# Evangelical Atheists Have A God Complex **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 29, 2005, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193 "2005-11-29T12:11:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/41 "2005-11-29T17:16:11Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > There is no atheist dogma. There are no atheist tenets. There is simply a denial of a particular god. I’m confused (the “atheist” discussions seem to have that effect on me). But isn’t the one bit of dogma an atheist must ascribe to, by definition, is that there is no God—particular or otherwise? IMHO, the “evangelicals” on both sides would do themselves and everyone else great service if they could embrace four little words: “I may be wrong.” This SHOULD be easy, as the religious-minded knows he is not God, and therefore fallible. The empirical-minded insists on proof, and he has no proof that (a) God didn’t start this whole thing into motion with a snap of his fingers, not to mention having even a theory of the universe’s origins that scientists agree on. ---
**Author:** ![Siege](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dbc845/32.png) [@Siege](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siege)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/42 "2005-11-29T17:20:49Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > Remind us again whether it was the good Christian kids or the Wiccan ones that tormented your friend and yourself. > > While there are nuts on both sides, it seems to me that one side has a far greater number in both absolute and proportional terms. You may as well ask how many of them were Americans. I was tormented for being English and for staying friends with a girl who had handicaps, not for the church I attended. If I were in the mood to start a hijack, I could point out that my experience with American grade school public education included a lot of indoctrination. One reason I got fed up with history around 6th grade was every year when the American Revolution and the War of 1812 were taught, the British were made out to be an evil people without redeeming values. It wasn’t until I was an adult that I learned that a sizable number of colonists opposed American Independence and it wasn’t until I watched _1776_ when I was in my 30s that I learned that the Declaration of Independence passed by one vote. Yes, America’s majority Christian, the form of Christianity varying by what part of the country you live in. I understand from **Polycarp** that there aren’t a lot of Lenten fish frys in his neck of the woods. I’m Anglican because my mother was Anglican, when you get down to the core of things. (My father was an agnostic who agreed to have his kids baptized and attend Sunday School.) If I were French or Irish, I might well have grown up Catholic. If I were born down South, I might well have started off Baptist. If I were born in the Middle East, I might well have wound up Muslim. Part of what religious education does do is teach people to conform to the standards of their culture or subculture and to understand their heritage. I broke a lot of social laws growing up, and I still see no need to obey them mindlessly. Still, I don’t have a problem with teaching children about their heritage. My gentlerman friend’s family is third generation Armenian. They all went to Armenian Sunday School and, at Thanksgiving, his sister said a blessing in Armenian, the only time I heard the language spoken. It’s a tie which links them and their family to their community, just as the services I attend at my Episcopal Church tie me to my heritage and community. Having been adrift and rudderless a time or too (for the record, I am _not_ implying Atheists are), it’s rather nice to have some place I can turn to where I can be understood as well as understand. Does this make sense? CJ ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/43 "2005-11-29T17:22:50Z")
I tire of all the evangelical atheists who ring my doorbell and try to pawn off their literature on me. They’re a pain in the butt when they try to mandate their versions of “science” in the schools. They’re constantly trying to mold laws, court deicisions and public policy to fit their teachings. Yes, there is no difference between fundamentalists Christians and “evangelical atheists”. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/44 "2005-11-29T17:31:03Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I’m confused (the “atheist” discussions seem to have that effect on me). But isn’t the one bit of dogma an atheist must ascribe to, by definition, is that there is no God—particular or otherwise? If you want to call that dogma. > [@](#): > > Main Entry: dog·ma > Pronunciation: 'dog-m&, 'däg- > Function: noun > Inflected Form(s): plural dogmas also dog·ma·ta /-m&-t&/ > Etymology: Latin dogmat-, dogma, from Greek, from dokein to seem – more at DECENT > 1 a : something held as an established opinion; especially : a definite authoritative tenet b : a code of such tenets \ c : a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds > 2 : a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church Frankly, I don’t see it. As I pointed out, atheism is a _response_ to theism. The only affirmation is a _rejection_ of theism. Atheism is a _description_, not a belief system. If you accept the existence of a god you do not get kicked out of the atheist club; you simply are no longer an atheist. > [@](#): > > IMHO, the “evangelicals” on both sides would do themselves and everyone else great service if they could embrace four little words: “I may be wrong.” Is it even possible for, as an example, an evangelical Christian to say “I may be wrong about the existence of God?” Is not belief in God necessary? > [@](#): > > This SHOULD be easy, as the religious-minded knows he is not God, and therefore fallible. The empirical-minded insists on proof, and he has no proof that (a) God didn’t start this whole thing into motion with a snap of his fingers, not to mention having even a theory of the universe’s origins that scientists agree on. The atheist does not insist on proof. The atheist cites the absence of proof as a reason to reject god. Not the same thing at all. