Ronja wrote:Good point, Robert. One easy stock comment to people who flaunt how pious xians they are could be "Whatever happened to Matthew 6?" I may be biased, though, 'cause those few of my relatives and acquaintances who are devout do follow Matthew 6 quite closely.
I don't mind what people believe or discuss in private. But publishing opinions to the whole Internet (or a large subset thereof) does indeed make one fair game for tolerably polite questions as a minimum, IMO.
Presenting expert opinions about religion's important role in (public) (primary) schools to our parliament, among others, and then turning up to teach my kids buys you stronger scrutiny still, of course.
While some people may argue that most wars were started over religious beliefs, I think a more enlightened view might be that Man needs only avarice as an excuse for war. Religion was often the moral justification rather than the driving force.
Irregardless if you believe or disbelieve, religion as espoused by venerated early believers are generally good societal examples on how to behave. Humility, self-denial, sacrifice, and charity are all good behaviors that can lead to a pleasant and strong society. Teaching that virtue is it's own reward, or that Hell awaits the transgressors are useful tools in getting the less pious to behave.
If you don't believe me, just Google True, False, Useful
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.
. And then when they come back, they can 
