I was talking to Mac late on Saturday night and the conversation strayed (as it will after that much alcohol) onto the topic of God, and not just God but organised religion as well. For some unknown reason I kept trying to get across the idea that something like Methodism is intrinsically more sensible than Catholasism because you don't have to worry about trans-substantiation or deadly vs venal sins or holy relics or papal infallability or all the rest of it.

Mac however made a very good point which really put me in my place. As soon as you believe, as soon as you have faith you've basically crossed the line. Once you are happy to stand up and say you believe in something for which by definition there can be no proof it really doesn't matter if you're a Lutheran or a Jesuit - it's all a matter of degree.

Once you've agreed to start believing in things with no proof per se, what you actually believe in is the least of your worries. And what right has anyone else to dictate where this leads you. Aliens from Andromeda - fine. Earth has a hallow core where dinosaurs roam - fine. Endless rebirth on the circle of life - fine. It doesn't seem to work that way though - the more exteme your own behavioural psychosis is the less likely you are to be tolerant of other peoples.