to think it is rude to persistently refer to God/Allah/etc. as an "imaginary friend"

[AtheneNoctua]

even after asked not to by several posters who have stated they found it offensive.

I like God, I think he's the Dude
but because I can't prove that he exists
or that in fact he is a he
I have to accept that he is indeed my imaginary friend.

What is so powerfully inspirational about say the early Christians
is that they would rather be thrown to the lions than renounce their faith.

This thread on the other hand - not so inspirational.

I'm having a little trouble at home at the moment with this one. DH thinks that God is an imaginary being and has shared this view with DD (7) who now also believes this to be so. Her view is 'if you ask God for something in a prayer it doesn't happen. You just have to do it yourself anyway, because God is just made up).

I personally believe...had a very strong faith when I was younger, though I confess it went to pot in my mid twenties and has never been back on the same footing since.

It makes me darned uncomfortable to hear my DH putting these ideas in my DD's head, but my faith isn't strong enough for me to make rational arguments against it, so I just tell DD that I choose to believe in God. I didn't say it, but I felt like adding, 'like you choose to believe in Santa' or in DH's case, like you believe Sheffield United belong in the premiership.

It's very rude of people to question someone elses faith. Rude and insensitive. I hope that I will be able to get this into DD's head at the same time as DH gets his 'it's all a fairytale' story.

YANBU.

I'm with the bible bashers I'm afraid, most people quote Dawkins because they can't think for themselves. Is it really the case that there would not be any fighting if there was no religion? I find that hard to believe.

Sorry...'most people quote Dawkins because they can't think for themselves.' ?????

I find that an astoundingly hypocritical thing to say coming from anyone religious!

We have just killed 1M in Iraq for oil.

I'm not religious!

It's a bit of a conondrum. Yes it can be insensitive. However, I will occasionally use the term when I want to shock. You see, I, my family, my friends and my loved ones have all been discriminated against in one way or another in the name of a spiritual deity I have absolutly no belief in. I'ts very very hard to stay calm an innoffensive when you are being denied access to medical care by your doctor in the name of a spiritual deity who dosen't like women.

I agree with theFallenMadonna (do you have big boobies by any change ) I think it is often meant to offend and on that thread the intention was definitely to be offensive.

agree with every word of your last post, marina. i would be utterly if any christian i knew started lecturing non christians on how they would burn in hell! and if they did, yes it would be totally rude and insensitive.

i was so disappointed with dawkins on this. there is a very valid debate to be had on the extent to which faith communities enjoy "privileges" in society, government or education. any intelligent person should be able to make their case without resorting to childish, personally belittling comments, all the more so if they are one of the leading thinkers of their generation!

oh and yes to other earlier posters. it is entirely possible to recognise the intention to offend without taking offense...

The problem most unbelievers have with those that do believe is the worry that the believers have someting worth having that they, the unbelievers) have not themselves managed to get, It is not about certainties, in order to believe you have to not 'know' otherwise it would not be 'belief' but knowlege. Belief is an act of faith, a step in the unknown. In doing that somehow miraculously you do 'know' in your deepest being. Strange how it works!
Everyone has a right to either believe or not I was one of the latter before I became on of the former.

I disagree twinnylinny. Neither I nor any of the unbelivers I know worry for a second that the believers might be 'right'. It's a bit patronising to say that to be honest. What you do get from disbelief is the requirement to examine your opinions carefully, not to just get a ready made set off the shelf, and you also gain an awful lot more time in your day that would be otherwise be spent in meaningless rituals.

here here slug
twinnie I certainly don't want what you believe in particularly if it makes me behave in such a crass manner to others
I'm happy to live my life in a way that I see fit without needing someone else to tell me what is right and wrong thanks

Yes, I do think it is rude and dismissive, and tends to imply that people with faith are gullible numpties, which is perfectly obviously not the case. (I am an atheist).

I also agree with Frogs' post below: "the more hostile the anti-God brigade are, the more likely it becomes that people of any religious faith will be strengthened in their feeling that the secular system is actively opposed to everything that is important to them. Which in turn makes it more likely that they will want to educate their children in a school where they know their beliefs will be respected and supported, ie a faith school. ", but think that can be turned around.

