The problem with most atheists' arguments

Nettle,
I chose to post this article in lieu of the countless ignoble, ad hominem spewing by both the benighted and the enlightened(some questionable) sides of previous arguments on this topic. Yes, this article has a few flaws (namely, the 3 levels of belief, which should undoubtedly be 7); yet, it's core message is empathy and the encouragement of reason. I feel that our frustrations with the ideology of the indoctrinated degenerate many arguments into diatribe...

I dunno. Despite what one of its messages may be, it's condescending and rude. If I believed in god and read this article, I'd be very alienated from atheists and their reason.

Also, this article points out that the main reason religious folk won't listen to reason is because their mind depends on their beliefs and they would lose themselves if their mind were to change. But that's true for anyone who has a belief. If god were to drop out of the sky, plop down in front of me, hand me a root beer, and say, "Hey, sup?" I would shit my pants and doubt everything I ever thought was true. I'd go nuts. Assuming that theists are the only one with their mind intertwined in a belief that keeps them firmly rooted in their ideals no matter what proof is presented is just ignorant.

The argument that you are inferring is that people (in general) cannot deal with a dynamic, changing world. Western Philosophy seems to often force the world into static constraints; however, Eastern Philosophy allows more freedom to view the world as changing and not to fear this concept. Your mind in only as constrained as the viewpoint used to interpret the world.

Please remember that I am using large generalizations and that I am referring to philosophy in general instead of particular religions.

The problem is that some atheists/agnostics deem it irresistably necessary to convert, opposed to inviting one to question everything.

We could say that this behavior is a derivative of the pernicious treatment of non-believers in our past and is spawning a generation of vindictive freethinkers(a paradox, indeed.).

Eitherway, it is an arduous ordeal on all sides.

An article doesn't change the human condition.

Alright SagaciousNJ, you make a valid point. lol I should note that I don't disagree with a good part of Dawkins' points. He's a very intelligent individual. I just find him arrogant and I don't think his attitude is helping him win anyone over. He's a militant atheist, and I find that that sort of attitude, held among religious folk or among atheists, only serves to alienate people from your cause.