the atheist's religous conviction

The BBC reports here of a man convicted today for murder (2nd degree reckless homicide) because he allowed his 11 year old daughter to die from a treatable illness (diabetes). Apparently this man, his wife and others chose to pray for a miracle from god rather than seek any medical attention.

This girl died in 2008 in America.

I am an atheist, I am confident there are no gods. Yet I believe that organised religion is a good thing. Christianity, buddhism, islam; in general I am in favour of them all. Communal religious worship can be very beneficial. It brings hope and comfort to the weak, the infirm and the grieving. It provides a time and a place and a sense of purpose that brings people out of isolation and into community.

It is true that very bad things can happen in the name of religion: wars, persecution and discrimination. However generally these atrocities are committed by evil people. People who see the strength of a religion and pervert it to their own ends. In a world without religion, the most evil amongst us would still find ways to generate followers and manipulate them.

However cases like the one today where a father allows his precious daughter to die trouble me. This does not appear to be a case of someone evil nor of someone intent on harm. We can all draw our own conclusions; was this: stupidity, delusion, extreme gullibility, mental instability? The truth is we can't tell from the facts reported and there's a good chance we'll never know. What we do know, is that in the world without religion this tragedy would not have happened.

Does this mean I should change my views? Is religion in fact: a bad thing?

I don't think so. The conclusion I draw is that, in this case, there has been a catastrophic failure of leadership within this religious community.

Religious leaders have huge responsibilities to their communities. Most of their followers can be relied upon: to hear the stories and understand the allegory; to find comfort from the words and not mind the inconsistencies; to be a part of their community without believing in imaginary friends. However there will always be a few in the gathering that fall: hook line and sinker. For these unfortunates: the literal translation will be paramount and the coda will be lost to them. For such people, religion truly is a dangerous narcotic.

These most avid observants will not be hard to identify but they do present a dilemma for the leadership. Do the leaders risk losing their authority by admitting that the literal translation can not be relied upon for real life; or do they leave the ticking time-bombs alone and hope the explosion does not happen on their watch?