If self-identified Christians do not adhere to some pretty basic aspects of Christianity, such as: * belief in God * belief that Jesus is the Son of God * belief in the Holy Spirit * belief in the two great commandments * regularly attending church ....it is very fair to question whether their self-identification is even remotely meaningful.

And here is the problem I have with the current line of argument. I am all for the secularisation of the systems and structures that govern our society, but statements such as the above make me nervous as to whether I am enough of an atheist to meaningfully identify as one. If I am not atheist enough, then what does that make me? What are the rules for being an atheist? Is not believing in god(s) enough, or do I need to develop a solid knowledge of every single religion on the planet in order to be able to deconstruct them logically? Should I refuse to ever set foot in a church? Should I spend vast swathes of my time railing against those who do express faith, reminding them that they are delusional fools who do not have the strength of mind to accept that once they are dead it is simply lights out and nothing? For reference I've tried most of these at one time or another and come to the realisation that rather than influencing anybody I simply make a complete tit of myself whilst becoming much less of an empathic human being. If being an atheist involves being an intolerant bigot, then I think I'd better resign. A secular state would be great, but we are not going to get there by feeding trolls like Warsi.