Well, speaking from experience, I would tend to say that there are likely to be some atheists who might fit the "I'm an atheist who just wants to have fun" category. However, many, if not most, are not atheists to escape the supposed moral constraints of traditional theism. I can safely safely that this does not fit any atheists that I know personally, who have sound philosophical and even moral reasons for rejecting the Judaeo-Christian conception of God. Indeed, they would argue that the God portrayed in part of the Bible is not a moral force, but an arbitrary and sometimes brutal one and that the religion that can accept the acts of that God as "moral" has no claim to morality itself.  That atheism is a more moral position than belief in a God who destroys cities to benefit his chosen people or who sanctions the sacrifice of his own son. To this, I would add that believing in God does not make one a paragon of morality and that there are many who profess a belief in God who as much fools in the sense you describe as any atheist.

In other words, this argument doesn't wash, at least with me.

EDIT: And did you consider that the "prominent atheist" that you're quoting (please name names if possible so we can check the reference for ourselves) was possibly not being entirely serious?

No, they are not.

Hi Stoneeyeball,

No more so than any other segment of society.

They have their bright-lights and their dim-bulbs just like the rest of us.

I suspect when it comes to morally upright there probably isn't that great a divergence either.  I mean we have Benny Hinn and Fred Phelps both seem to be on an extended moral hiatus.

Grace and peace to you.

John

stoneeyeball,

The purpose of this post is to stimulate thought and discussion.

...

It is not intelligence, or a lack thereof, that leads a person to reject belief in God. It is a lack of morals that leads a person to reject belief in God.

The thesis of your argument seems to deflate your introductory sentance. It does not appear to me that you really care to stimulate thought and discussion, but only to stir up a serious roasting. This, of course, is only appearence. If you do actually want to engage this topic with any sort of honesty, I would encourage you to back up what you say rather than simply spewing out the typical uninformed and simplistic evangelical drivel that makes conversations like this impossible.

P.S. While we are talking along subjective lines, I have yet to meet someone who "became an atheist" on any sort of moral grounds. If you really want to "meet" some de-converts, head over to http://de-conversion.com and listen instead of talking.

There are people who believe in god who are not moral and there are atheists who are as well. It has to do with the human condition that we are not always perfect.

It sounds like you should meet a few atheists. We are as the same as any theist - we just believe in one less god than you do.

Your post is so stereotypical. I hope you don't agree with it because it is quite juvenile.

Hi Stoney

I suspect you don't know many atheists if you believe the paragraphs you have written to be true. In fact the folks I know who are atheists (myself included) tend to be the most progressive, and reasonable folks you will find.  In fact I have often found that for practical purposes, the progressive folks I know seem to be a mixutre of agnostics, atheists, free thinkers, progressive Christians from Churches like UCC, or some Anglicans, liberal Catholics, progressive Jews, Quakers etc.   These folks tend to have a lot more in common, than for example with Evangelicals.  If you put them all in the same room, it would likely be the Pentacostal or Christian Reformer who stands out, not the Atheist.

In all seriousness if you are considering a philosophical examination of whether a person can be both moral and atheist (yes of course they can) then please read Robert Buckman's excellent book " Can we Be good without God?".  If you want to read something deeper, yet less accessible on the topic I would suggest Immanuel Kant

Bascially my friend I am not a non believer because I want to be able to run wild through the community, but rather because I see no evidence that your god is real.  It is really as simple as that, your god is no more believable than Zeus or the Pink Pixies who may live in my neighbours garden. He is no more real than the pagan gods who existed in people's lives prior to their suppression by the emerging Christian Church.  I would defend your right to believe in any of these supernatural beings, but in turn would ask not to be lumped in with the depraved because of my lack of belief.

Hello stoneeyeball:

I'm an atheist; and I'm no fool. But I'm a spiritual atheist. Does that make me foolish, or not?

Where did you get that foolish notion that atheists are fools, anyway? From the Bible? Yeah, right!

God uses fools to shame the wise

Hi stoneeyeball:

your quote:

Belief in a divine Being is accompanied by a feeling of accountability and responsibility toward that Being. So, to escape from the condemnation of conscience, which itself was created by God, one must deny the existence of God in order to deny the moral pull of the conscience. end of quote

I've met many of these beings in a little bar or club I used to frequent on weekends. However, I can't judge if they were atheists or not. They would say they didn't believe in God but I never pursued their beliefs regarding  if they were 100% sincere . Talk about God in  bars I've been to is a major no-no and in any case its not a habit of mine to go around striking up conversations about God.

