Sallam, 37

'Cause I'm agnostic. My belief isn't really rooted in the "I believe a God could exist, I just don't have the proof." The way I approach it is it's an inherently ambiguous assertion to try and prove so I approach it differently. So, I approach it as to what my personal belief of altruism is, which God is an embodiment and symbol of. That being said, I believe a truly altruistic God wouldn't need the assurance of a people anthropomorphising and embellishing his existence for the sake of "worship." There is no shame in it, but it's not necessary if God is truly altruistic. Moreso, what God requires is that you enjoy what he gave you and don't impose restrictions of belief on yourself through supposedly supernatural origins. A true altruist believes in compromise and acceptance, and the self-imposition of dogma-filled fairy tales handicaps this ability. So, ultimately, either there is no God and our invention thereof is a way for humanity to understand and follow altruism, which then necessitates that we leave the idea behind upon entering adulthood and inheriting the responsibility of managing our own altruistic virtues, or there is a God and the only way to truly follow him is to not try to concoct a prideful story of exclusion just so you can add yourself to a nonexistent army that conducts civil war against the inner-workings of God's creation.

Not entirely coherent, I know. Part of the whole reasoning behind this moral compass of sorts is that I don't spend too much time on judgmental dictations, so this tends to suffer. Anyways, there's my best attempt.