Bad things do happen to innocent people and this self-evident fact demolishes the traditional idea of a totally good god of umlimited power. God, if such exists, must sometimes be either impotent or uncaring in the face of innocent suffering. Either he cares but can't act or he can act but doesn't care to (or a bit of both). God, if any, must be limited; there is no basis for belief in the infinite god - he clearly does not exist. But to believe in a limited god is pretty unsatisfying to people who crave simple certainty - as religious people tend to do. The atheist option is more satisfying. 'There is nobody out there to protect us and there is nobody out there to fear' is a more dignified human stance than half-belief in half a god - and half-guilt about it all.

Cecil is surely right to be thankful for all the good in life and it is this side of things, rather than innocent suffering, that most moves me to atheism. I, like many many other middle class Western people, have had it very easy; few of us really know the full meaning of the word 'suffering'. If there is no god then this good fortune is just that - and let us be glad of it. If there is a just god, even a limited one, then our comfortable good fortune must be because we are better and more deserving than those suffering millions whose lives we can scarcely imagine.

I simply do not believe that we comfortable Western middle classes are better people than others in the world so the 'just god' theory has to go out of the window. Our smooth ride, if considered together with a just god who sees that we deseve it, would lead each fortunate sheltered one of us logically to say "Thank God I am not as other men are; that is why I have had it so good." I do not care to say this and Cecil, of all people, would not applaud me if I did.