I live in a community that happens to contain a fair number of atheists. I've met and talked with them daily at and around the school yard and in the park for some years. No deep God conversations but I would have to say I found them to be pretty regular ordinary people like Rev. John says. They loved and they cared about their families and neighbors.

Morals ? What's that....? (joking....kidding you!)

I never made atheist. Atheism is a faith. And i lost faith in my teens. All that kept me in a church was a desire to meet girls at the Young People's Union.

That's natural. We're grow up with a pretty simple sort of faith. Some, not many, never lose it. Most of us question it and move on. We don't move to atheism because that's a faith and it comes too close to admitting a desire to have a faith again. So we, in grand terms, become agnostics or, in more modesty, simply don't  give  damn.

I live in that state for some forty years, then realized i hadn't really lost my faith,  I'd just lost that silly, Santa Claus version of it we get taught in sunday school.

I've never found atheists to be any sillier than believers (who admittedly, can be pretty silly.) Nor have I found them morally that much different though, I suspect, as people of the atheist faith they have greater desire to be moral than agnostics do.

graeme

graeme,

If atheism is a faith, anything can be a faith.

brads ego

I checked out your link. My husband is also an atheist. He is currently receiving pallative home care. I'm spiritual. I  don't talk spirituality to him and I never have. I didn't read all of your link but it sounds quite abusive.  God have mercy on the crazy Christians....lol.

I agree with graeme that atheism is a faith that there is no God.. I see nothing wrong with classifying it as a faith.

Hi Brad:

If faith is a belief system, then any belief system is a faith.

If faith is a spiritual belief system only, then only spiritual belief systems qualify.

But what if one's faith is spiritual but entirely experiential, without any belief system? Is that faith?

Is spiritual atheism, or atheistic or non-theistic spirituality, a faith?

In the Far East there are several co called "atheistic" or "non-theistic" religions.

Wow, Stoney, you've hit a hot topic here.  I go away for awhile, and everything heats up.  You raised the question rather than make the statement re: fools.  I contend that we are ALL fools at times.  It seems to be part of the human condition.  No one has perfect insight or understanding.  Three basic questions I find people trying to answer independent of their backgrounds are who they are, why are they here, and where are they going.  Some find these answers within the context of a spiritual journey or faith and others seek these answers elsewhere.  I doubt this discussion will persuade anybody one way or the other.  Just as you can't paint Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, etc. with the same brush, the truth holds for atheists and/or agnostics.  Any 'religious' experience, including atheism, can be derailed through a person's ego and their motives for promoting their faith, or lack thereof.  The trick is to find some balance in your own life with a philosophy or theology that fits you.  One person or group vilifying another is not productive to the discussion or the topic.  I hope everyone finds their ultimate concern in life in such a way that it benefits themselves, their loved ones and society.

stoney, I think atheism is by definition an empty philosophy.  The prefix implies it is the absence of something and for that reason, and because of my own experience of God, I often feel sorry for atheists.  But foolish is not a word I would use to describe them because it is not foolishness that keeps someone from God.  If one cannot connect with God, then that is just the way it is.  I am not sure what keeps people away or, conversely, what brings people to God but I do know many atheists that have been drawn to faith over time.

The fact that I feel sorry for atheists is probably foolish, but I can't help it. 

Stoney, are you playing devils advocate? Surely you don't believe that nonsense about atheists being immoral?

I expect that the moral and immoral are peppered fairly evenly between all types of people, regardless of their beliefs. 

Devil's advocate?  I stay away from the devil.  She's much too cruel for me.  I prefer shit disturber.  I've been a shit disturber ever since my teens and student days in the 60's  and beyond.  I've helped organize demonstrations and rallies.  (Strangely, I never got arrested.  I could run fast.) Even as an adult educator, I would make controversial statements to see who was thinking and who was just reacting.   I've know atheists who run the gamut like anyone else in relation to moral behaviour.  As a former agnostic, I journeyed to my faith through a honest search involving much research.  Any philosophy of life can be a place to hide a person's real motives.  Eric Fromm wrote, in The Sane Society, of man becoming alienated from other, from his God, and from himself.  This can affect anyone regardless of their life's philosophy or sitz im leben.  Respectfully, PJ.