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/45 "2005-11-29T18:13:06Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > I think it’s a fair criticism of religion that it doesn’t seem to do anything to assuage that violence tendency despite its claims to be a positive force in the world. In fact, much of history shows us ample examples of times when religion is at least a compounding factor in the violence if not a causal one. I don’t think this is a fair statement, because it lumps all religions together as “religion” and then talks about what “religion” does or doesn’t do. It’s as if you said that “government” or “relationships” were bad things because of all the harm they do. Some religions (and non-religious philosophies of life) don’t see anything much wrong with violence; others value peace very highly and strive to promote it. (I’m having a hard time relating your statement to the Quakers, for instance.) ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/46 "2005-11-29T18:15:04Z")
Heck of an OP, **Ear**. I hope you stick around, too. I’m an atheist, myself. And while I understand the objection a few people have raised to the term “evangelical atheist,” I think it’s fitting. Evangelical, in this sense, meaning anyone who can’t stand the fact that people like different things than themselves. Doesn’t have to have religious connotations. I’ve met quite a few evangelical Mac users, for example, who are no less annoying than the holiest of Holy Rollers. They’re not as _dangerous_, but that’s different. I’m genuinely terrified of the fundamentalist Christian right in this country, because they represent a political philosophy that is inimical to my understanding of morality, ethics, and basic human rights, and because they have significant political pull right now. But that’s got nothing to do with their religion. See, I used to be a dick about religion. I spouted the usual “There is no God and you’re an idiot (and probably evil) for thinking otherwise.” 'cept, I kept meeting religious people who were both smarter and better than I am. The SDMB helped a lot with that. At some point, I realized that religious beliefs, or the lack thereof, were not a reliable indicator of the intelligence or moral character of a person. It was quite a revelation to me: _religion doesn’t matter_. It doesn’t make a bad person better, nor does it make a good person worse. It’s an excuse for a lot of behavior, good or bad, but if it didn’t exsist, people would just have to find a new excuse for what they do anyway. It’s not like Jesus is the only thing keeping **Polycarp** from beating his wife, and I doubt that an atheistic Pat Robertson would be any less of a corrupt, hypocritical shitpile. People are good, or bad, or most often some combination of the two, and they tailor their religious beliefs to support their behavior. Worrying about their beliefs is pointless. It’s the behavior we have to be concerned about. Their beliefs are just window dressing. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/47 "2005-11-29T18:22:09Z")
> [@Cliffy](#): > > There’s a reason we think this. It’s because we’ve considered the issue rationally. No theist can make the same claim, because belief in God is irrational. People are right to jump on you for this. What a way to win an argument: just say, “I’ve considered the issue rationally, and any opposing viewpoint is irrational.” :rolleyes: If you’re saying that belief in God can’t be justified/proved entirely by reason, okay, I’ll give you that; but neither can disbelief. If you’re saying that belief in God cannot be consistent with rationality or a reasonable view of the world, well, that’s just… an irrational thing to say. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/48 "2005-11-29T18:24:34Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > They’re constantly trying to mold laws, court deicisions and public policy to fit their teachings. Me too. I wish they’d be happy to call it the Christmas holiday (instead of Winter holiday, or whatever the hell they’re calling it now), seeing as Christmas is an officially recognized secular national holiday. ---
**Author:** ![Grelby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a5b964/32.png) [@Grelby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grelby)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/49 "2005-11-29T18:26:21Z")
> [@Cliffy](#): > > There’s a reason we think this. It’s because we’ve considered the issue rationally. No theist can make the same claim, because belief in God is irrational. Would like some bull with that shit? To assert that the existence of God is _provably_\* false is just as laughably irrational. Don’t get me wrong - I’m an agnostic with strong atheistic leanings. I maintain that the existence of God, or other supernatural entities, is unknowable because it is untestable. One of the reasons that it is untestable is that we know nothing about the nature of the supernatural, and one of the reasons we know nothing about it is because it’s unknowable. For this and other reasons, I’m inclined to think that the existence of God is pretty gosh darned unlikely, but I have no dog in this fight, so I’ll leave it to folks like you. It is certainly true that the burden of proof is upon the religious to demonstrate that there is a God, but that doesn’t mean that you are 100% assured of being correct. For the record, “we’ve considered the issue rationally” is quite the overestimation of the rational capabilities of most the atheists I’ve met. Of the smartest people I’ve met, both