R -E - S - P - E - C - T: Who gets it and who decides?

[JuliaL]

I can't respect willful ignorance.

I can.
But then again, I have a flexible definition of right and wrong.
Those things of which I approve are right.
Those things of which I disapprove are wrong.
Crossing the streams is bad.
I reserve the option to change this definition at will.

Pigheaded, stubborn denial of obvious fact can be respected as a powerful strategy to defend a common position within a social hierarchy. Theists, probably unaware, cohere in groups BECAUSE of their total adherence to shared fantasy. Rational, supported truths do not provide this functionality because their correspondence to reality can be confirmed by anyone and so do not serve to identify the individual as a specified group member. It's the contrafactual beliefs which force their holders together more strongly. The wackier the belief, the more dedicated the believer has to be to hold it, the stronger the glue sticking them together.

The believer may not be aware of the strategy they use, but it and they can still be respected as powerful and effective in maintaining stability. The belief doesn't have to be true. In fact, it probably works better if it is false.
I think it unwise for atheists to only hammer on the obvious falsehoods readily available in religions. It forces the true believers closer together. Some may be better reached by pointing out that this is what is happening to them.

.