Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
They must also be some of the most misrible unhopeful people in the world as they have nothing to look to, no faith to follow or any source to lift themselves up when times are bad.
Do you concede that this is a non-sequitur? It simply doesn't follow that to be content and hopeful (or whatever opposite we assign to "miserable") one must embrace religion. Nor does it follow that a lack of faith implies that bad times make it possible for those without religion to "lift themselves up." My family and I have done well through some hard times. I had a house destroyed by fire; my wife's father died when she was a teen; etc. We've recovered from each of these and other hardships quite well, and without reliance on any "faith" or religious mumbo-jumbo.
Seriously. Do you concede the fallacy of your argument here? If not, please support it with some
sort of evidence, because this is not only a non-sequitur, but an argument from personal incredulity.