Hi Dana,
.
I felt similarly about religion and 'waking up.' Once you know something is wrong or just doesn't fit within the scheme it is porported to...you just can't go back to being ignorant anymore. The inconsistencies tend to stick out like red dots on a blue horizon...you just can't continue to ignore them.
.
I'm actually agnostic, rather than athiest.
.
I suppose for me, the difference between the two is more about mutual respect for the person, and respect for the possibility of the unknown. Almost nothing in this world is certain. There is a lot of room for interpretation and for the unknown. Views and perspectives change. 1000 years from now, we'll all be considered neanderthals for the way we view the world. Such is the plight of history, generation to generation.
.
In the end, closed-minded is a matter of perspective.
.
There are those that will call you closed-minded...simply because you don't automatically fall in-line with their dogma. They confuse open-minded...with weak-minded.
.
Then there are those that will call you closed-minded...simply for having your own opinions and beliefs, and standing by them. Not much different from the above. Especially when the one accusing you of being closed-minded won't consider your arguments with consideration equal to that which they demand of you.
.
To me, being-closed minded is being unwilling to discuss or consider new information. Again...
New information. Old perspectives/information discarded time and again can get tiresome to discuss ad nauseum. At those times, I simply remove myself from the argument/discussion whenever possible, especially if my patience is wearing thin. It's just not worth my time or the frustration. Visible impatience with tired themes can often be mistaken for closed-mindedness. (eg. Gravity? Does it exist? I might entertain someone's discussion of denial of gravity a time or two out of sheer morbid curiosity. But once the basic tenants of their argument are exhausted and refuted...there is little reason to continue to entertain such a position for the 50th...100th...etc time as it remains unchanged.)
.
Am I the only one that can't carry on an intelligent conversation with someone who wants me to consider their thoughts on a god?.
It all depends. There are precious few religious people that I know that are knowledgeable enough in their religion, and mature enough...both intellectually and emotionally...to discuss religion with. Most just can't take the pressure of any sort of scrutiny. With those precious few though, the conversations can be very interesting. It's not like discussing math or basic physics though. It's more akin to discussing philosophy or art. Unfortunately, the vast majority of religious individuals can be difficult to discuss anything more than the rudimentary philosophical concepts with before the discussion spirals downard.
.
What is the difference between some mentally disturbed person talking to voices in a wall and a religious person talking to a voice in the sky? I just can't justify it..
Or someone talking to themself (and answering)? Or to the spirits of their ancestors? Or to a dead loved one at a funeral? No, personally I don't subscribe to it. I can't justify it for myself. It's not a logical thing though...it's emotional. For some, it helps them to cope. It's when the walls/god starts verbally talking back is when you need to be concerned. When one becomes unable to separate their own inner voices from their external hopes/beliefs and/or coping mechanisms. Often if you want to believe something badly enough...you're going to find it...even if you have to manufacture it. 'Mentally disturbed' only really comes into play when such distinctions are lost. Though I do admit, many of the religious (especially some in my family) really toe that line.
.
Of course...that said...when "mentally disturbed" is the norm...isn't it everyone else that is considered crazy?
