Why are the religious so sensitive?

[Meatball]

I’m new here so I hope you don’t mind me chiming in. I believe in God so I’ll refer to myself as a “theist”: from now on. I came here to challenge my beliefs and knowledge as well as to get a better understanding of atheists and agnostics. If there is any objections to me posting here please let me know. I don’t want to be where I’m not wanted.

It's great that you are willing to challenge your beliefs to the extent of joining an discussion community such as this, I hope you find yourself welcome here. Without any opposition this forum will inevitably turn into a massive circle-jerk.

After watching part one of 'The Four Horsemen' yesterday ...

I take it that's a movie? What's it about? Did you like it?

I'm not sure how familiar you are with atheist authors, but the "new wave" of atheism is mostly credited to four people:

• Daniel Dennett
  A philosopher who deals with the concept of free will, he wrote 'Breaking the Spell'.
  
  
  
• Richard Dawkins
  An evolutionary biologist, he wrote 'The God Delusion',
  
  
  
• Christopher Hitchens
  A journalist and literary critic, he wrote 'God Is Not Great'
  
  
  
• Sam Harris
  An author and student of philosophy, he wrote 'The End of Faith' and 'Letter To A Christian Nation'

I challenge you to read any of these books if you're looking to challenge your faith. Each provides a very compelling case.

These four guys got together for a recorded discussion on atheism and religion. You can buy a DVD of the entire discussion, with proceeds going towards charity.

I think deep down every believer knows that their religion is far-fetched.

That may be true for some theists but I’d have a hard time believing that it is true for all of us. I know its not true in my case, i.e. I don’t have a deep-seated belief that religion is far-fetched.

That, combined with the deeply personal nature of religion, means an attack on someone's religion is also an attack on someone's personal flaw.

I don’t follow. How is this related to personal flaws?

It was connected to the previous statement that religious belief requires a leap of faith, in that you cannot proof it. You rejected that line of reasoning, so I can see how you missed the connection. I'm not sure how to describe it, it's admittedly not well thought out.

Because it requires faith to believe something unprovable, it makes it a personal conflict, if even a miniscule one. Attack this belief is an attack on this personal conflict. Almost like homophobia and repressed homosexuality. A repressed homosexual is especially sensitive to questions of sexuality because it's something they are dealing with internally, on a personal level. It may be on a subconcious level, but I think it exists nonetheless.

It's just a theory, I have a lot of free time.