I do think its possible moderate believers will be willing to work alongside athiests on some issues.

i also think you underestimate the self perceived emotional plight of fundamentalists, who recognize their religious culture is dying and who see reprehensible (in their eyes) social and moral decay increasing in the world they live in. viewed globally, they are also typically individuals with severe emotional problems and/or limited educational attainment, and they predominantly socialize within subcommunities of similar people who support their views and reaffirm their sense of alienation from the larger world around them.

at bottom, fundamentalist (magic based, dogmatic, conservative, retributional) religion is a public mental health problem. it must at all costs be kept out of the educational and governmental institutions, and it must be gradually marginalized by sustained and consistent policy. only progress in science, education and social programs can get rid of it.

Regards
Dave

Can anyone delineate, roughly, the general criteria that discriminate moderate believers from fundamentalists? Thanks.

I liked Leum's answer very much, and I'd like to expand on it just a little.

In my view, the defining characteristic of a religious fundamentalist is that they believe that the inerrant, final, and inarguable Truth about God has been discovered. What this means is that in the fundamentalist's view, there is no room for pluralism or secularism - we know exactly what God wants from us, and there's no possible justification for doing anything else. Religious moderates, by contrast, would be those who acknowledge the possibility that they are mistaken about some aspect of their faith, and that other groups' differing perspectives might be valid as well.

I grant that, by this definition, not all fundamentalists are aspiring theocrats. It's quite possible to believe that you know exactly what God wants, but that he has nevertheless left it up to human beings to decide their own destiny. But it does follow that all aspiring theocrats are fundamentalists. The absence of doubt is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition for the dangerous desire to force your will on others.

Fair enough. And no offense taken.

Just for the record, BruceA is a religious moderate. And, truth be told, my faith has been influenced by questions raised by agnostics and atheists. But in my experience, a faith that is moldable is much more resilient than one that is rigid.

There seems to be a widespread misunderstanding — among both freethinkers and fundamentalists — that "religious moderate" is synonymous with "moderately religious". I use the "art" analogy because art is something that is subjective yet deeply meaningful, speaking to the core of one's being. In my experience, that describes the faith of a lot of religious moderates.

I really like BruceA's likening religion to "art" for the moderates. Half of them probably never really consider whether or not it's true, they are just used to what they consider the pretty pictures. You can show them the hidden horrors in what they've always enjoyed or provide them with a new style that they never before experienced.
They may rewrite that poem, but we can influence the new version.

I think you can understand what the Bible story is about -- one parody produced in Hong Kong against Genesis story of Sodome and Gomora and incest of Lot -- told by a lady with a childlike voice like a bed time story --- and got banned in YouTube.

According this same argument, moderate believers are more likely to beleive that the are many paths to salvation, or whatever, and that there is no pressing need to resolve contradictions and incorporate new knowledge unless they happen to feel like doing so.