And I defintely will think about this a lot. It’s an interesting debate. But rather than rely on centuries-old dogma, I will use my own brain along with the best information available to me today to help me arrive at my own conclusions. And I hope you’ll do the same.

They don’t huh. OK. So what they’re doing is stating facts? So Allah does want them to be suicide bombers. And that’s not made up by people. And god does think that Israel is the holy land for Jews. I’m starting to get it. And god really does hate gay people, except when he doesn’t.

Yes, that’s very healthy.

I was once a member of the ACLU, until I noted it’s out and out hatred for the free expression of religion. There are alternatives, such as the Becket fund, which states:

Freedom of religion is a basic human right that no government may law…

“I pretend that god thinks X, therefore we should do Y”. I’m arguing my point based on what I like to pretend god thinks. That’s a religious argument. And it’s perfectly ok. And it’s legal in most countries. And the ACLU has long defended people’s rights to pretend stuff.

But there are other people who pretend that god thinks Z, and therefore they should do Q. That’s cool too. After all it’s just pretend.

But when they debate (or gainsay) this, there is nothing healthy about it. They’re debating what’s better to pretend. It’s absolutely silly, and people end up getting killed.

They are? You’re joking, right? Religious arguments throughout history have managed to be both silly and deadly.

Here’s an example of a religious argument:

Palestinian: “My god says that this is my holy land.”

Jew: “My god says it’s mine.”

Is that healthy? Obviously not. The problem is that one group is pretending that god takes one stance and the other group pretends god takes another, mutually exclusive stance. It’s not an argument that has been settled healthily.