Atheist Richard Dawkins, and other skeptics, like to say that your religion is determined by where you are born geographically. For instance, he says that if you were born in Iraq you’d be a Muslim because that’s what the culture dictates. If you were born in Italy, you’d be a Catholic for the same reasons.
Their reasoning is such that the location of a person’s birth, the time of a person’s birth and cultural surroundings affect people in such a way as to determine their particular belief in a god. So, you Mr. Christian are only a Christian because you were born in America.
So, Whattya Do?
As usual, I would ask them a question: are you an atheist because of where you were born?
If the religious beliefs of people are determined by where and when they were born, then they can’t exempt themselves from the equation.
They are atheists because of those same factors, none of which by the way include truth or reason! It seems like the atheist is an atheist, not for rational reasons, but because of culture and geography based on their own logic (or lack thereof)!
Now the simple fact is that geography and culture do not affect your belief the way the skeptic is trying to insinuate, and it’s certainly not the sole factor for belief. There are many many Christians in the Middle East where Islam is prevalent – how could that be possible based on the skeptics claim? Even one of the most prominent Christian Apologists, Ravi Zacharias, was born in India and became a Christian there. Seems like no one told him about how his birthplace determines his beliefs.
There are various beliefs in every culture and part of the world, and the bulk of the world’s population (over 90%) are theists!! Based on that fact alone, there should be no atheists anywhere based on their own claims. Their claim actually becomes self defeating when you look at the empirical data.
Does your place of birth affect how your brain processes information and definitively determine what you will believe about everything? Hardly!