First, a bit of context. All the events described here took place in France. As you know, the ratio of religious people to atheists is very different from USA here. Moreover many religious people are not very ‘faithful’.

I’ve had a discussion on the topic of religion with a friend of mine. Before, I preferred not to touch this subject following the social convention that it is too ‘sensitive’, but after reading some discussion here and some discussion from Dawkins and Dennett, I changed my mind and started to present my atheistic view of the world more freely and pointing out all the wrongs that church did. One time when I pointed out that the church interdiction to use the condoms in Africa led to the greater spread of AIDS, it caused an emotional reaction on her part. A bit later we came back to this discussion so to say ‘tête-à-tête’.

She has some inconsistencies in her position, as well as a weird notion of my lack of respect for her, when I criticize the religion, with which I think most of you are quite familiar. That’s not the point of my post. There is another aspect that seems interesting to me and which I would like to discuss.

When we clarified her position, I’ve found that she basically hand-picked the things that she liked from the christianity, without noticing the things that she didn’t like. She basically constructed her own faith, basing on the moral code of the modern society. There are some discrepancies in her position, for example, she understands that she prefers the christianity just because she was born in the christian country, but she has a prejudice towards muslims. On the other hand she thinks that contraceptives are a good thing and thinks that if she asked a priest (I am not sure if she ever did), he would tell her that it is ok to use them. When we discussed particular wrongs which are done by the church, she says that probably it has some reasons behind it and it is not so clear (while she didn’t try to find out what these reasons could be).

I hope that you could get a grasp of her position from the presented description. There are some things that I am not sure about, and I would like to have some opinions.

Can we call her position religious? For the moment I just told her that I excluded her from the group of religious people, as she takes personal offence when I attack religion. I just told her that my critics is not for people like you, but it bother me a little bit as I am not being completely honest.

How should I approach this ‘sensitive’ subject in the future? She is a friend, and I don’t want to antagonize her with the ‘attacks’ on religion. On the other hand, this subject comes quite often in the discussion, and I am trying to pursue a line of not ‘leaving them alone’.

Well obviously she is religious, and also a christian of some sorts (it isn't dreadfully important what parts of the bible she holds to be hers, christianity is very diverse). The most important bit is to not comb all theists with the same brush. Yes, atrocities are commited by religious believers but your friend doesn't really seem like the type to deny Africans the use of condoms.

These 'all-out' attacks is what gives many atheists a bad rep to begin with. I'm sure there are atheists you don't want to be grouped together with also.

So when you debate with her this is not really legitimate criticism, for her it seems like is the 'big questions' you want to discuss. What is/isn't god, why do people believe, explanations for faith, timelines for the universe, the properties of a deity, philosophical debate of what is possible to know etc.

Basically the fun stuff.

Express your beliefs without pushing, and feel free to end the conversation if it gets too tense. Use your sense of the situation and how she's reacting.

Personally, I want my friends to know that I dislike religion, but I don't actually try to convince them of anything. If that's what you're trying to do, then keep in mind that most people only alter their beliefs and perspectives gradually. A little bit at a time is best. Remain firm in your beliefs, make a point here or a point there, and over time you may influence her. Or not, her beliefs may be too ingrained.

People are emotional about what they believe. They may believe something because it's comfortable. So be a "fly in the ointment" - don't attack her beliefs per se, but don't allow yourself to be smoothed over. The slight discomfort of being exposed to dissent is often more important than any argument. You can be the part of her religious fantasy world that doesn't quite fit - and that may cause it to unravel at the seams. But if you attack the beliefs that she values, then she'll just get defensive and shut you out. That way, her beliefs will be more insular, rather than less insular. Tug something here, tickle a bit there, avoid the frontal assault.

Is she religious? Well, I would say so. She identifies as Christian, which means she's fond of Jesus, which means she supports the Bible. She may not be aware of this, but everything we know about Jesus comes from the Bible - there is no separation possible IMO. She also seems to defend the Catholic Church, an organization that causes a lot of harm (and has done so throughout its history, since Peter and Paul). I don't know what material or political support she offers Christian causes and Christian groups, but the fact that she aligns herself with an ugly belief system is enough for me. Of course, this point is philosophical. I do think that in being a Christian, she's doing harm. But I don't think it's my business, and I think it's only a tiny part of who she is. I don't judge her as a person on that basis, I just see her as complicit in a technical way.

Incidentally, she probably thinks being Christian is a big part of who she is. That's one of the greatest dangers of religion IMO. If she's compassionate, she may attribute that to a Christian value system. If she has spiritual experiences, she may attribute them to God. If she has courage or personal strength, she may even view these as "gifts from God" and contingent on her faith. People in most societies are encouraged to identify with their religious beliefs in extreme ways, so it's natural for them to take offense when you attack what they consider to be the basis of who they are. Obviously I believe that if she were freed from her beliefs she'd realize just how insignifcant they are. She'd understand that all those good things she attributed to religion are actually independent of it.