Enter MacBeth, stage left...

Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!

Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more; it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,

Signifying nothing. 

                                           Act V, Scene V
 

I was passing by and became interested in this thread.  I've read all the replies.  I didn't see one that defined what an atheist is.  I think it's important to define "atheist" because I've known a number of people who say they don't believe in "God," and yet, upon further aquaintance, it becomes clear they believe in many of the attributes which are thought by "believers" to partake of the Divine, such as grace, mercy, compassion, justice, truth and so on.  On another thread, I tried to address the question of what "God" is.  Perhaps it would be easier for people to address the question of what an "atheist" is.

In the nineteenth century the problem was that God is dead; in the twentieth century the problem is that man is dead.  -Eric Fromm, The Sane Society, 1955. Chapter 9.  What happens when God and man are both 'dead'?  Should we have a requiem for the human race?
 

(On the lighter side, did you hear about the dislexic atheist?  He didn't believe in 'DOG'.)

Try this on for size.  William L. Rowe has identified and defined 'the friendly atheist'.  "A friendly atheist is a person who accepts that some theists are justified in believing in God, even if it is the case that God doesn't exist."   

Interesting quote.

Friendly athiests are great in that aspect, They are comfortable with themselves, & are some of the least of the judgmental type of people out there.

But some athiests get downright offended, at least I find that when people are offended, it is human nature to offend in return, with name calling & whatever, when all we as christians are trying to do is share the greatest news that the world has ever been blessed to have knowlege of. At least this should be our motive as christians as this is our belief.

Since I first came to this forum, I wasn't very familliar with the United Church.

I  thought of the United church as a body of believers in Christ, & this seems to be fact.

The United Church implements a web site, or discussion forum, which is a great ministry vehicle & a place for believers to come & hang out.

I came here in hopes to be able to share things that are personal between my relationship with God though Jesus the Christ.

I notice more conflict than sharing here.

Are there no athiest forums where athiests can go to share & be accepted more than to come to a forum by a christian church to spew their beliefs & scoff at ours?

So why do they come here? Is this a valid question?

Bolt

Are atheists fools?  No more than anyone else.  We're all fools in some way, and yet mankind survives.  Why? Who knows?  I'm too sick and crippled up to reply today, but I'm concerned that our old buddy, the 'academic' (choke, cough, guffaw) Atheisto, is visible by his/her absence.  I thought this would be up his/her 'academic' ally.  Maybe his/her high school gave out too much homework this weekend .  Yes, I'm bad.  Discipline me, but only with leather and a whip.  (Okay, it's time to go back to bed.  My headache is taking over all the way down to my big toe. And, NO, I don't drink!).

.

Yes, it is a valid question. But... you may not like the answer. One of, if not THE, most important qualities of the UCC is that it challenges its members - to think, explore, ask, tolerate, embrace. You cannot possibly do these things if the only opinions and positions you are exposed to already match your own. You must listen to the things you don't understand, don't recognize, don't like, in order to grow as a Christian and a human being. 

There are days when lots of us get tired of listening to a few of the hard core atheists who don't seem to have any respect or knowledge of the history or theology of which they speak. But they are the minority. Most discussions I have with atheists here have really enlightened me. They aren't converting me and I'm not converting them (yet ) but we are learning to understand and respect each other's viewpoints and if they were excluded from the dialogue here, that would never happen.

And frankly if it weren't happening at the Cafe it wouldn't happen anywhere else in my life - I don't talk religion at work, and at church - well, I'm not likely to encounter a bunch of interesting atheists on Sunday morning to have a chat with. So I am actually thankful for the way that most of the atheists here challenge us to explore our faith more deeply.

If you are truly secure in your faith, this kind of meaningful exploration won't scare you off.

^ simple answer.

The long one is something like you can't judge a group of people by the few members you have met or heard about.

There are tons of atheist forums - some of which I visit from time to time. Many of them sing the praises of atheism while criticizing religion, faith etc. I don't find it stimulating as I like to hear people challenge each other, hopefully with some degree of respect.

