I have wanted to write about my experiences of reading The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins (2006) and the discussions with friends which followed. Dawkins hopes that people who perhaps haven't thought seriously about religion or the existence of God, those who are "sitting on the fence" on the subject, may be encouraged to do so after reading his book. What surprised me most during discussions between my friends and I on the subject was the fact that it seemed impossible to have a dispassionate yet serious conversation about religion with anyone, regardless of their religiosity or lack thereof.

One of the main criticisms I have encountered concerning The God Delusion is a dislike for the manner of Dawkins' angry, rant-like rhetoric and it is true that he pulls no punches when addressing the subject of organised religion, provocatively describing the "indoctrination" of children as akin to "child abuse". This highlights the unspoken societal rule that a persons religious beliefs are to be afforded a level of respect far above that given to their political beliefs or their particular tastes in art or music for instance. Religious beliefs are almost above criticism. I can berate someone for their electoral voting inclinations without fear of serious reprisal so long as I remain civil and as polite as the situation demands. I can say that someone's admiration for the music of Billy Ray Cyrus shows shockingly poor taste and that every minute they have spent listening to it was a waste of their time here on earth. However, I cannot say to a person of faith that I think their belief in God is also a waste of their time and that their holy books are fictions based on myth, at least not to their face, without fearing that I will have crossed some kind of line in the sand, no matter how polite I am about it.

If I call any particular organised religion "ridiculous" and go on to qualify that by saying that I believe the deity or deities involved to be a figment of the human imagination, adherents to that religion have a right to be offended if they so wish, as long as their reaction remains a legal and reasonable one, but the notion that I would also have managed to offend and slander some kind of omnipotent super being through my pronouncements is a little more unsettling. Just what sort of all powerful creator would be the least bothered by what I had to say and then also require the intervention of human followers to teach me a lesson I'd never forget?

It is this notion of untouchable deference towards religious beliefs which has been the main source of debate surrounding The God Delusion and it is the area which generates the most heated discussions among those I have spoken with on the topics covered within the book. It is a shame that this aspect takes up so much attention because there is so much more within the pages to stimulate the mind. For many people the intricate complexity of the natural world cannot be something which has arisen through mere chance and the only coherent answer to the existence of intelligent life which can be imagined is the co-existence of a creator. What Dawkins does both in this book, and more so in his previous works on evolutionary biology (especially The Blind Watchmaker, 1986), is present the case for life arising through innumerable small steps over an almost unfathomable period of time, Darwinian evolution, and he does so with admirable clarity for the non-scientist or layman.

Human beings struggle with the thought of their own deaths and spend a lot of time worrying over what may or may not happen afterwards. Believers in a deity may find solace thinking that they will be saved and ascend to heaven. Even if it is the other, hotter, place they end up there is still something after death. A typical atheistic thesis may be that after death your body is either buried and then slowly consumed by soil-dwelling creatures or otherwise disposed of, by burning for instance, and that your conciousness flickers out of existence when brain function ceases. Far from turning all atheists into doom-laden depressives it should really encourage them to make the most of their lives here on earth. Why be scared and worried about death when you're not going to be around to see it? Whatever the (unknowable) truth about what happens after your own death it does seem utterly pointless to spend a great deal of time agitating about it beforehand.

Dawkins' The God Delusion may have some notable flaws in its execution and may veer towards table thumping self-indulgence in sections but it certainly cannot be accused of a lack of passion and it is provocative in a way that is guaranteed to promote debate, whether among your friends and peers or within the confines of your own head and that is probably the author's main aim in the first place.