Why serve Satan a DEFEATED a so called "god"

Mail sent from me:
May I take it you spammed everyone in ROT, or am I just lucky ?
My comments are simple: spirituality is folklore, spirits are nonsense, super-spirits are nonsensical folklore. What reasonable explanation is there for belief in the body's animation by a spirit or a soul in light of the building evidence of neurology that the brain animates the body, the activity of the brain is what is called consciousness, and the not yet complete mapping of the brain ? What need for a super-spirit "creator" when modern cosmology explains the universe without one ?
There is no reason to believe in an afterlife, or a soul, or a god, UNLESS you already believe the nonsensical folklore of spirituality...which is your right.

Sender's response:

In your response you said that "modern cosmology" explains the belief of the universe. Where do you get that from? Those who think as you do always say something to that fact with FACTS. Case in point: There was a woman in her late 20's who had a fatal desease. The doctors told her that there was no chance of escaping this and that she should get her "affairs in order" because she would be dead in a few months if not weeks. In deperation she seeks the help of a minister and asked for prayer. She was not a believer but figured "what the hay". After the prayer she goes home and the next day goes back to the doctors. To their amazement the desease is TOTALLY GONE!. The doctor then told her that "sometimes these things just go away!" and that "maybe the falsely diagnosed her in the beginning." THESE ARE DOCTORS WHO JUST GOT THROUGH TELLING HER SHE WAS GOING TO DIE. BUT NOW BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO ADMIT THAT SHE WAS HEALED, THEY COME UP WITH THIS. C'MON!!!! JESUS LOVES YOU BROTHER WEATHER YOU LOVE HIM OR NOT. I HOPE THAT YOU WOULD ACCEPT HIM NOT AS A RELIGION, BECAUSE HE'S NOT. BUT BECAUSE HE IS THE ANSWER. REPLY IF POSSIBLE.

My response to above:

You say people like me respond with facts...
OK, I like facts.
How can I respond to you when you respond with faith promoting rumor? All I can say of your response is: You like to see the world through a lens of faith. That lens allows you to see faith promoting rumors as fact instead of folklore. I like to see the world through a different lens, a lens through which faith promoting rumor, religosity, and spirituality appears baseless. On the other hand, modern cosmology and the non-sense of the notion of souls and spirits are written about in books that have been written in a popular reading style. Broca's Brain, Candle in the Dark, Astonishing Hypothesis, Neurophilosophy, First Three Minutes, Brief History of Time, Last Three Minutes, and Hero with a Thousand Faces are favorites' of mine.
I can honestly tell you I read the Bible as a teenager, and 20 years later I still read it. Can you tell me you have read anything of the above, or similar, list ?
Atheists are not closed minded. I do not take my rejection of godism lightly. I am of the opinion that theists take their godism lightly, especially when they use faith promoting, gee-whiz gosh-and-golly, faith promoting rumors to promote their faith.
I have no problem with anyone being a theist of any sort, but I demand the right to reject godishness and promote the rejection of godishness based on good sense.

Sender's response to above:

Sir, I have no use in reading the books you've mentioned. Wait now...listen and hear me out. Don't push the "disreguard" button yet. I mean this in the way of this. I get all I need from the Bible. I am not singling out your books because I don't read books by Christians either on the subject of Christianity for the simple reason as this. Books the are written by man are man's ideas, man's thinking, man's knowledge etc. I don't trust man at all.
I have come across many web sites by Athiest and all of them say that Christians are foolish and stupid, and dumb and a whole conglomerate of filthy words, because we so called "push" our beliefs on people and yet at the close of your letter to me you stated that you "demand the right to reject godishness and promote the rejection of godishness.." This is hypocricy at it's finest!

My response:

My page singles out no particular theistic world-view for criticism. I reject all theism on the basis of rationally considering the things all forms of spirituality have in common: 1) souls, spirits, or "monads" animating, or mysteriously connected to, humans; 2) a supersoul(s) (god(s), various forms of buddhahood, ancestor worship, process theologies' various entities). The only criticism of xtianity is a sentence mentioning Dr. Hugh Ross' "soulishness" doctrine. I do not understand it, please see Ross' web site: Reasons to Believe. He considers himself to be a born-of-the-spirit type xtian, and he is a PhD physicist. He is credited with bringing young earther and old earther creationists together, though not with this soulishness stuff.
I am sensitive to critique and will remove the Ross comment if you feel it is a low blow or misplaced dig at xtians. No, really, I will.
However, I do feel I have as much right to advertise for atheism as any other person has the right to advertise for (fill-in here), and, I feel I have as much right to send e-mail as I do to receive it.

Lastly, sender's response:

I appreciate the response of your E-mail. I do agree with the fact that you as all other Web sites have, the right to express what they feel is their beliefs. WHAT I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH, is when I come across webs that not only express what they believe (or disbelieve), but then start to cut, slash, bash, hurt, condemn, curse, cuss, refer to rumours etc. and totally slander what others believe in. This goes for all webs; Atheist, Phychologist, religious and Christian. I am a Christian and believe that Christ can change anyone and he doesn't need our (Christians) un-Biblical help such as condemning and so forth to get his message across. Just like all anti-Christian sites don't need to resort to filth to get "their" message across.