If everyone on here was only singing the praises of religion would it not get boring? We need to look outside our worldview and question things.

Cate has called me on a few things I have said and I do reflect on her comments and sometimes agree with her. I really enjoy reading her posts as well as many others.

I did go to Sunday School at the United Church. I am quite the defender of the UCC. Except for some of the fundies - athiest and theist, I think it is fairly representative of the UCC.

Happy atheist said it best. We don't grow spiritually by being spoon-fed and staying "in bounds". We grow spiritually by thinking and having that thinking challenged in a respectful manner. This forum wouldn't be what it is without atheists and, yes, even the evangelical Christians. I know that not all Christians, even liberal/progressive ones, are comfortable with too much diversity of thought. That's why I'm a UU. So I can be in a religious environment that values diversity. However, something like wondercafe is a good approach to opening people up to more diversity and maybe that will help open some minds on all sides.

Mendalla

A valid answer to a valid question.

Heavens no I don't fear conflict at all, there is only one fear of mine, is not speaking what I'm supposed to speak & not doing what I speak.

Bolt

I have heard theists say that an atheists life must be empty - which is not the case at all. I am a very happy and contented atheist. I marvel at the universe but find it too simplistic to say god did it. I am curious and questioning. I like the buddhist worldview, which is not about believing or not believing in any gods. The naturalistic view is much more exciting than any religion can make up - for me anyways. Quantum energy, string theory, parallel universes - one day I think our worldview will go beyond theism and atheism.

Another valid answer to a valid question, a very good answer too.

The only thing as far as my opinion goes & all may not agree, but the human mind is very limited in it's natural form, but in the sense of the things of God are limitless, infinate.

There is so much there that it will keep me excited for all time.

Bolt

There are many different ways of seeing the truth & seenig lies. Lots to talk about!

But knowing the difference is the KEY!

Shure questioning is GOOD, weighing ,studying, & measuring is GOOD.

Seeing the truth is GOOD seeing the lie is GOOD, comprimising the truth is NOT GOOD. accepting the lie is BAD religion.

Bolt

Another very good answer! Thank all for being respectful with your answers!

Bolt

Hi Marnie:

An atheist, in the strict literal meaning of the word, is an a-theist: someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in God, which is more commonly described as "agnostic." Someone who disbelieves in God would, strictly speaking, be an anti-theist.

I'm not agnostic; I'm a Gnostic.

There are people, like me, whose spirituality is entirely experiential, beyond doctrinal belief. This is what I call "atheistic spirituality," "spirtual atheism" or "atheism in the name of God."

Bolt, we live in an adversarial world.  Even most of the education system, especially in the university setting, is an adversary setting.  Conflict is, in some cases, a major fact of life today.  The United Church is not necessarily a body of believers in Christ.  There have been clergy, past and present, who dismiss or diminish Jesus but enjoy the 'status' of being a minister and the outward veneer of respectability this brings.  The fact that this website has conflict is no surprise.  The United Church has been in conflict mode for years and, in some instances, crisis mode.  As a former student of Canadian Church history, the UC has declined steadily since the 1960's after the baby boomers graduated from Sunday school and never returned.  I know many United Church members who would feel as much at home in a Unitarian setting.  I was raised in the United Church and even graduated from a UC theological seminary years ago.  My doctoral studies were in a conservative Anglican setting and from a Baptist university.  A conservative understanding of conversion and salvation are not necessary for membership in the UC.  I'm NOT slamming the United Church but merely pointing out, for clarification, the discrepancy between your expectation(s) and the reality of the situation. 

Hi Arminius, thanks for your interesting definitions.  I look forward to seeing how others on this thread react to your idea that an atheist is someone who "neither believes nor disbelieves in God."  I'm glad I asked the question.  I suspected there might be differing answers.

Define the source of morality, Stoneyball. As a non-believing atheist, I have a moral code which defines good from bad and yet I reject belief in god(s).  How does a believing theist make the distinction between good and bad?

What is the authority for your morality?

LL&P

Spock

Lithicocularsphere,

very juicy and tasty OP :3

everybody here (including me) is someone else's fool.

There are no deodands, only pornography,

Inannawhimsey

Yes we do live in an adversarial world which  is the cause of all the problems!

