Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:01:27 -0800
To: B J K*********
From: Darwin Bedford <>
Subject: Re: [WEB-20021125.d0f3a0] Message to Darwin

Hi B J K*********,

Yes it does seem that my site is preoccupied with refuting Christianity, although the aim is to refute all religion.  I can think of at least two reasons for this.  It is a North American site and Christianity is the dominant religion there and it's the religion that I have been unwittingly exposed to all my life.  The second is that Christians are more adamant (the most in-your-face) about saving your soul than most other religions.  I also feel that if Christianity dies off (and it should because it is based on the most hilarious of stories), that other religions will die off with it -- i.e., religion will become pass

Since the religious to non-religious ratio in North America is still around 80% to 20%, I think that focusing on refuting God is the best strategy for now.  However, I hope to be proven wrong on this.

Darwin Bedford

At , you wrote:
Date and Time: Monday, November 25, 2002, 12:48 PST
Source URL:

  B J K*********

  I have been an athiest for more than two decades, but only recently picked up a copy of "Losing Faith in Faith". I quickly realized that author spent the majority of the book rejecting and arguing against Christianity, but chalked it up to: 1) The length and depth of his former commitment to his faith, and 2) The recentness of his emancipation.
  In his book he made extensive reference to the Freedom from Religion Foundation, so I decided to check out their website. My purpose was to find kindred spirits for dialog and to expand my horizons. I was disappointed to find FFRF to be primarily focused on refuting Christianity, so I expanded my search to other athiest websites. Unfortunately, all, including yours seem to be similarly preoccupied. That's a shame, because it relegates the forum to reactionary status.
  I want to broaden the focus to include (two examples)Nietzsche and his insight (when he said 'Were there not a God, it would be necessary to invent one.). OR, Could it be that the persistence of religion is fundamentally rooted in mankind's biological history as a "social" animal? i.e. All stable societies MUST of necessity consist of mostly followers?
  Are you up to getting beyond philosophical discussions that seem preoccupied with convincing Christians (or yourselves) that they're wrong and you're right? I have reached the point that I DON'T CARE what Christians think of me or my beliefs; you can't be a stand-on-your-own athiest until you no longer need that refutation to validate yourself.
  P.S. I have come to look at religion as being like Dumbo's magic feather. While his faith in it was purely delusional, nonetheless, without it he would never have even tried to fly...much less succeeded!
  I look forward to your reply.