Christians hate atheists for their freedom?

It makes sense if you think about it.  Christians have this all-powerful authoritarian figure telling them how to live out their lives.  Not only do you get punished horribly for stepping out of line, but this authoritarian is omni-present and will always catch you.  There is literally no freedom to do anything.  The most amazing thing is they don't realize this, or don't admit it.  This God does a better job than Big Brother could ever possibly dream.  But deep down in their hearts, they know they are being watched and controlled and it makes them angry to see those of us who are free.  Thus, they lash out at us.  Please do no fault them for it though, imagine how quickly you would become like that if you knew there was someone watching and condeming you every time you masturbate.

I think we should help our christian brethren escape this oppressive fascist called God.

>>180 No, the situation in this case is which parts of the environment that has been experienced and in which order. But this is semantics - what I meant to argue was that more input/output between and organism and the surroundings does not necessarily make for a more amicable/intelligent/reasonable/trustworthy individual. Experience = Credibility and maturity either, due to cognitive imperfections in perception and mental patterns (one can experience but still be too prejudiced or self-deluding to fail to learn a lesson). A human with poor values in such variables can become king of the hill as well, but usually at the unfair expense of others (case in point, Ivy League bending over to get as many children of previous alumni as possible enrolled, dictators et al.).
Regarding the criticizm that I want to blot out meta-physical hypothesizing and reasoning in favor of reality-based focus on wordly issues - I understand if my position is vague. What I seek is not to turn off the debate altogether to rob religious people of ammo, but rather explain the folly of using super-dimensional entities and *hypothetical* factors to back up arguments referring to worldly matters. (For example, christians like Mark Steyn say we must turn to the christian work ethic and industrious values of western culture to survive the muslim onslaught. According to these people christian values prevent practices such as slavery, while it says quite clearly in the Old Testament that slavery is a-ok. Then they say that the Old Testament is allegory, that it does not invalidate other biblical teachings. Then I wonder if Eve's original sin is allegory, and if Jesus died for allegorical sins. We should not have to refer to 'god' to become industrious and anti-islamist adults, especially when said god is a genocidal, homophobic paternalistic cunt.) What I mean is that while we can and should discuss the nature of the universe and the possibility of a sentient creator, we must put our foot down the minute said sentient creator is used as leverage in human issues such as abortion. God/Tiamat/Whomever may exist - I like to discuss that. What they may have said and dictated is not for us to follow, because it is apparent that they know shit about human nature.