Depending in the friend I could have answered in that way or in the more hitchens way, it's a moronic dark age belief structure designed to oppress woman and scare people into submission into a man's mans world

Huh. Yeah, I think your answers were on the right track. I find your friend's initial presumption that atheism is somehow attractive to be odd, I have never heard that before - it's almost as if she is asserting that there is some hip counter-culture attraction to it. For me personally? there could be a hint of truth to that, I have always been rebellious, I have always raised a middle finger to the status quo, and often push people out of their mental comfort zone - but to say that becoming an atheist for the sole purpose of being an antagonist is incorrect, IMO. For those of us that come from religious families, we risk alienation, if not being rejected outright.

Being publicly atheist can jeopardize job security, or other discriminations in the communities we live in. Some of you may be familiar with the case of Coach Joe Kennedy that was rejected by the Supreme Court earlier this year... One of the members of our local atheist group played a role in raising the issue to get Kennedy fired (he wasn't actually fired, Bremerton School District simply didn't renew his contract) - anywhoo - I have read letters that she has received from xtian Coach Joe supporters - and they are ugly! threats of violence, rape, and death (ya know, because they are god fearing folk)...

The moral to this story is that there is nothing glorious or enticing about being atheist for the sake of being atheist; for many of us, it is a long and painful process - and many of us risk losing a lot, simply for observing truth and evidence.

“Against the Gods” is a book detailing how we lost the need for supernatural explanations as time progressed and our knowledge, specifically in statistics, increased. As for how “attractive” atheism is, I like the House quote “I find it more comforting to believe that this isn’t merely a test” echoing the idea that life is precious because it is finite. Not the outlook I personally take, but more or less agree with the sentiment.
Many of the youth often have moral objections to the church such as transgressions against LGBTQ+ groups and misogynistic views of gender roles. Many also see the fact that there are many claims of religion that are not only unsubstantiated, but provably false.

You have given a very good answer. Just as religionists progressed the study of the bible, we must progress the study of science in our own lives. Not in a laboratory but in ways that can affect everyone personally. Just to ask for evidence is a good start. Please see my science teacher group on this site . You do not have to be a teacher only interested in science education. Amongst other things we start at a very basic level i.e. What IS science? Lots of people have misconceptions.

I think you did a great job of explaining it. There is a second use of religion and that is controlling a large group of people, mostly through fear (eternity in hell, etc). Today people are educated and lost their superstitious fears.

Religion is easier

I agree with the "Religion is more attractive" - absolutely - and so much easier to get along in todays society if you are a believer.

Science and Logic made religion impossible for me to believe.
I've never been a good one to drop the "Just because god says" answer on.

I think you did great.

Welcome back!

Agreed and welcome back!

That is a good answer. I am also one who got my first college degree from a xian, Lutheran, college. I also took 5 of the religion classes while there. Those things are what also started my becoming a nonbeliever.

Good answer!

1. Science - it is all in the facts or lack there of

2. Hypocrisy- if you are going to espouse some philosophy of love and acceptance (based on a physical manifestation named Jesus), then you should try to have some

Looks like you pretty much covered it. I agree, it's harder not being part of the crowd. It's not really "attractive" to go against the crowd, is it? But the more we know, the less we need fairy tales to explain. It's like once you know it's your parents, and there's no Santa, there's no reason to keep believing it. But it was fun while it lasted to believe such fantasy stories.

Welcome back, glad you are back, you were missed! I loved your explanation and it lines up with my own way of thinking! I hope she heard you...at that level of understanding!

I think you explained it well to your religious friend. Maybe, you got her to question the bs and some day might leave bs of religion.

I think the question itself is wanting, because it suggests that people choose atheism or religion consciously. I'd be happier with the question if it asked what is convincing about atheism. I realize the school has a particular perspective and this question fits into a biased narrative about the allure of the secular world, but it won't spark critical thinking on this issue because it's framed in a way that keeps students on guard against nonbelief. Despite that, I agree with your response. Religion provides answers without explanation, so belief is easy. By contrast, nonbelief requires being comfortable not having all of the answers, and for many of us that's hard — but the desire to discover the deeper explanation has to be stronger than the desire for a shallow answer. Unfortunately, a lot of people seem to be so uncomfortable with having no definitive answer that they're happy to insert magic and divine mystery to quell that feeling of uncertainty. And, of course, trying to find meaning in tragedy and to come to terms with mortality are powerful motivators for belief; emotion, especially fear, overpowers rationality. "I don't know" and "I see no evidence to support that claim" are perfectly reasonable stances, but they're not as comforting as "We have the answer, and that answer is 'God.' Amen!"

In western societies such as the USA and Europe we demand a greater level of proof in a daily lives for everything except immigration levels, as this filters into our collective psyche religions keep failing to provide proof.
Then as we begin to know more about the world, we start to find out that there are many alleged one true gods - about 42 at the moment!
So how can religion stand up to scrutiny, well it doesn't.

Firstly look at the course texts she has been using and make sure that responses, even if they are arguing for or against, are used in context with these sources. This shows she has done her reading.

The question is looking for a specific response by commencing with Why. Therefore the assignment should discuss an agreement and disagreement with the premise laid out in the question and a response to both positions. Depending on the number of words that would be contained in three paragraphs of around 300 words each.

Make sure that references are taken from the course texts and also texts from outside of the course work to support the arguments.

For a conclusion don’t add new content, just use it as a condensed form of what has already been discussed and concluded.

Introduction (tell what she is going to say) and conclusion each 10% of the word allowance.

It is most important for the content to refer to course reading and then use her own ideas and external research to agree or refute.

I liked your answer. Good job!

The more we know, the more science advances, the less dependent we become for quick answers to unknowns.

Good answer. I'll bet the more highly educated a population is, the less religious they are. This would explain why the USA is the most religious of industrialized countries.

Give your friend credit. Answering your challenges will strengthen her faith. Most religions discourage critical thought or variations of belief. If she has asked these questions to herself she may be prepared. This may be a homework assignment preparing her for evangelizing.

“I don't want to believe. I want to know.”

“For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.”

― Carl Sagan

The one thing I like most about the god of the gaps, is that it has kept on getting smaller and smaller all the time, till it perhaps fades away.

The more science progresses and explains the unknown, the more humans lose the need to have a god to explain it.

Using your own words here explains it very well. God and the bible are static and never changing. Science is progressive and ever changing. That works for me because a flat earth and weird ideas about a firmament, worldwide floods, and talking snakes are a bit much. The biblical god is much like Zeus and about as credible.

I definitely think the God of the Gaps and the rise in rationality is party of it. Science produces miracles that religion can't even dream of.
I think another important factor is social change. People are much more mobile in their lifestyle now, less dependant on the fixed social structure of work/family/church than they used to be.