"The Golden Compass" trilogy does not support atheism.

[Just as a check, I am not saying the Golden Compass trilogy is bad or good, and I am not saying that promoting atheism is bad or good - I am just saying that the trilogy does promote breaking FROM religion, - (just as the Chronicles of Naria promote Christianity) - which may be good or bad, but nevertheless, the book promotes it. I am not saying the books/movies should be banned or anything - please do not take this debate/voting on the debate any further than the topic at hand.] Pullman quote: "In the world of the story — Lyra's world — there is a church that has acquired great political power, rather in the way that some religions in our world have done at various times, and still do (think of the Taliban in Afghanistan). My point is that religion is at its best — it does most good — when it is farthest away from political power, and that when it gets hold of the power to (for example) send armies to war or to condemn people to death, or to rule every aspect of our lives, it rapidly goes bad. Sometimes people think that if something is done in the name of faith or religion, it must be good. Unfortunately, that isn't true." Pullman sees breaking from religion as good. In the movie now out, based on his first book, the plot describes the "evil magisterium" which needs to be overthrown. -In real life, the word "magisterium" means the teaching authority of the church. Pullman advocates that people should not belong to a religion - he says it is bad because the church has power. Personally, he has said he doesn't care if people belong to church or not - some have misconstrued this to mean his books don't promote breaking from religion, but that is not what it means; Pullman still conceedes what the book is actually about and that not following a religion is best. Pullman has openly stated that he dislikes the Chronicles of Narnia and his books can be seen as showing "the other side." His books promote atheism rather than theism. Furthermore, at the end of the trilogy, (not in the movie - which is only the first book), the children "kill God." Pullman is not being shady at all - he himself is an atheist and openly promotes atheism in his books, and that's fine, but it's true. With all that in mind, I will address your numbered points briefly/specifically... 1. Well, the books do also attack God/gods. (Look to the plot of the end of the trilogy.) But, more importantly, you conceede that he attacks established religion - along with that, he promotes no religion - he sees that as best. 2. Materialism is kind of irrelevant in this case. I'm not really sure if Pullman promotes materialism or not in the books, but it doesn't affect the fact that his books do promote the break from religion. 3. Yes, he is saying it makes for a better story - that is one of the points of the books - he is trying to say that the idea of destiny exists because people know it makes for a better story, people want religion because it is the better story- that is why he promotes no religion as the best alternative. 4. Evolution is also kind of irrelevant. He agrees with evolution, so do many religious people. He beleives at some point a change occured that made our species humans - that is evolution. He doesn't not beleive in evolution - just because he has his own interpretation of it doesn't mean that he isn't a "real" atheist or something. 5. Ok, the author is writing a story. If one gets the feeling that the author suggests the church came from hell, then that is because the AUTHOR has succeded in conveying that the church is evil, and the READER has associated evil with hell. The book does not suggest the existance of hell, just evil.