West, You have singled out religion to be your nemesis and in some regard I can empathize. I wasn't "attacking" what you is. I was "attacking" what you believe. What you believe is the most unmitigated rubbish and an abuse of any definition of reasonable. What you is, is well documented by your post. Don't blame me for what you make for yourself. Anyone who equates Nazism or any expression of fascism to religion has bent reality to profit hate.
I'll say it once again.
"To separate out religion and hold it the predominate reasoning behind the many aspects of mans more sinister character is not a higher moral or ethical position. It's an excuse to attack and belittle. It's a selfish and cruel attempt at appearing clever. It's a rouse. You need to find some tolerance for other peoples way of thinking and dealing with their personal life experience."
And I'm sorry for you that an idea of a higher power is dead to you. Not for any purpose of religion but, because you have chosen to toss aside a valuable human experience. A human quandary. The existence and value of the human soul.
Religion didn't create the idea of mans soul. The idea of mans soul lead to developing religion. Certainly organized religion is flawed and that man has exploited it for diverse means down through the ages but, that is the inherent evil of mans nature not the purposeful design of religion. We mustn't blame mans institutions for mans behavior. Reasonable people don't blame the building of prisons for the obvious criminal element found in every society.
I wish you peace of both heart and soul.

aqvarivs in no manner of truth can you claim a higher power. That belief is your superstition. Individually superstitious beliefs in higher powers are the burden of the believer. When you take it to public superstition becomes an agenda to decieve. Your belief in a higher power is no different than a belief in a thousand year reich or a belief in the rebirthing powers of the Ester Rabbit. You have no moral grounding in a belief in a higher power. This is why you are angry with me because for god believers a belief in higher powers equates to them as moral superiority. History and god belief in this era prove morality has nothing to do with superstition. Christianity has demonstrated through history and rhetoric it is positioned as antimoral. God belief is the realm of deceivers and religious claims of containing moral standards is only part of the deception game and all monotheist and major multitheist cults are guilty of it.

Yes I do hold moral superiority over Christians because Christians do not know right from wrong they need external guidence to tell them what to think which is how Islam and Christendom became fascist movements. Christian rhetoric concerning morality is as dubious as all christian claims, always unsupported always contradicted. Then there is immorality which superstitious cults such as christianity claim as moral which are not morals but loyalties to ritual.

Again god " higher power" toothfairy , santa claus,intelligent? designer, super magician or whatever you want to call it is focused centrally and pertaining only to the ego. Re- old and new Testament, alleged teaching of Christ ,Koran , crystal healing , satanic apocrapha , astrology, tarot. Leading back to moral panic , the fact we are not immortal is superstitiously translated to we are punished by magic that we need to be saved from magic creating a set of rules and rituals to base further external persecution on. Gays, abortees , divorcees, atheists and other religions must pay for newly invented crimes against arbitrary morality. Paranoid hysteria is now called spiritualism.

Kieran,
The basic claim of Christianity is all humans have failed to live the pure life of God. That includes me! That is why I worship, admire and study to understand a more pure and holy character and life. The principle of grace applies i.e. even though I have failed I ask forgivness and reconciliation to the true spirit.

West: "Besides I am not Atheist, I speak of what religion is not what religion believes. The Atheist debate is well and truley over , there is no god."

You can't say, I am not Atheist, then say, there is no god.
That's as amusing as Coach's attempt to pretend Christianity isn't a religion.

What you're incapable of understanding, is that all the rules that you are invoking to prove god doesn't exist hinge on no more than faith. This is the problem with the whole god debate.
You can't rule it out because it is simply a concept.
In time you can argue that there is no proof to verify that there is a god. That's fine, but by exactly the same token, you can argue that there is no proof to prove that there isn't a god. That's why this entire debate is so stupid.

So what are we left with? A collection of religions with views that conflict to varying degrees, each with a series of rituals and dogma that generate conflict.
Through the fear of hell they are also capable of inculcating values, and while it is fair to highlight the horrific deeds committed in the name of religion, it isn't fair to ignore the values that religion has provided society.

I suspect that we're of the similar view, in more enlightened places there shouldn't be a need for religion any more, and the world would be better off without the conflict generated by warring ideologies.

Your attacks aren't based on sound reasoning - you hate religion for it's conflict and desire to control, yet your argue in a similar vein.

You can't forcibly abolish religion, it thrives on persecution. All you can do is hope people see the stupidity, and realise they don't need god, or a big 'hell' whipping stick to coexist.
You can only hope that one day, enough people will see that it as the next stage of humanity's evolution.

But it can't be forced. Try to persuade peacefully - you'll get further doing that peaceably than with violent language and insults.

West,

Of course I can claim the existence of a higher power. I would never suggest that you or anyone else must believe in a higher power. I would never suggest that I was morally superior for holding such a belief. Not being religious myself I can not claim to be morally superior to a person who adheres to a specific orthodoxy.

You are apparently a person who needs to be seen as morally superior and part of that need is found in a destructive and bitter anxiety. I have had many conversations with people who have lost the desire to further their relationship with a particular Church or religion, and none have had such resentment as you portray.

I understand you position on having to deal with the inconvenience of religionists that refuse to take a kind hint to bugger off. However.
This is an article for comment by a religionists on the subject of the spirit world, and while you have every right to your opinion on the subject you have chosen to attack other commenter's beliefs not the essence of the subject matter. You are not conversing. You are being unpleasant for the sake of being unpleasant, and suggesting that such an attitude is a superior form of intellectualization.

You seem rather limited by your professed superiority and moral advantage. The viciousness of your attacks must be due to the momentum that is built up coming from such a great height.

TurnRightThenLeft I am an antitheist because I know and acknowledge god is a product of superstition. God is not relevant because there is no god. That has nothing to do with faith; it does not take faith to acknowledge reality. Faith is unquestioned hope. If we jump off a 100 metre cliff we can do so because we have faith we will survive faith is a psychological resolve, psychological blinkers, it doesn’t mean we can survive. But awe geez prove god exists so we can have a serious debate based on knowledge of god and not just everybody espousing the preferences of their egos.

If your god is a false god then you have no god which makes everybody an atheist. I feel the word atheist panders to religious values.

Aqvarvis I apologise I hadn’t articulated what I meant by my moral superiority. My moral superiority was perhaps too strong a way to put it. What I was saying was that a person who needs religion or spiritual beliefs for moral guidance is morally fickle and their true nature is one that does not accommodate morality easily. Compare that to somebody who knows right from wrong and has no need of doctrine or dogma. I certainly don’t need the 10 commandments to stop me from killing and stealing. I suspect somebody who does.

Aqvarvis you are obviously annoyed that somebody else has another point of view than your own. Christendom as is Islam is certainly fragile to criticism and that’s why censorship is so essential and so central to them both. They are faith based and faith requires blinkers or the believer won’t have the guts to jump. I am gently reminding religion it is nothing of what it claims to be in fact in many cases it is the opposite. God believers claim they are justified in impacting on other people’s lives I am simply stating they have no right and they are wrong. Religion is only a game after all and the self called spiritual have to be aware not all of us want to play their games