And there you have it. You are, in fact, no different than anybody else who states with absolute certainty that their beliefs are 100% correct. You, in your absolute certainty, are as potentially "dangerous" as the scary religious "fundamentalists" like idsuddeth, and your words:
>Are you suggesting I should allow you to persist in your false beliefs? Surely not – if you believed it was safe to cross the street, but I saw a car coming, it wouldn’t be respecting you to let you walk out into traffic.

I can only imagine similar sentiments were expressed by Torquemada, or Pope Urban, or Mohammad, or Pol Pot. How long before those of your ilk (the "Freedom From Religion" folks come to mind) begin to believe the only way to save humanity from the scourge of theism is to take up arms (or car bombs) against the evil believers? Congrats, you are in splendid company.

I have been reading up on the founding fathers of late, and frankly I will give you Washington, Jefferson, and Ben Franklin; they weren’t Christians as defined—those who believe in the redemptive powers of Christ.
However Washington did believe (as did many of the founding fathers) that:

• * Virtue and morality are necessary for free republican government.
• * Religion is necessary for virtue and morality.
• * Ergo – religion is necessary for republican government.

Washington also wrote: no man’s sentiment are more opposed to any kind of restraint upon religious principles than mine are.
I would no more step on your right/desire (and vnut and a myriad of others) to NOT believe, as I would expect you—acting under the auspicies of the Constitution—would respect MY right to believe. I will discuss my belief with you; but I will also respect your right not to hear the Gospel, and we can talk about football, fishing, or any other topic you desire. Yes, I will intersect my belief in talking with you from time to time; because I ferverently believe that non-believers are committing suicide—suicide of the soul. I’m as concerned for your soul as I am for YOU as the person.

But on the subject of the Founding Fathers, let’s look at a few more, shall we?

1. Samual Adams
2. In his own will he wrote: *Principally, and first of all, I resign my soul to the Almighty Being who gave it, and my body I commit to the dust, relying on the merits of Jesus Christ for the pardon of my sins.
3. Alexander Hamilton
4. * His last dying words reportedly were: I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a sinner. I look to Him for mercy; pray for me.
5. Patrick Henry
6. * In a letter to his daughter, dated 20 August, 1796: Amongst other strange things said of me, I hear it is said by the deists that I am one of the number; and indeed, that some good people think I am no Christian. This thought gives me much more pain than the appellation of Tory; because I think religion of infinitely higher importance than politics; and I find much cause to reproach myself that I have lived so long, and have given no decided and public proofs of my being a Christian. But, indeed, my dear child, this is a character which I prize far above all this world has, or can boast.
7. * His will contained the words: This is all the inheritance I give to my dear family. The religion of Christ will give them one which will make them rich indeed.
8. John Jay
9. * In an April 23, 1811, letter to John Bristed, April 23, 1811, he wrote: I do not recollect to have had more than two conversations with atheists about their tenents. The first was this: I was at a large party, of which were several of that description. They spoke freely and contemptuously of religion. I took no part in the conversation. In the course of it, one of them asked me if I believed in Christ? I answered that I did, and that I thanked God that I did.

What about your respect for someone who believes that David Copperfield is a sorcerer who can really do the ‘tricks’ he performs, despite evidence to the contrary? Or, someone who believes in ‘Bigfoot’, ‘Yeti’, ‘Loch Ness Monster’, ‘Fox TV’s Alien Autopsy?

However, your car analogy leads me to this conclusion: I am, at least, your moral superior. My morality would forbid me from allowing a person to walk in front of the car, therefore I would have to attempt to prevent them from doing so, even at the expense of my own life. Your morality stops you from doing more than saying ‘hey there’s a car coming’. Intellectual superiority is a moot point, truthfully. I don’t judge intellecutal superiority because it may well be that one superior in some areas, but inferior in others.

>As for the distinction between al Qaeda and the Catholic Church, so far, the Church is way ahead on body count. A hundred thousand or so in the Inquisition, another million or so in the Crusades. But they’ve been around longer. I’ll grant that they’ve been fairly tame for the last century or so, and Al Qaeda is certainly trying hard to catch up.
Yet, Atheists have arguably surpassed the religious in terms of numbers of dead—just in the 20th century. Have you forgotten your history? Did you miss out on Hitler or Stalin??

I did choose that I could not vote for an atheist, but that’s not because I don’t believe they will govern well; but rather because I fear that if there were NO believers in power, then the constitution might be changed and I would no longer be allowed to believe. Should that ever happen, I would continue to practice my faith and accept whatever consequences might be handed to me.

>[all the BS that scottb wrote]
Thanks for proving my point about "arrogance." I was hoping you’d rear your smug head and trot out all that baloney about Deism and how it’s the same as atheism.
I ain’t voting for you, either!