A mormon girl approached me at the town square this spring and started talking to me. She asked me what was the most important thing in my life while holding up Joseph Smith's epic masterpiece of divine insight.
I replied; "You mean purely from a philosphical standpoint?"
She said; "Yes."
I answered, while starting to turn away; "To be logical and rational."

She had no reply and has never approached me since, despite visiting the country and the city a few more times and I have seen her around. Mormons and Jehova's Witness comes around here to pester us sometimes, I get extremely agitated every single time. Its rude, intrusive, maniacal and quite frankly a waste of my time. Pawn your lunacy on someone else, please.

I met a couple in college, both from Utah, both mormon. I had a few classes with them and I kept my distance. I later ran into them after graduation and both had renounced religion, due to acquiring the fundamental tools of logic and critical thinking to apply to their everyday lives, through education at the University. To say that they were embarrassed and saddened that they had been conditioned to think a certain way as children and young adults would be an understatement.

In terms of Dawkins......have you read the God Delusion? The book is full of nothing but straw. Just for one....his discussion of the trinity. I mean, he could have just read C.S. Lewis for a better representation, and its not like C.S. Lewis even offers the best defense of the trinity.

I've only seen their live debates, so I can't comment on the books. What does he write about the trinity that is so wrong?

I've never watched Dawkins debate. Just to give you an idea....in the God Delusion, Dawkins essentially argues that he won't take part in debates because religious believers are too stupid.....guess he changed tact on this one. Its been a while since I read it (and I don't have the book on me), but if I remember correctly, he argues that the trinity is non-sense because, in the Bible, God talks to Jesus. Dawkins asks how can God talk to himself given that Jesus is God. I think he then argues that this means the story of Jesus talking to God is either a lie or means Jesus is crazy.

In contrast, C.S. Lewis argues that the trinity is better conceptualized as each part of the trinity (Father, son, holy spirit) manifested in a different dimension. Once again, I don't have the book in front of me, but the argument is essentially that God and Jesus are the same person, but they are existing in separate realities. I'm probably not doing the argument justice, but think about yourself in the future travelling back in time and talking to your present self....you could still say you talked to yourself, and you wouldn't be crazy or lying.

Point is, there are much better arguments for the trinity than the one espoused by Dawkins, hence, why people consider it a straw man argument. I'm not saying Lewis is right, but its definitely a better argument than the one presented by Dawkins.

I find bible thumping Christians and atheists equally annoying. Why do Christians have to annoy and try to convert people all the time? And also why can't Atheists just relax and not spend all their time disproving religion?

Just for the record I believe in God but don't follow a religion. I guess I'm a Deist or something similar.

maaaan twas a joke!!!

Dogma is in the eye of the beholder. All fundamentalists are equally flawed in their attitudes and thinking (this equally applies to fundamental and aggressive atheists).

I think that's born of the extreme examples of religion encroaching on others to the point of being detrimental. Much like the creationists trying to push off religion as science or the issue of "honour" killings.