Not that I belittle your point as it is a very valid one indeed.

I asked the question to see the diverse answers & found that many are the same type of point, to gain knowlege one must look at the different peoples opinions & beliefs.

The problem I seem to be having is that with the attitude of no comprimise, this brings me to a place where I must keep committed to the revelation that was given me.

This turns some people off, & I respect that, & I do understand why they may feel that I'm elevating myself but this is far from my true motive, & anyone who knows me personally, knows this.

satan loves to put false intentions in peoples minds to create division, & I believe he works overtime at places like these.

Bolt

If God had wanted me to be moral, he would have made me that way

Hi Marnie:

My definition may not be the dictionary definition of atheism, and most atheists may indeed be anti-theists.

If the separate, supernatural, interventionist God is regarded as the only possible God, then I am an atheist. If, as I feel, God is the self-generative universe, in a state of synythesis, then this is as much as no God, just a non-theistic spiritual universe, as in Buddhism, and I am a non-theist. But it is also one God, as it is in the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and I am a theist. And, because everything is godly, there could be any number of gods and goddesses, as in the multitheistic religion of Hinduism, and I am a multi-theist. Or any variation in-between any of those.

What ultimately matters is not how we define God, but how we experience God, or the Divine universe, and how we express this experience outwardly. Spiritual experience, or experiential spiritaulity, is what ultimately matters because in it we experience the unitive state of the universe. Ideological, doctrinal, and dogmatic spirituality is potentially divisive. Experiential spirituality, on the other hand, is powerfully unitive, and to act directly from that experience is Divine action.

We must, of course, also express our experiential spirituality in words, but if these expressions are regarded as artistic rather than absolutist, then there is no conflict between differing interpretations. On the contrary, the differences are necessary artistic differences, and are welcomed.

When the sceret of them atom within the atom is clear, then all things, both internal and external, are clear, and you see nothing but God.

-Al Balyani

THE GOD HYPOTHESIS AND PROBABILISM

===================================

In thinking about the God Hypothesis, which Richard Dawkins on page 3, The GOD Delusion, describes as, "a scientific hypothesis about the universe, which should be analysed as skeptically as any other",  it helps me to at least attempt to understand the doctrine of probabilism.

PROBABILISM

=============

Probabilism is the philosophical doctrine that certainty is impossible and that probability suffices to govern faith and practice.
 
Atheists--that is, people who choose to deny the existence of gods, or God, and to live their lives without any invisible means of support--because they admit it is impossible to prove a negative, call on the doctrine of probabilism to help them argue their case. This is the philosophy behind the campaign by atheists in London, England, who were the first, in early January, to post the following add on 800 city buses: THERE'S PROBABLY NO GOD. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.
 

But probabilism also works for those who choose to affirm the existence of anything, including the existence of God, or even gods, fairies and the like.

The United Church of Canada countered the atheists bus campaign with a full-page ad in the Globe and Mail, a national paper: In addition to the text used by the atheists, they added this option: THERE'S PROBABLY A GOD. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.  Check boxes appeared besides each option, inviting the readers to choose. Readers were also invited to join the discussion here at WonderCafe.ca

Let's all give thanks for this interactive website of the United Church's Emerging Spirit  campaign.

By the way, because for me as a spiritual being, the physical universe--open to being explored by all the sciences--is very much a part of the holos, which I call GØD, I have no hesitation in saying that GØD is not just probable, but IS--just as sure as Being or Presence IS.

Atheists, keep in mind that, for me, GØD is not just a being, or some super kind of idol created by the mind. It would be foolish of me to even attempt to prove that there is such a being. To atheists who ask for evidence, I ask: Is there no evidence for your being, my being and what I call all Being or Presence? Unless life is what Hemmingway called a "dirty trick", it seems to me that certain truths are self evident.

Of course I do not know all about all Being, even all about my own being, or the being of anyone; but this does not prevent me from being certain of the part about which I do know and--unless I choose to reject it, which I am free to do--am experiencing in the Now.

It is my awareness of GØD as the total process of Being now, which enables me to work on being moral, ethical and loving--according to the Golden Rule. This motivates me and encourages me to make the eternal pilgrimage, empowered by a rational faith and gracious Being or Presence, which, unless we choose to reject it, surrounds all of us.

