@Magus: It's an alright article, but I would contest some points. Mostly, I hthink he's exaguarating certian things to make it fit, like the part about the nipple gate and sex. There is a order of magnitude in differnce between a accidental indecent exposure, and your loved one commmiting serial infidelity. Janet Jackson hadn't explicitly agreed not
to show herself or only show herself to someone in particular only. A relationship is an agreement between the participants in it.
Also, the part 5. I would argue that there's also a magnitude of difference in saying "you will be punished after death for all eternetity" and "no-one gets any punishement or reward except what they get in life". And for part 9, the problem with religious moral is, that you accept it for some parts, you have to accept all the core parts, even the ones that don't make sense, because they are holy. There are, and can be, moral systems not dictated by religion. The article itself (and other reserach done on the subject) show that Atheists are no more likely to be criminal than religious people.
This love so bold goes undeclared/a joy unseen, a world unknown/a love that dare not speak its name/hidden treasure, precious stone