Random wondering

You know, it has always seemed more correct for an aethist to cry "we dont want God in our world" than for christians to cry "we want to see God in society"?


Christians are often the ones defending while those who don't believe in God are the ones attacking.


But i have a right to insist on the existence of God as much as you have a right to insist on the non-existence of God, right?


It's as if omitting something was better than committing something; that omitting God was better than letting God in.


But both assumptions (that there is or there is no God) are equally controversial and equally important so omission is no better than commission, right?


There's a saying by someone... that if God isn't true, christianity is utterly useless. But if God is true, then christianity is of utmost importance.


Different people take different sides, and some are hopelessly straddled in the middle.


Don't worry, i'm not some extremist seeking to change the system to one that assumes God instead of one that somewhat tries to exclude God... After all, the different sides have, despite their different underlying beliefs and lifestyle principles, been able to survive together in a common world. Cos i know assuming God in my world (the word assuming is used for the sake of this post only.... i assert that i don't really assume God in my world, firstly because it's not an assumption in the sense that i know for real He is real, and secondly God is real no matter whether you believe whether He is or not) doesn't take a system change - it takes a lifestyle and mindset change on my part. I said it already... it's more got to do with underlying beliefs and lifestyle principles rather than system fault.


Haha i know this is something controversial, but anyway this post is just to remind myself, that the next time someone says he/she is proud to be an aethist, i can comfortably and loudly say that i'm proud to be a child of God. =)