

[distortionmarshall]

80. lol - nah....

..... i hate preaching to the choir....

:)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

78. Both sides have to recognize

that people's belief systems are largely formed by their life experiences and personal temperaments. They are very deep-seated and, despite all protests to the contrary, usually not open to argument.

Browbeating and namecalling never changed anyone's belief system. All one can do is be there with answers if people start questioning on their own.

It's been my observation that people who get all bent out of shape if someone has a different philosophy than they do are really insecure in their own philosophy and cannot deal with challenges to it.

[EV1Ltimm]

82. I'm an atheist, my wife is catholic.

Our beliefs are just a small part of what makes us who we are. There's more to a person than what church they go to, if any at all.

90% of atheists and 90% of christians don't have an "us versus them" mentality. I think the more we're open with our discussions about beliefs and we realize that just because someone doesn't share in our faith, or lack thereof, that it's really not that big of a deal.

[Ysabel]

86. we can all get along well...

those who don't are just choosing not to...