Where do you draw this downright ignorant conclusion? Have you heard of William Lane Craig, Alvin Plantinga, or Richard Swinburne? If you really are seeking truth, don't settle in your beliefs merely because of the mediocrity around you.

I was raised in a religion that emphasizes understanding the belief system and arguments for it (the focus on valuing the truth was what caused me to ultimately leave, btw.). So I do have first-hand experience of what it means to believe in something for perfectly good reason with strong, consistent arguments. And I have to tell you, while most religious people probably believe for reasons like you just described, I've seen and talked to many self-proclaimed atheists and many refuse to believe for exactly the same reasons - they were raised as atheists. Or they discovered that atheism is what cool people do, or didn't want to stand out from the crowd.

People who don't believe in supernatural aren't inherently smarter than those who do. For many (I suspect most) of them, atheism is a blind faith, the same way Christianity is for their parents.

They evangelize, but its more of ideology that concerns religion rather than just a belief. The main problem with atheism is the definition: absence of religion, this is such a derogatory word as if believing in deities should be the norm. Agnostic is even worse seat: declaring that you have no clue but probably are somewhat spiritual. If you don't like religion say proudly that you are antitheist!

Yeesh, that's sort of an insulting (and rather broad) conclusion to draw about religious people. It seems akin to saying "Religious people are too simple-minded to understand the concept of morality; They can only conceive of good behavior enforced by the threat of torture/violence/all the other stuff that hell entails."

There is a way to phrase this sentiment without alienating quite as many decent people. Try to find it next time.

(I, too, am an atheist; but I don't see a need to enforce atheism on HN.)

Well, it is a good point if you think atheism is about honesty rather than reaching a conclusion based on reason and evidence. I've heard atheists admit that under the extreme pressure and terror of a fox hole or impending death bed, they probably wouldn't maintain the rationality and focus on evidence that guided their reasoning in a calmer, less terrifying situation.

To some religious believers, this is about honesty and arrogance, and when the chips are down, the humbling truth behind so-called atheism emerges. If you see it this way, it really isn't that hard to understand why they don't like atheists much - atheists appear smug and insincere. To some atheists, it's a sober, rational conclusion (maybe one they aren't especially happy to be reaching), the sort of reasoning that is least likely to happen in a fox hole or on a death bed. But it's really just a conclusion, not an attempt to insult people or "put down" their beliefs.

Maybe you are right, and xupybd too. This is why I still think my parent had an interesting and insightful answer. I actually wanted to understand that this way, but was put off by the "at such a tender age". This does not look neutral to me. "at this stage of life" or "at this young age" would not have triggered this in me.

Unfortunately, written text is not sufficiently precise for this kind of things.

I'm biased though. I happen to have met (independently) two people last year who were sorry for me and wanted to make me believe in God (which is okay. When you have convictions, you may want to make people adopt your convictions - but they didn't seem to understand my point of view). I also went to the US and met people there who were seeing atheists as extremists and intolerent people (I was ok for them though, because I am agnostic - so for them, I consider the existence of God).

But isn't that more agnosticism that atheism?

I’m not sure how a productive discussion can happen when both sides pre-judge each other. Skepticism itself is a charged term. /r/ReligionSkepticism and /r/AtheismSkepticism already self-select for audiences - one segment is clearly defending, and another is attacking. A more neutral phrasing would be /r/ReligionChangeMyView. I initially wrote this without opening up the GP's link, but I encourage you to check it out to see if this tracks.

To your point about religion, I’m atheist but have a few very religious friends. Them being religious didn’t sour me on them when we first met, though I’ll likely always disagree with them on that point.

as someone who spent their 20s and 30s devoutly atheist I very much appreciate the sentiment - never discount religious people. the smartest person you meet in your life will be religious, probably.

What does 'atheist' really mean? It's the negation of God, OK?

Many of the best scientists out there initially were atheists, and have been convinced by science itself of the existence of some kind of 'God'.

So please don't try to convince me, try to back-convert them to atheism!

It naturally follows that atheists are inherently smarter or at least more honest than religious folks of any stripe. So when someone from this crowd comes across a religious person who is plainly intelligent, who indeed they look up to, who clearly cares and thinks about religious things . . . well, the result is generally some sort of spit-take. I see it once or twice a month at least.

I expect some folks are a bit shell-shocked that the great patio11 also claims to be Catholic.

You know, it infuriates me when my theist mother tells my atheist self that I'm probably a theist without realizing it. I won't take any of that "If you're a X, you're probably just a Y without realizing it" nonsense.

Stop trying to justify your prejudices. Two wrongs, etc. etc.

On topic, I do wish folks down-voting me throughout this thread would explain why. I started posting because I'm very interested in the question but lack an answer. Down-voting me only proves the point and necessitating the very question!