> > First my position, I am what most would consider a “strong” atheist, I
> > “know” God does not exist, that in itself has attracted some attacks,
> > so I would ask that you let it pass this one time. I have lived in the
> > heart of a divided society for 25 years, a society, given my position
> > in it, that tested my religious affiliations robustly and daily.  So
> > on a daily and personal basis I experienced the “very bad” side of
> > religion. Nevertheless, and despite my strong non beliefs, I happily
> > accept and defend other people’s right to think differently.

> > For some time now I have been attacked for taking that position
> > sometimes by assholes, which I consider flattery, but sometimes by
> > others for whom I have a certain respect, and it is the criticism from
> > the latter that leads me to ask:-

> > Why is it so wrong to defend the “nice” theists who do me no harm,
> > while being happy to condemn the “bad” that potentially could.

> > Believe it or not I ask this with an open mind, and if I my position
> > is proven wrong, I will accept it, reappraise my position and admit my
> > error.

> > I leave you with an apt quote from Mahatma Gandhi, 1931:-

> > “Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It
> > passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced
> > and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious
> > right.”

> You aren't depriving anyone of their freedom to err by pointing out
> their errors. You can happilly accept and defend other people's rights
> to think differently while criticizing the thoughts that they are free
> to have.

> The "nice" theists who do you no harm are doing all of us harm by
> giving tacit approval to the theists who DO cause harm. Their silence
> can only be taken to mean they agree with the harmful theists, or that
> they know they are harmful but are scared of them. Either way, they
> support the harmful theists because they aren't doing a thing to stop
> them from acting in the name of their MUTUAL beliefs, and it then
> becomes a slippery slope towards totalitarianism, theocracies, 9/11,
> the Bush administration; pick your poison. Maybe the difference is the
> nice ones should just be sweet talked out of their beliefs (though I
> suspect a lot of the nice ones might show a darker side of their
> personalities when that conversation begins).- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -