Nasty eh Joe?

You think "religion lite" is an insult then Joe? So how do we distinguish between the social worker persona you portray and those who tell us their god wants them to slay infidels? How can I call a sweet old lady religious and at the same time call those who want women to be second class citizens religious too?

You both reckon it is your faith that drives you.

Yes, deviation is unhelpful. Doesn't mean you take the word out of context knowingly in order to call people fundamentalists for refusing to speculate whether the beautiful garden has fairies at the bottom of it. You cannot be a fundamentalist unless you defend a position. I am delighted when my position alters through finding something new. I even sat as an assessor on a PhD viva panel for someone who shot one of my own findings down in flames, and was the first to shake his hand when we accepted his thesis. Doesn't sound like a fundamentalist to me? Or to anyone else unless they are in a weird position of defending the basis upon which fundamentalists in religion get their views.

You love saying god this, god that and god the other, but when impressionable people of less intelligence than you actually believe it in a way a child does, you wash your hands of them. Funny that.

Why do religious people get so touchy when reminded of the absurdity of what they like to profess? They love handing it out, but scream persecution when put against rational argument. Why is that? Why is pete wrong, me wrong and Joe right?

Classic. Someone saying I insult their superstition thinks I am the one needing a shrink.... Here in The UK, we don't pay snake oil merchants to analyse our more irrational traits. 1. Psychiatrists analyse you when you are referred, not when you want comfort and 2. My wife analyses me in a far more forensic manner than any "shrink" could.

She thinks religion is for the weak and feeble too by the way. Despite having a vicar for a brother. (Possibly because of for that matter....)