Draad,
I don't know this for sure because I don't think anyone can, but here's what I think.
Have a look at the first post on this thread. It says nothing about religion and makes no claims as to anything to do with religious people or their beliefs.
It's a philosophical attack on the atheists, not because of their lack of faith, but simply on the basis of how they view the world scientifically.
They deem all life to be entirely the product of evolution. Even in the absence of religion, they would still subscribe to evolution.
In other words, evolution would exist even if the name "God" or the idea of religion never existed anywhere in the universe...according to them.
Now look at how each and every one of them brought religion into the argument. They couldn't justify their point unless they leaned it against religion.
I even clarified as to why atheism was used in the title. Because they, by definition, exclude the metaphysical from their thinking while relying entirely on science to explain existence.
So now I wonder. If one cannot substantiate your world view without leaning it against something that you DON'T believe exists, then really, how secure are you in it?
They claim I'm all over the place, not make sense, attempting to confuse the discussion...and yet, what I said was very clear.
If you remove the idea of God from the atheist's table, they suddenly have to stand entirely on their own world view and it confuses the shit out of them.
Unless they're arguing against religion, they really have very little in their arsenal. As this thread shows.
EG...see how many post above bring God into it, even after I said and showed how religion has no bearing on the point being made.
And now you know why they're so eager to attack Christians.