the religious and atheistic ones have considered the issue rationally and come to different conclusions. I can’t say the same for most of the folks I know on either side. > [@](#): > > **John** , there are many stupid things in your OP that I’m too pissed off to comment on, so let me just address the most egregious. You seem to have forgotten that there is objective truth in this universe. So you get just as pissed at everyone who claims to know the score – but you’re willfully ignoring the fact that some are right and some are wrong. Yes, those who are right do have moral superiority. And we’re right. The theists are wrong. I’m not saying that because I was raised that way, or because I want it to be true. The exercise of reason leads to the rejection of god, or at least the Christian god – and I am a reasonable man. “We’re right and the theists are wrong.” “We have moral superiority.” You are indeed sounding like a reasonable man :rolleyes:. ---
**Author:** ![SisterCoyote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@SisterCoyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SisterCoyote)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/50 "2005-11-29T18:30:22Z")
Frankly, IMO, the problem is not religion, the religious, athiesm or the athiests. The problem is zealotry, in whatever form it comes, and zealotry is an individual sin (for lack of a better word). ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/51 "2005-11-29T18:35:07Z")
> [@Thudlow Boink](#): > > I don’t think this is a fair statement, because it lumps all religions together as “religion” and then talks about what “religion” does or doesn’t do. It’s as if you said that “government” or “relationships” were bad things because of all the harm they do. Some religions (and non-religious philosophies of life) don’t see anything much wrong with violence; others value peace very highly and strive to promote it. (I’m having a hard time relating your statement to the Quakers, for instance.) **Thudlow** I must confess that I understand your point. In addition to the Quakers, I’d add the Buddhists as another religion that does not ask its believers to go convert the heathen with something sharp and pointy. OTOH, I’d hardly call Quakers one of the _mainstream_ offshoots of Christianity. I would never claim that all religious people are evil, just that eventually, a religion leads to oppression and violence, mostly against minorities. As far as the comparison to government, I think there is a difference in that people **can’t** live together without some kind of structure. They could certainly do so without religion though. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/52 "2005-11-29T18:40:36Z")
Whenever the rational mind is applied to spiritual matters, theology results. It is a hybrid of incompatible species, it is sterile, futile, and sadly ubiquitous. The theological mind can study scripture and find a perfectly reasonable basis for believing that unbaptized infants will be consigned to eternal damnation. No one who looks into his heart and sees Jesus smiling back can believe such a monstrosity. The first goal of meditation is to get that rational mind to shut the fuck up. Not permanently, not to exclude its many, many wondrous gifts. Only that it should know its place. Atheism is simply another form of theology. _Feh!_, in the words of the Reb Hillel. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/53 "2005-11-29T18:54:22Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Whenever the rational mind is applied to spiritual matters, theology results. It is a hybrid of incompatible species, it is sterile, futile, and sadly ubiquitous. The theological mind can study scripture and find a perfectly reasonable basis for believing that unbaptized infants will be consigned to eternal damnation. No one who looks into his heart and sees Jesus smiling back can believe such a monstrosity. > > The first goal of meditation is to get that rational mind to shut the fuck up. Not permanently, not to exclude its many, many wondrous gifts. Only that it should know its place. > > Atheism is simply another form of theology. _Feh!_, in the words of the Reb Hillel. I honestly don’t mean to be a prick about the matter, but if I get my rational mind to STFU, then where does it stop? I am bombarded with ideas and philosophies that are not in accord with observed facts. Rationality is all I have to winnow them with. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/54 "2005-11-29T18:55:41Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Atheism is simply another form of theology. Atheism is another form of the study of (usually Christian) God and Scripture? Man, how did that escape my notice for so long! I thought I had this stuff down… Jesus, guys, can we quit with this “look at me, I’m using a word in an unusual context to draw equivalence” shit? Atheism is theology, atheism is dogmatic and evangelical… everybody gets the fucking point. It’s neither clever nor original, and I don’t think any of these terms is being used correctly. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/55 "2005-11-29T18:58:33Z")
