The physicist's problem is the problem of ultimate origins and ultimate natural laws. The biologist's problem is the problem of complexity.

Two religions cannot both be right, because they contradict each other, yet they can both be wrong.

I sympathize with politicians who have to watch every syllable they utter for fear it will be misused by somebody with an agenda.

I have never quite understood - and this is no doubt my failing - I never quite understood why you would read fiction to understand the human condition.

However statistically improbable the entity you seek to explain by invoking a designer, the designer himself has got to be at least as improbable. God is the Ultimate Boeing 747

God is an idea that people believe in and I spend time arguing with people that subscribe to that idea(man made idea).

Theologians will protest that the story of Abraham sacrificing Issac should not be taken as literal fact. And the appropriate response is twofold: first, many, many people even to this day, do take the whole of their Scripture to be literal fact, and they have a great deal of political power over the rest of us, especially in the United States and in the Islamic world. Second, if not of literal fact, how should we take the story? As an alagory? Then an alagory for what? Surely, nothing praiseworthy. As a moral lesson? But what kind of morals could one derive from this appalling story?