No.
The only sensible position is to accept that one doesn't know.

Whether or not one thus decides to base one's behaviour on the fact there might be is up to oneself. Personally I wouldn't sleep in a field being combine harvested as that would be really silly.

However, if someone wants to, because they believe that their god will save them, good luck to them. I have no problem with that. I may well advise them against it, but I will not, however, be telling them how wrong they are to believe such, what idiots they are to believe any other way, and be taking out shouty adverts on 'buses.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 31 Aug 2010, 16:10, 1 reply)

Would you therefore be ok...
....with them beating their wives or forcing them to cover their faces in public? Covering up child abuse cases? Withholding medical treatments from their children because it goes against their beliefs? Enticing others to kill themselves and non-believers in exchange for eternal reward? Relying on prayer rather than self application to sort out life's little hardships?

I'm concentrating on religion here because that's one I have particular beef with. Your 'live and let live' opinion would be laudable if people who believed in this shit kept to themselves. Alas, they don't, and therefore I can't honestly say 'good luck to you' as they indoctrinate others into this twisted nonsense.

The only sensible position is based on evidence, and the evidence isn't 50/50.
(NoveltyCondomHead Clanks Wams., Tue 31 Aug 2010, 16:18, closed)

Yes - you're confusing religion and theism.
I don't condone wife-beating, child abuse etc at all, religion or no.

While I accept the rather incendiary rhetoric, that does seem a little disingenuous - along the lines of "When did you stop beating your wife?".

My live and let live position is laudable. Everyone should think like me. Of course, no one else is actually perfect.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 31 Aug 2010, 16:29, closed)

Meh, I see what you're saying....
That the intellectual position of theism is seperate from the actual practices of existing religions, and that as you can't disprove the existence of higher beings then people should be free to worship (in the abstract sense, rather than the evils of what really happens).

However, and I'm struggling to find the words for this, it does seem like a fairly niggardly position you're taking. OK, one could argue that the right to believe whatever you like is important, but for the most part, religion and theism are very tightly bound concepts.

Hmmmm, reading that through I'm not sure I've made my point well enough. Hey ho.
( kappynitty doubled your entendre on, Tue 31 Aug 2010, 17:12, closed)

I disagree that religion and theism are tightly bound concepts, and that the position I'm taking is niggardly.
I think that it's entirely down to the brain user.

I will accept that many are unwilling to differentiate between them, however.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 31 Aug 2010, 17:17, closed)