The following "conversation"  was the result of the writer claiming that  freedom of religion allowed people to believe in a supernatural being.

I have my faith, that's all I need.

I do not believe in anything supernatural and you have faith, fine. no problem. What is a problem though that believers , such as you are threatening through legislation to impose your beliefs ( anti-abortion, creationism, etc.) on the rest of the population. I am not trying to legislate my opinion on you.

Actually you are, if you want to impose by Law Abortion as legal, and in Evolution, the moment you mandate Evolution be taught you are imposing it onto others. You can say "But its Science", it makes no difference as its still imposed. So lets not pretend here.

Here is were you and many Fundamentalist so distort things. Allowing abortions does not force anybody to have one. If you do not believe in abortions you do not have one and that does not make you a criminal. You go not go to jail if you have a baby. But forbid abortions and you become a criminal and murderer and go to jail, Big difference!!!!
Teaching evolution in school is a different kettle of fish. The science is sound and overwhelming evidence is accepted by the vast majority of scientists. That you, and some religious scientist don't accept the science is your problem. There is still a Flat Earth Society in this country (Wikipedia). They have the right to teach that belief to anybody, because no one has seen the world as being round, look around you when you stand in an open field, isn't that obvious and proof that the world is flat? We are taught that the world is round only in pictures and books, and they can be faked so you can claim that all that is a government plot to foil the population for some nefarious reason to their benefit.
We don't teach it as an alternative 'theory' in the schools either. You have the right to teach creationism in your Churches and Bible classes, there is no prohibition or criminal act involved if you do, but it is a religious doctrine and religious teaching takes place in the churches. With the diverse population, the many religions and the many branches of Christianity, all with different opinions, we teach the science accepted by nearly all religions and denominations and let the dissenting churches do their own thing. No one is stopping that! Again a big difference! If you can't see that, you are blind, if you do see it but don't accept it because of your religious beliefs, you got a big problem. We tolerate your view you are free not to have abortions and teach creationism and we don't interfere with your lifestyle., but you want to interfere with all of us, that's called intolerance, big time!
So let's not pretend here.

Some of the “believers” keep telling me that since I don’t “believe” in the bible I should not quote the bible in my arguments. I have to reminds them time and time again that I did not say that I do not believe in the Bible stories, much of that is historic and believable. I have pointed out many times  that I don't believe in the God of the Bible and the so called "morals" he espouses. I also recommend that people read the whole chapter of the book of Numbers 31, not pick out some verses. I am not going to reproduce the bible here. I am sure that most “believers” have one handy and it doesn’t matter which version you use. This bible is allegedly written by God, through "inspired" human beings. This God of the Bible, in which they believe, shows time and time again that he is unforgiving, cruel and vengeful, and the proof is in the book of Numbers. Killing all man, male babies, pregnant women and taking possession of the virgins are not "moral" actions. Sounds more like a holocaust. My innate morals reject all of these biblical morals.

-Thomas Payne (1737-1809), as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine:
"When we read in the books ascribed to Moses, Joshua, etc., that they (the Israelites) came by stealth upon whole nations of people, who, as history itself shows, had given them no offence; that they put all those nations to the sword; that they spared neither age nor infancy; that they utterly destroyed men, women, and children; that they left not a soul to breathe — expressions that are repeated over and over again in those books, and that, too, with exulting ferocity — are we sure these things are facts? are we sure that the Creator of man commissioned these things to be done? and are we sure that the books that tell us so were written by his authority?"
"Whence arose all the horrid assassinations of whole nations of men, women, and infants, with which the Bible is filled, and the bloody persecutions and tortures unto death, and religious wars, that since that time have laid Europe in blood and ashes — whence rose they but from this impious thing called revealed religion, and this monstrous belief that God has spoken to man? The lies of the Bible have been the cause of the one, and the lies of the Testament of the other."
"What is it the Testament teaches us?— to believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married, and the belief of this debauchery is called faith."
"It is from the Bible that man has learned cruelty, rapine and murder; for the belief of a cruel God makes a cruel man."

Yes, Thomas Pain expressed exactly how I feel about the God of the Bible or any other god ever imagined by humans. The only difference I have With Thomas Payne is that he still believes in a Creator. I venture that If he lived now and was aware of the scientific progress we have made and are still making, he would abandon that idea as well. The universe creates itself. There is no supernatural aware personality directing the evolving of the universe. We can call the Universe itself God but that is a misnomer. "god" or "lord" are words meaning "leader", the head of the household, king or emperor. Natural laws exist, and randomly creates the universe and all that is in it, why? Perhaps we will find out, or it could be beyond our capacity to grasp, however, pure fantasy, by believing in a creator who is obviously based on ancient human leaders and thinks and acts like us humans, is patently nonsense.

Have you ever wondered why people cling to their belief in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Evolution vs Creationism for example?  There is a psychological explanation for that. Leon Festinger, an American social psychologist, called this cognitive dissonance. He actually joined a cult, led by Dorothy Martin, who claimed to have received a message that a flood would destroy the world on December 21 of that year. When nothing happened on that date the group did not abandon their beliefs, and since they then claimed that their actions had saved the world  they became even stronger believers. How does that happen? Quoting Festinger:
1.           "The existence of dissonance (or inconsistency), being psychologically uncomfortable, will motivate the person to try to reduce the dissonance and achieve consonance (or consistency)"
2.    "When dissonance is present, in addition to trying to reduce it, the person will actively avoid situations and information which would likely increase the dissonance"
When you point out information indicating that a believer is wrong (or inconsistent) they feel uncomfortable (dissonance). To reduce that feeling, a common human reaction, they will automatically dismiss that information and often not even recognize that information as having anything to do with their mistaken belief. This reaction is strongly reinforced when they belong to a group which holds the same beliefs. No one wants to be wrong and therefor we tend to be blind to facts which do not conform to our beliefs. Science is a great way to neutralize this effect. We must be very careful however, since there have been many pseudo sciences developed by the persistency of the Cognitive Dissonance effect, they can however be distinguished by using the proper established scientific method:
"a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses." “Another basic expectation is to document, archive, and share all data and methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny by other scientists, giving them the opportunity to verify the results by attempting to reproduce them.” (Wikipedia)

We can  now understand why it is so hard or impossible to have a believer change their mind and why some unbelievers still believe in ESP or UFOs.

Believers often use the argument that the complexity of the universe cannot have formed randomly and therefor is “proof that a designer must have created it. I found the following argument In the Disqus forum

To go from the singularity instantly to the laws of physics, the Higgs Boson particle, up and down quarks, the fine tuning of the universe, the beauty, logic and perfection of mathematics, the DNA programming code that governs all life, intelligence, consciousness, beauty all provide evidence for a non-material intelligent creator.

“provide evidence for a non-material intelligent creator?” No it doesn't. It an assertion you make. Just since one "believes" that it does, doesn't make it FACTUAL. Again using science terms to impress people, who on the whole, are not familiar with or do not understand Quantum Physics, does not prove anything, complexity can be created by random happenings. To use DNA as an example shows that it is so "complex that it must have been created" is demonstratedly false. It proves just the opposite. The DNA code has many flaws and obsolete sections which we can observe, indicating trial and error in evolution, successful mutations survived, although still not perfect, and unsuccessful ones died off, an observable fact, showing random trial and error not intelligence design.