I don't like being called the 'anti-god brigade' (or a 'brigade of any kind - usually the PC brigade' ). Some of the posts on that thread in favour of state funded faith schools made me - as a secular democrat - less inclined to the pragmatic half of my view about them being built on historically benevolent principles, and being (as MN-erpointed out to me) a way f some families to enter the catchment where house-prices are out of reach

In principle, I can't see a right way for any state funded school to discriminate against a child who lives next door on the basis of belief. BUT I do feel I hold that view alongside respect for individuals who have faith. And although I have on a couple of occasions been told stuff which I do consider a bit loony far-fetched and / or rude (and generally to do with DS's leg) it would be utterly iniquitous - and silly and unintelligent - of me to try and use that as a stick to beat intelligent, respectful, sensitive people who happen to be in the same religious spectrum!

And good manners - simple good manners - are an important ingredient of any worthwhile deabte.

I don't feel the need to spend time with Jehovah's Witnesses on my doorstep, but I certainly don't understand the gratuitous rudeness often advocated towards them.

Blu, by 'Anti-God brigade' I didn't mean atheists or non-believers, but was referring to the people who are so vehemently opposed to religious belief as a concept that they think it's fine to attack religion using terms that are obviously meant to be insulting. (I don't feel insulted personally, btw, I'm quite hard to offend! But it's clear when people are intending to be rude, and I draw my own conclusions).

I stick by my point though, that the more hysterical the anti-god rhetoric gets, both in public debate and in the media, the more likely people of any faith are to want to hunker down in their comfort zone of people who they know share their values.

Yes- sorry Frogs - I know what you mean - and certainly that you were not throwing out insults - my clunky point is that dismissive (or other hostile) language on either 'side' is counter-productive.

But don't you think the "anti god Brigade" (I agree, an awful term) are hostile precisely because the religious establishment seek to discriminate against them in terms of state funded schooling and, to a certain extent in the legal fabric of the country (e.g.abortion and homosexuality laws)? Once you take "god" out of the debate, what possible excuse is there for denying people equal rights?

The fact that the House of Lords still has unelected Bishops who can block equality laws (e.g. homosexual age of consent) simply because their (yes I'm going to say it) "imaginary friend" tells them it's OK to discriminate makes it very difficult to be tolerant with others who parrot these beliefs, however sincerely held, especially when it affects me, my family or my loved ones.

Message withdrawn

Wholeheartedly agree with Pruners

It is not rude in itself to refer to God as an "imaginary friend".

if the speaker means it to be rude then they are not being nice

if someone ridicules someone's belief that their child/gran/aunt is with them in spirit then they are not being nice

How about people just ridicule each other's support (in whatever form it takes) less ?

I love "equal opportunities offender"!

I aspire to be one of those - much more relevant today than being a working-class hero, dontcha think?

It's seeing views like twinnylinnie that make me wish to embrace the "imaginary friend" line of attack.

The problem is that I do see my religious friends as being deluded, because they base their lives on something that to me is at least a little bizarre. They on the other hand see me as sadly lacking in faith (but possibly convertible), and try to encourage me to make the jump that they have undertaken. Now I have three options on this, one I redirect conversations when they stray into areas of belief, two I cease to associate with them, or three I could go on the counterattack. In RL I do one for those I love (or have to work with), and two for those I don't. I reserve the third option for arenas where debate is the aim, and I do think Mumsnet threads on religion are the ideal venue.

I have to say in real life I have come across far more "aggressive" believers than non believers, mainly because evangelism is part of most faiths, whereas I have yet to meet anyone who feels that they are "called" to try and stop people from having faith (although I acknowledge such people exist). Because I am (mostly) a nice person I do not say to colleagues or friends when they tell me about what "God" said to them that they have been indulging in a bit of imaginary friendship, but yes that is indeed what I think.

I have been re reading my message, I cant find where I have said you were wrong, or indeed where I was right.
As for being patronising, in what way? My opinions are my own, carefully thought out and put into practise, I have been nowhere near a 'shelf' in order to think the way I do, but have spent most of my life thinking and reasoning for myself, I do not disagree with anyones right to be an unbeliever, I think I might have mentioned that, I am not asking you to think like me, behave like me or condone any of my actions, by the same rule you can also do exactly as you wish, its ok with me.

Surely those of us who are secure in our religious beliefs are hardly going to be swayed by SGB or anyone else using that term though, or similar terms, are they?

Personally I just think it's quite funny.