So you believe in God because you want to, just like everyone else. But why do you think that is of any interest or value to anybody? You are quite right to feel ashamed: parading your irrationality in public is -- or should be -- deeply embarrassing.

You are right to mention ego, and ego and pride are what drives most, even those who deny it, and perhaps more so.

You are right to emphasis common humanity, but it is not religion that is common to, or consistent in, humanity. A focus on a common humanity and the world we share seems to be the best "inspiration to face the world without pretences". Altruism is the best God.

A few years ago Andrew Denton, in an article in the SMH, quoted the Risen Ape passage from Robert Ardrey's "African Genesis". Ardrey repeated the quote with further supporting comment in his "Hunting Hypothesis".

That, and a passage from the "Territorial Imperative", explained to me how we came to be here and why we are the way we are. I had both passages on file before Andrew Denton used one of them.

All religion is man made, mainly by the politicians of some ancient age for their own purposes of population control or what today would be taxation . If that isn't so why are there so many different religions.

Many religions have died out over the ages and being a non-theist only requires that you ignore one more beside the thousands you already think were or are nonsense.

Jon J writes: <So you believe in God because you want to, just like everyone else...> Wrong. And that was one of the main points of my article: I believe in God because, although I refused to surrender for decades, my experience impels me to do so. (And by the way "everyone else" must include you! Are you saying you share my belief?)

Jon J writes: <You are quite right to feel ashamed: parading your irrationality in public is -- or should be -- deeply embarrassing.> Wrong again. I feel no shame about writing the article. I did feel extremely reluctant to publish it (as I actually explained, in case you haven't read it) because I knew I would have to endure the attacks of the stone-throwing moralisers like you. Your ethical position is that whatever public utterances do not fall within your understanding of rationality must be repressed by the authorities -- i.e. by you. How does this differ from Fascism and Communism?

McReal: I think you and I are probably not far from common ground. It would take me a lot of words to explain this, so it will have to wait. Thanks for your comment.

Dear Stephen,

Thanks for quoting me. I think you wrote a great piece and am happy you found me worth disagreeing with.

"Jon J writes: <So you believe in God because you want to, just like everyone else...> Wrong. And that was one of the main points of my article: I believe in God because, although I refused to surrender for decades, my experience impels me to do so. (And by the way "everyone else" must include you! Are you saying you share my belief?)"

I should have said 'every other theist'. But since you have provided no evidence that would convince anyone who wasn't predisposed to belief, I stick by my statement: you believe because you want to.

"Jon J writes: <You are quite right to feel ashamed: parading your irrationality in public is -- or should be -- deeply embarrassing.> Wrong again. I feel no shame about writing the article. I did feel extremely reluctant to publish it (as I actually explained, in case you haven't read it) because I knew I would have to endure the attacks of the stone-throwing moralisers like you. Your ethical position is that whatever public utterances do not fall within your understanding of rationality must be repressed by the authorities -- i.e. by you. How does this differ from Fascism and Communism?"

I am not an authority, and I do not want to stop you proclaiming your beliefs -- or doing any other foolish thing -- in public, as long as nobody gets hurt by it. But I like to think that if I was tempted to publicise my own irrational beliefs -- yes, I have them, like everyone else -- some kind friend would tell me that it wasn't a terribly good idea. It's not a moral issue, it's just a charitable urge to prevent people making themselves look foolish.

If you do have any genuine evidence or arguments for your beliefs, let's hear them. If not, then they are irrational, no matter how widely held they are or how compelling they seem to you. The guys on the street wearing tinfoil hats have compelling beliefs too, but we're not obliged to take them seriously.