> [@Siege](#): > > Interesting. I went to Sunday School throughout my youth and have even taught Sunday School and yet I never became a homophobia or approved of bombing abortion clinics. Indeed, I’m in favor of gay marriage and am firmly politically pro-choice. The last time I taught Sunday School, this time to teenagers, one of them told me she wasn’t actually Episcopalian. Instead, she was into Wicca. Far from trying to show her the error of her ways, after finding out a bit about why she believed what she did, I introduced her to a practicing Wiccan, one you and I both know in real life, **Davenportavenger** , and to various other new vices including, for a while, this message board. Search the archives for posts by **agentfroot**. > > CJ The actual thread in question was about nonbelievers sending kids to Sunday School. No one disputed the reasonableness of believers doing so. Don’t you think that at least some Sunday school teachers in some churches would not have your reaction to a Wiccan? That at least a few teach to believe the Bible totally without thinking? The root of the argument in the thread was that one side asked what harm could come from sending a kid to Sunday school, with an added comment about atheists being afraid of exposing their kids to religion, with the other side saying perhaps a lot, and that all kids get exposed to religion plenty, but that is different from being in a classroom environment with someone who might be trying to indoctrinate the kids with a belief different from that of a parent. And of course there was also a lot of noise. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/56 "2005-11-29T19:02:31Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Whenever the rational mind is applied to spiritual matters, theology results. It is a hybrid of incompatible species, it is sterile, futile, and sadly ubiquitous. The theological mind can study scripture and find a perfectly reasonable basis for believing that unbaptized infants will be consigned to eternal damnation. No one who looks into his heart and sees Jesus smiling back can believe such a monstrosity. That’s just it. Who are you to say what God and Jesus find moral and what they don’t? If God, the creator of all morality, says that infants burn, (or do easy time in limbo) are you more moral? If Jesus says all who don’t believe in him burn, no matter how moral, are you more moral than Jesus. Actually you are, which is the point. I bet you wouldn’t flood the world. But if you think that God is the ultimate judge, then you had better just do what he says and not ask questions. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/57 "2005-11-29T19:05:12Z")
> [@SisterCoyote](#): > > Frankly, IMO, the problem is not religion, the religious, athiesm or the athiests. > > The problem is zealotry, in whatever form it comes, and zealotry is an individual sin (for lack of a better word). Well yes, I agree that it is zealots that cause the problems. I think my claim would be that religions generally cause zealotry. As people have pointed out, there are a few that don’t. The Quakers might be one and the Buddhists might be another although the nominally Buddhist countries may have some pretty vicious armies. Testy ---
**Author:** ![SisterCoyote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@SisterCoyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SisterCoyote)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/58 "2005-11-29T19:26:08Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > Well yes, I agree that it is zealots that cause the problems. I think my claim would be that religions generally cause zealotry. As people have pointed out, there are a few that don’t. The Quakers might be one and the Buddhists might be another although the nominally Buddhist countries may have some pretty vicious armies. > > Testy Religion can be something that a person gets zealous about. So can patriotism, ethnicity, music, film, books, and I’m sure you can think of other examples. All of which _can_ lead to violence, degredation of the other, and feline/canine cohabitation. The problem, though, isn’t the thing that a person gets zealous about; it’s the way that the zealot behaves, and that is, again, an individual proclivity and not (again, IMO) inherent to religion, patriotism, ethnicity, or so forth. IO (hopefully clearer ;)) W: Religion doesn’t cause zealotry, but some zealots are drawn to religion. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/59 "2005-11-29T19:37:19Z")
> [@SisterCoyote](#): > > Frankly, IMO, the problem is not religion, the religious, athiesm or the athiests. > > The problem is zealotry, in whatever form it comes, and zealotry is an individual sin (for lack of a better word). Very reasonable. I don’t even mind zealotry, since zealotry can get things done. I do mind when someone else’s zealotry reduces my and other people’s freedom. (For my own good, of course.) Many of the religious, sure that god is on their side, do this. Few if any atheists do, unless they are serving some sort of secular substitution for religion, like Communism. These people are just as wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193/60 "2005-11-29T19:44:16Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > And while I understand the objection a few people have raised to the term “evangelical atheist,” I think it’s fitting. Evangelical, in this sense, meaning anyone who can’t stand the fact that people like different things than themselves. Then you have diluted the definition of “evangelical” beyond useful meaning. You might as well speak of “evangelical Yankees fans” or “evangelical Mac users.” If an atheist can’t stand the fact that people like different things than themselves, that has fuck-all to do with atheism. However, if a Christian claims that hell awaits all those who deny Christ, then it is the religion that is behind such a claim. There is no common definition of “evangelical” that is divorced from the idea that a movement is the driving force. Individual assertions of rightness, no matter how fervent or close-minded, simply do not fit the description. > [@SisterCoyote](#): > > IO (hopefully clearer ) W: Religion doesn’t cause zealotry, but some zealots are drawn to religion. Respectfully, bullshit. Those teenage girls who are exploding themselves in the Middle East are simply zealots looking for an outlet? Jim Jones followers would have drunk the poison anyway? Not all religion causes zealotry, sure, but to say that it never happens? Again, bullshit. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evangelical-atheists-have-a-god-complex/333193.md?page=4)