I'm less tolerant of the "we should respect other people's religious beliefs" idea than I used to be. I think Douglas Adams had a good point when he said, "Now, the invention of the scientific method and science is, I'm sure we'll all agree, the most powerful intellectual idea, the most powerful framework for thinking and investigating and understanding and challenging the world around us that there is, and that it rests on the premise that any idea is there to be attacked and if it withstands the attack then it lives to fight another day and if it doesn't withstand the attack then down it goes. Religion doesn't seem to work like that; it has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. That's an idea we're so familiar with, whether we subscribe to it or not, that it's kind of odd to think what it actually means, because really what it means is 'Here is an idea or a notion that you're not allowed to say anything bad about; you're just not. Why not? - because you're not!' If somebody votes for a party that you don't agree with, you're free to argue about it as much as you like; everybody will have an argument but nobody feels aggrieved by it. If somebody thinks taxes should go up or down you are free to have an argument about it, but on the other hand if somebody says 'I mustn't move a light switch on a Saturday', you say, 'Fine, I respect that'. The odd thing is, even as I am saying that I am thinking 'Is there an Orthodox Jew here who is going to be offended by the fact that I just said that?' but I wouldn't have thought 'Maybe there's somebody from the left wing or somebody from the right wing or somebody who subscribes to this view or the other in economics' when I was making the other points. I just think 'Fine, we have different opinions'. But, the moment I say something that has something to do with somebody's (I'm going to stick my neck out here and say irrational) beliefs, then we all become terribly protective and terribly defensive and say 'No, we don't attack that; that's an irrational belief but no, we respect it'."
I think he's right when he says that religious beliefs get a free pass where other sorts of opinions are open to challenge and disagreement. I see stuff on discussion boards all the time along the lines of "my nephew was ill and the doctors gave up hope, but the people in church prayed for him and he got better. How can anyone say that God doesn't exist?" or "There was a terrible plane crash and hundreds of people died, but a baby survived, praise Jesus!" or "we were in a car crash, and even though the car was totalled we walked away without a scratch, which proves that God exists" or something. As soon as anyone comes along with "what about the kids in the hospital who don't survive?" "What about all the people on the plane who died?" "What about the people who don't survive car crashes?", it's made very clear that these responses are out of line because you have to respect people's religious beliefs.
It's the same with some of the religious sportsmen and the "Jesus was watching over me" line when they win. I've noticed that so far nobody's asked Zach Johnson, "where was Jesus this week, Zach?" when he doesn't make the cut at a golf tournament, and the same is true of a lot of team sports. Apparently it would be rude or hurtful or intolerant or something for people to point out the essential illogic of these claims.
If someone wants to say that a baby or puppy survived and therefore God exists, but if a baby or puppy doesn't survive, it doesn't mean God doesn't exist, or if Jesus is looking out for them when they win a tournament but Jesus can't be mentioned when they don't, it seems that they're allowed a free pass to get away with that contorted logic and the rest of us had better just deal with it. I don't think that's fair or appropriate or even healthy. I know people find comfort in religious belief and I don't like seeing aggressive attempts at deconversion, but that shouldn't mean that these beliefs can't be challenged.
