I left the Christian church about twenty years ago, for a number of reasons, but chiefly because I just didn’t believe any more. It was partly because of a lack of evident factual foundation in the Bible, partly because the hypocrisy of so many who form the public face of the Church, and partly because of the profound anti-intellectualism which seems so commonly espoused by members of the Church.

A lack of Church support for people in my demographic group (unmarried people too old for “youth” groups) probably played a part at the time as well, but that was, if anything, merely a contributing factor.

That said, I usually describe myself as an atheist with theist sympathies; that is, religion can be, and often is, a force for good .I just wish its representatives would stop being objectively evil.

In particular:

• I believe in the unconditional right for a woman to terminate her pregnancy at any time.
  – Firstly, because an unborn child is not a human being. For much of the term of the pregnancy, the foetus does not even fit the legal definition of being alive; there is little or no brain activity.
  – Secondly, because a human being has no legal or moral responsibility to risk their own life and health for the sake of another person, and such risk is inherent in carrying a pregnancy to term. This leaves aside the separate but significant issue of the fate of an unwanted child – even assuming they survive.
• I believe in the right of human beings to express their sexuality in whatever manner they wish, so long as it does not unduly impact other people.
  “Impacting other people” does not include moral outrage. Most categories under the LGBTIA+ groupings actually exist in nature to a greater or lesser extent, so calling them “unnatural” is just wrong, and imposing on them for “moral” reasons is mostly done on the basis of religious teachings. The same people refuse to impose capital punishment for working on Saturdays, for example, for eating oysters, or any of the hundreds of other rules from the Old Testament.
• I believe that the “welfare state” is basically a good idea; society needs to support the poor and disadvantaged. (I find it passing strange that many so-called Christians oppose this sort of “socialism”, even though Jesus’s teachings were unambiguously in favour of supporting the poor and disadvantaged.) This is partly from “golden rule” principles – treat others as you would be treated yourself – and partly from economic rationalism; neglecting the poor is both cruel and wasteful. However, while welfare needs to exist, this needs to be done in a manner where profitable enterprise is still incentivised; all things in moderation.
• Young-Earth-Creationism is bunk, objectively false for anyone with the slightest capacity for rational thought. Fossil starlight and the geologic record, at minimum, support the existence of an old Earth. If you think God somehow faked these, then God is a liar; he’s placed false evidence. If God is lying to you through his own Creation, how else can he be trusted?
  Old-Earth Creationism I find plausible but I find no reason for it; if you’re going to require that God always existed, it’s simpler to say that the Universe always existed, even if only in a simplified form as the “primordial atom” of the Big Bang – but the Big Bang doesn’t even require that. The Universe may have had a point origin, with no “beforehand” at all.

My position with regard to tax exemptions for churches is more or less neutral. I was at one point a (largely incompetent) treasurer for a small parish so I understand the pain; I think there’s also an argument that taxing church income is frequently doubling up on tax, as most church income is from donations for already-taxed income. Most churches barely break even. Of course, this assumes that church spending is for legitimate purposes; this is generally true, but breaks down with some ministries.