Yes, RevKing, GØD as the totality of being—the self-generative singularity of cosmic energy in a state of synthesis—this is how I, too, would define GØD.

Most of all, however, I experience GØD, and try to think and act directly from that experience. But if I were to define GØD logically, the above definition is the best I could come up with for now

The main feeling of the experience of GØD, however, is universal at-one-ment, unitive awareness, unitive love and compassion, unitive conscience and consciousness. And the main emotion is deep, profound and abiding joy, peaking, at times, in ecstasy, and—dare I say the word—rapture.

Well, RevKing, this is THE Kingdom, eh?

And one would indeed be a fool not to go for IT, eh, stoneeyeball?

Well, being a "totally brand new out of the box newbie", I would do well to keep a low profile and not make a comment for a coupla years.  After all, it's "empty vessels that make the most noise", however I suppose I wouldn't be here is I didn't like to share my opinions! LOL

So... I would say that MOST atheists are simply... illogical!

That is, because so many of them perform good deeds, act in decent honourable ways and can be self-sacrificing.

ANY departure from self-gratification, self-aggrandisement, and the basic maximizing of personal "now" goals isn't really consistent with being a full-fledged atheist.

But then, there are so many other inconsistencies with a general view that denies the idea of a Being outside of, and generally more complex than, OURSELVES!

Hey... Christians can be pretty illogical too - some fluff off the difficult questions associated with believing in a loving personal God in a world like this - but, ATHEISTS usually purport to be "mini-logicians" yet act in ways that belie their stance.

Well, that's my opener, now back to my board game... BIG MOUTH!

I've been called an atheist by people in my community because I believe in things outside their box (until somebody demonstrates something different). Some of theose pretty boxes on the hillside are veeeery small! Is that perspective of belief systems chaotic? Perhaps! Is Love chaotic space where a mind is lost in the perfect storm? It is probablistic indeterminate ... yet physical people need hard things! Is that definition of oxymoron, metaphore, aporism and all sorts of similar word?

Then I have been told I have gone religious in my old age ... because I believe in things that other people don't wish to see. Now that is funny ... the concept of delusion! Is it like bent space in a flat out rapture ... like light in the eye of the soul ... Arminious?

My ides big in here ... and appears to be expansive (derived from Pan, old word for the devil). Have we left the mind, lost our clear though for a holiday away from balanced non-stuff ... like caring thought. A bit of battle will teach those wee devils ... and the Furies laughed while the Muses began to stir about in their Fates. Is that infinite space we've put in a Box for marketing purposes? Now beyond the box was sometimes called "cupid myth", an outside chance that someone cared for you.

Is that an most alien thought along the pathological way of conquest and chaos that is directly opposed to any sort of caring? You divine on what pieces should be placed in which box! Have a giggle on high as you take up a frustrating job on a new tier, organizing an isolated flood of beings is like holding hot water in your hand. Who dropped that commentary? Is that like communion, or caring communication? It's like Floyd a Pink Rein ... water stained by plasma? A canon of wisdom about joining of two storms that man separated with terrorism. Two storms? One of care the other of thought ... in m'ns mind they are diametrically opposite ... then they fail to see both sides of God ... where we are directed to love the enemy even if he is a devilish thinker when it comes to teaching demons how to think. Have you ever seen anything as hated by humanity as intellect ... a nude thought?

Oh, perhaps that's Rae new'd th' ought ... change amour fuss!

I think the discussion is talking more about pantheists:

"Pantheists don't believe in a supernatural God at all, but use the word God as a nonsupernatural synonym for Nature, or for the Universe, or for the lawfulness that governs its workings."

I prefer to use the words nature or universe. I stay away from using god but then maybe I am just a foolish, empty, illogical atheist lol.

Lol....welcome old methuselah, that made me laugh.  I see from your profile that you're old enough to know better but now don't give a crap...speak on, I say!

If we stick to the main connotation of atheist, I would expect most people think it is just a non-belief in a supreme being.  I don't think it's illogical for an atheist to believe we could evolve empathy, etc. as it is necessary for our survival that we don't blow each other up.

I subscribe to the belief that there is an intention of goodness that draws us...and I call it God, but I wouldn't disagree with a different label...hope to hear more from you...cheers!