Of course, her beliefs are her business and nobody else's. And that's why I don't try to convince anyone per se. I think it's better to develop myself, to tend my own garden. But as a fortunate coincidence, if I develop my own happiness and compassion others will notice, and that may be the greatest refutation of all. If, as atheists, we prove that we can be happy, kind, spiritually aware, and responsible, then what can religion possibly have to offer?

This is really deep. I don't think it should be solely applied to religion, or lack thereof (though it does apply to this example quite effectively) . I try to live my life by exactly what you wrote.

A majority of our society has a twisted view on what we, as humans, are. They have some idea of what a perfect person is and ridicule everyone who does not meet their near unnatainable standards. I think the mindstate is clearly depicted when you turn on the telivision. It's full of he said/she said bickering over petty incidents, women with perfect figures, people with perfect teeth, etc.

Now, I'm not saying that there is anything bad about being fit or having good dental hygiene, but I don't think it is representative (or considerate) of the American population. As far as the petty bickering goes, my philosophy is that people should be more focused on understanding why a person is or acts a certain way. Instead, they seem to create arbitrary reasons to hate or love said characteristics.

This mindstate has always had a debilitating effect on my well being (low self-esteem, impaired speech, I chewed my nails down to nubs etc.)It drove me to the point where I was smoking marijuana everyday for four years straight, just to quiet my restless mind from attempting to makes sense of such insane behavior.

One night, I had an epiphany (or perhaps a spiritual experience). I realized that I had two options.

1-I could spend my whole life weeding through the (mostly irrational) conclusions people will draw on who and what I am and continuously question myself OR
2-I could live my life based on the characteristics you described - kindness, compassion, responsibility, honesty- and disregard their conclusions entirely because I would be confident in my intentions.

I chose option 2. I no longer have a mental obsession with marijuana, I am excelling far greater than I ever have in school, and I no longer worry for hours at a time.

I now have a completely different outlook on how to treat people. I compliment people and "kill them" with kindness in an attempt to release them from there negative internal dialogue, even if it's just for a moment. I, like you madnak, hope one day they will catch on, so we can move onto bigger and better things.

What I would do is to keep plying her with common sense questions and let her answer them for herself.

*So how old do you think the earth is?

*How do ya think Noah got every male and female of every species on earth into the ark?

*Gee, what do ya suppose all those animals ate when they got off the ark, what with all the other animsa and plants all drowned?

*Do you REALLY believe we all descended from just the few inhabitants of the ark and diversified into all these races and languages, etc.?

*LOLl!! - That god sure is a jokester for letting Abraham come within seconds of slitting his son's throat, huh? What would you think of your husband if he did that with your son?

*So if you're not a virgin before you get married, are you ok with your fiance coming to your house and stoning you to death?

*With all the good god has done for people in the form of answers prayers, why do you suppose he's never helped an amputee?

*Be honest now... If you're mom and dad were Muslims, instead of Christians, wouldn't you be worshipping Allah right now? What if they were Hindu?

And finally...

*Exactly why do you think your religion and your interpretations of it are right and every els'es is wrong? I know you're not dumb, but are you really that much smarter than every Jew, Muslim, and Hindu, on the planet?

Drag, you have to choose between being right or being happy.
If I cared about a person that is religious I would just leave her alone and let her be, why do you want to change her mind?

i would 'stop' using 'quotation marks' so often. they aren't 'used' to denote emphasis, like 'italizing' or 'underlining' are, or to be sprayed arbitrarily throughout a post--they have a 'specific' function of either direct 'quotation' or indicating the intentional 'misuse' of a word or non-word to 'convey' an idea.

@time_deuces
She is not much interested in discussion the philosophical part. She is sure that she knows the truth, the only possible way to change her stance is to go by small steps, as madnak suggests.

@madnak
Good advice madnak, you touched many important points. Thanks. I am astonished at the understanding that you show with such incomplete information.

@Lestat
She agrees with the theory of evolution. I doubt that I would have a friend who rejects such basic things. She also accepts that other religions are not worse, at least at the intellectual level. Emotionally she is very attached to christianity, without understanding the deep motives.

@valenzuela
I am not much interested in changing her mind, it is mostly the sense of rightness. When people start to discuss the good sides of religion I start to show the bad ones too. And you are right, the conflict is between trying to do the right think and having good relations with others. You see, if we develop antagonism on the religious grounds it will go into other parts of relationship.

@not a model
Normally I don't use the quotation marks so often. It was a bit sensitive subject for me, and the intention was to add some subtlety. For example, when I wrote " 'attack' on religion" , the quotation mark were added to show that it was not a real attack. I never said that all people who believe in god are stupid, or something like that. I only mentioned some facts about the negative influence of religion on the world. She just took it too personally, and madnak gives a very good explanation why.
English is not my first language, and I probably constructed a dubious analogy with French, where we use the expression 'entre guillemets' to show that we don't use the word in the direct sense.

P.S. Thank all for the replies.