A silly argument.
How does "You can't be certain there is no god" extrapolate to "you should follow Religion X"?

Whether there is a god or not is not the question. It's not even a question, since it's not expected by anyone to stand up to ordinary logic. That's why I reject religion.

That and that if you're not a fundamentalist, you don't really need it; you're just helping to make something socially acceptable which has resulted, when it's taken to extremes*, in unspeakable oppression and suffering all over the world throughout all human history.

*wipes off foam*

* i.e. actually practised as the holy books seem to demand
( Newington, Wed 12 Jan 2005, 16:48, archived)

Ok
I get your point.

I deal with some of them on a daily basis. Of course this is my interpretation, they could be what Jung called archetypes, or theycould be hallucinations. They could also be parts of my own personality that I see as seperate individuals.

I dont say I am right, and everyone else is wrong. It's just a personal observation.

I was told by an Anglican Vicar that 'we couldn't both be right'. I agreed, but did mention that it was entirely possible we could both be wrong...

Edit - and I don't see it as a religion. It's just natural to me, is all.
( Wicca'd Witch needs ideas for a new sig on..., Wed 12 Jan 2005, 16:52, archived)

I'd say "you don't harm anyone so I don't mind"
but after what I said up there, that'd be hypocrisy.
I do think you're wrong. But I do think it's absolutely fundamentally important that you're allowed to be religious (or whatever you call it) if you want.

I've also met you and, like a number of theists I know, you're not stupid, so there may well be something else I'm missing.
( Newington, Wed 12 Jan 2005, 16:59, archived)