Oh hell some bullshit happening somewhere !!

Yeah, let's always white wash what the Catholic Church did like a good little atheist.  Not.

If you have concern for truth, you seek to accurately represent things, out of respect for truth.  If you have an agenda, then your idea is an agenda.  I would say it would most likely be in the interest of an atheist to represent truth as accurately as possible, because atheism, which is a lack of a belief, can't have an agenda to it.  You gain nothing for misrepresenting things. If you want to get sloppy, then I can go with what Marxist government did last century, and blame all atheists today, and see they are also into killing people with religious beliefs, because of what Marxists governments did.  This is not fair to Marxism, atheism or atheists today.

It seems stupid... largely because Western Atheist Morales are build on Christian/Catholic Morales as western morality almost completely derives from Christian Morality in the first place.

Which was an argument made by an Atheist Philosopher who's name I'm blanking on right now. Still alive, lives in... france i want to say.

Just because you believe in some level of objective morality doesn't mean you have to not be an atheist.  It just means that you think some things are universally seen as moral and always will be, because there is no way for culture to make these things NOT universally valued.

Edit: Also is it just me, or does it look like the reporter has like nothing but rage bubbling right underneath the surface where she wants yell at her.

Also, i'd say this is a bigger deal them a Christian blogger turning atheist because well....

Atheists turn Christian a lot less then vice versa... or so I'm guess. No hard statistics on that admittedly.

Pretty much this guy and C.S. Lewis are the only famous people I know who went from Atheist to Christian.

To be fair... there is support for an indecisive god. 

Hence why there are some branches of "Christianity" that view the New and Old Testament as two different gods.

While others treat the old testament as practically false or of the devil.

Really the bible does tend to give the same narrative of parenthood and the different steps.  At first mostly permissive, then the kids get unruly so he has strict rules, get's harsh and authoratarian, then he was neglectful for a bit... eventually he mellows out and accepts his chidren for what they are,  reopening the dialogue for communication by being more authorative.

My view, in this regard, is actually that, irrespective of whether you believe in a god or not, pretty much all religions follow quite closely the pattern of parenthood.

When starting out, it's purely about nurturing - simply keeping the society functioning at all.

Then, as society starts to become a little older, the rules become strict, proscribing a lot of things and prescribing strict punishments for those things. And quite often, those rules are less about preventing them from the bad actions, and instead are focused on preventing them from being in situations where they might do bad things. Like banning a child from sitting close to a fire, or running with scissors. The equivalent would be banning consumption of pork or banning homosexuality.

But as society begins to mature, those rules are gradually relaxed, replaced in stages by advice rather than rule.

Eventually, it is expected that the 'child' (society) reaches the level of maturity necessary to be able to formulate and stick to its own rules. That's how one moves from childhood to adulthood, and it's how a society becomes self-reliant and more logical.

The "parent" in this context can either be "god" or the wise people of society.

In essence, even if you're a devoutly religious christian, it makes sense for you to believe that "God's will" is for humanity to, eventually, not need him, much as a child eventually doesn't need a parent when it becomes an adult. Doesn't mean the end of religion, but it does mean the end of strict adherence to religious rules.

I'd estimate that society is around 16-17 years old in terms of growth from child to adult. It still has a bit of a way to go, but it's beginning to become a lot more independent and logical.

This video from youtube's http://www.youtube.com/user/mccainisthroughX  pretty much sums up anything that anyone needs to know about the moral structure of the Catholic Church.  You've got an ex Nazi that's supposed to be the closest person on earth to God wanting to give sanctuary to a monster that was convicted of 45 counts of child molestation just 5 days ago.

I agree with the "god's will for humanity to not need him"

I'm going to disagree however witthat as a theme to all religions... it may be in western modern current religions... that's not the case for all religions, or even most.

For example, most Paganistic societies.  The god's there weren't really any rules so much as a "don't screw with us, we'll do what we want" type dynamic.  Zues for example was more like the big brother who would sleep with your girlfriend then kick your ass if you got upset about it.

Most paganistic societies, in the "BC" side of history, were actually quite advanced. The Romans and the Greeks supposedly had quite a bit of knowledge (including medical knowledge) that is now lost. I would argue that those societies had already progressed, with regards to religion, before their falls. Meanwhile, the actions of Zeus in the mythology aren't really relevant, any more than how "god" treated adam and eve is relevant. Those are stories intended to impart information.

In short, I think you've confused the purpose of the religion with the stories within the religion. Think of it this way, in the case of judaism - the stories and mythology was built up in the form of oral tradition over time, during which the religion grew stricter and stricter. Then the christian era came along, and loosened the rules quite a bit. For some of the adherents of the two, things went backwards, and thus came the much stricter islam (not unlike how, if you have an unruly 14 year old, you are (or should be) much stricter than you would have been with an 11 year old).

It's a lot harder to prove things when it comes to the greeks and the romans, because much has been lost to time, now.