B_C_B wrote >>
I don't believe there is a god. (Which is different than BELIEVING there IS NOT a god.)
How can one be so sure? Why not believe in a flying spaghetti monster? http://www.venganza.org/
The reason I don't find FSM a valid critique of my religion is that it assumes that religious people pick a set of beliefs at random, and hold to them without any evidence.
I would say rather that I've received a number of convincing proofs of God's existence during my life, but that they were of such a personal nature that they cannot be meaningfully shared. This means of course that they cannot be considered scientific --i.e. replicable and able to be decontextualized --nor can they serve as evidence for others, but they are more than adequate for me.
That's one answer to your question, and it explains why I believe in a personal God. However, even in the absence of those experiences, I would probably still believe in the "philosopher's God" --the unity of all perfections --which is a concept that makes sense to me from an intellectual point of view.
Speaking of which, if you, or anyone else is interested in a good intellectual debate on the subject of religion, I would recommend the Columbus Philosophers Meetup. We run about equal parts theist/atheist/agnostic and often discuss religion, yet I've never once seen it degenerate into a shouting match or for people to treat those of opposing views with anything less than complete respect.