the sensible option

in which the difference between "theophobe" and "atheist" is explained:

Militant theophobes are celebrating that an Arkansas judge is letting them put forth a display celebrating nihilism and meaningless as an "in yer face" to Christian displays celebrating Christmas. Let's ponder this. Why be happy about the opportunity to spoil someone else's holiday if you are only motivated by reason and skepticism? Why not have your celebration of nihilism and self-centeredness in one of the other 11 months of the year, if it's not about an "in yer face" to Christians? If you are really motivated by reason and skepticism, why even care about other people celebrating what they believe?

Look, let's say I professed not to like fast food. Now, if I just avoided eating at fast food restaurants, that would be proof enough that I was sincere in my beliefs. If I stood outside McDonald's slapping Big Macs out of people's hands, you'd think I was a nut. If I demanded that the Government make it illegal for the golden arches to be displayed in public, you'd think I was a tyrant.

The intellectual vanity and vacuity of theophobes is encapsulated in this quote from a high school sophomore who refused to read the Bible even as literature because, "This is the word of God. People take this literally... I don't want to read about what they believe to be true." That isn't reason, that's shoving your fingers in your ears and saying "Neener, neener, neener." There's something wrong when refusal to understand that which you do not believe is considered a mark of intellectual sophistication.