>I wouldn't call Mahat MaGhandi "week-minded", nor Hans Kung, nor Adin
>Steinsaltz, nor Amir Aczel, nor Phillip Clayton, nor Alan Sandage, or Joel
>Primack, or the Dalai Lama, or Charles Townes or...I wouldn't call any of
>these people weak-minded.
I would. In a way. However "brave" or "principled" they were, if they have to believe in the tooth fairy because they can't handle reality, well, that's a form of weakness in my book - but it doesn't mean I hate them or something. I don't accept that anyone sane can possibly be stupid enough to buy religion on it's non-existent rational merits. There has to be some alterior motivation for the active preservation of the delusion.
>But it makes me wonder if your definition of
>atheism, comes from, perhaps, a rebellion against fundamentalist or
mainline
>Christian Culture? Which was the original point of my addition to this
>thread.
I don't call myself an atheist. I'm merely a rational person. I suppose my non belief in Santa is some kind of rebellion too.......I suppose it can't possibly be simply because I don't NEED religion to live my life, as I don't NEED santa. I fully understand why people do, though, and as I said before, I'll never think badly of anyone for having any form of belief....as long as they don't start using it as an excuse to hurt people. Then I can become VERY intolerant.