he'll change his tune on his deathbed like they all do

Really, so you are saying there is some kind of study that proves this?

"he'll change his tune on his deathbed like they all do"

As if you would know, you ignorant bombastic old prick.

LOL, you are taking Bill O'Reilly's internet imposter seriously? You need help, man, you shouldnt be taking the other clone they keep over at FoxNews seriously either, BTW.

I think the problem most people have with being an atheist is that they feel like being able to answer to a higher power keeps them stable and rooted to moral values in a way that they wouldn't be if they couldn't lean on some higher authority figure. With that they feel like they have motivation to do the "right thing". The "right thing" for must modern people that ponder these questions is being altruistic (putting others before themselves).

Modern monotheistic religions are all at their core altruistic and when people see the fruits of this altruism they are comforted in knowing that their god is good so in the end hopefully good things will come to them. Historically religions have not necessarily been altruistic and many non-major religions and cults are narcissistic in nature.

I'm not sure why so many people incorrectly try and say that atheism is a religion. Atheism is a belief that is grounded in the facts that are available to modern society. If a person honestly sticks to the facts of modern science I think atheism is a very reasonable conclusion to make.

Of course being human isn't always about the facts. It is about subtleties and feelings and while there might always be a great explanation the ingrained "feelings" that people have are more often than not stronger than their learned logic. Likewise it is the imagination of the human species that not only keeps it moving forward, but sometimes holds us back from finding the real truths of the universe.

One last note on bashing the leaders of religions, I have never seen or heard of a case where a person in a position of great power was not corrupted by their position. The old adage "absolute power corrupts absolutely" seems to be wisdom for the ages. Just because the leaders of large religions are corrupted does not for me symbolize the goodness or evilness of the religion. Powerful positions not only turn good people bad, they also draw bad people to them, whether it is a government position, religious leadership position, or scientific organization executives all are bent to satisfying their own needs and skewed outlook on reality.

Sorry for the length.

More atheists have proselytized to me in the last year than Christians, and I know a whole mess of Pentecostals who think I'm going to hell.

Don't you think there's something wrong with that?

"Bill O'Reilly's internet imposter"

You give me far too much credit, son.

I just made the name originally after lurking here and seeing a Bill O'Reilly video every day and hearing the whiny liberals that frequent VS sound off on his horribleness.

Incidentally, I've always found it quite humorous that people post his videos at all--isn't that just giving him more press, which is exactly what he wants?

The only problem I have with athiests such as Pat Condell is that he comes across as angry with a finger pointing style. Who cares? it's not just that he is an athiest, it is that he has some huge anger against religion. Personally I like athiests who just go about their business and I like religious people who just go about their business. I'll have none of this elevated emotion over nothing.

Anger is a perfectly legitimate and justified emotion to have when dealing with religion.

Religion brainwashing children, for example, makes me angry.

atheism may not be another religion but it does seem to be another belief.

i'm an atheist, possibly even go as far as an anti-theist, but this guy is a bit smug in his delivery. it'd be good to see him in a debate like this though. i wonder if this guy is familiar with biocosm theory...