Lee Siegel (yeah, that guy!) writes an LA Times op-ed attacking atheism:
When our anti-religionists attack the mechanism of religious faith by demanding that our beliefs be underpinned by science, statistics and cold logic, they are, in effect, attacking our right to believe in unseen, unprovable things at all. Their assault on religious faith amounts to an attack on the human imagination.
Belief and imagination are two very different states of mind, and the norms that apply to them differ dramatically. To say that belief ought to be based on evidence isn't to say that imagination should be based on evidence. As an atheist, I'm often happy to imagine that God exists (for example, when reading myths, daydreaming, or considering a philosophical argument). I just don't think there's sufficient evidence to believe in God. Lovers of the imagination have nothing to fear from atheism, since atheists are fine with you imagining whatever you want.
The same confusion appears to be at work here:
