system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: If you have seriously thought about your religious beliefs and are still religious, you are 100% brainwashed. I am slowly starting to judge religious people and would like to stop.

I know there are religious posts on here a lot,  but this is a specific thing I wanted to discuss. I would like my view on this changed because while I've never been religious,  I also like to think I have managed to avoid being a pretentious asshole about it. However,  I have spent a lot of time looking into philosophy and why people think the way they think,  and i am just struggling to see how anyone who has looked at the situation logically can see it as reasonable. I used to be the person who would genuinely respect and empathize with the rational behind other people's opinions, but I'm turning into the person who just says,  "gotcha" and had thoughts of "brainwashed" or "ignorant".

Step 1: In order to believe something exists, you should have seen evidence of some sort.

Step 2: No evidence exists. 

Step 3: The default position is to not believe until I see evidence.

I do not understand how people believe things without a logical reason to think it's true. Please help me understand where this comes from if it isn't brainwashing or conditioning of some sort.  I do not think it will be possible to convince me of a God in this thread,  I only ask for some kind of help understanding this block. 

Anticipated Counterarguments:

1. God is not in the realm of logic,  so there is no need for logical evidence.  This is,  imo, a cop out. It is basically saying,  you can't technically prove this wrong so it's automatically true. It's more of a defense of god in the face of logic instead of a reason to believe if you don't already. If I said I could shoot fire from my hands,  but it didn't rely on logic so i couldn't demonstrate,  you wouldn't believe me.

2. Beliefs require logic? Then why do you believe xyz? If anything,  you will get me to change my perspective on xyz, not on this. 

3. Telling me some kind of definition is wrong,  therefore my whole argument is wrong.

4. Telling me that my understanding of the word logic is incorrect.  For the purposes of this discussion,  I'm defining logic as "using pre existing information to draw new conclusions". If you'd like to tell me that's not what logic is, fine, but that isn't going to change my rationale on this. 

I have religious friends in real life,  and don't discuss this with them because there is no way to do it without directly challenging their beliefs and I'd rather not create tension or a sense of disrespect. I would like to understand where they are coming from.
gpt
I actually believe that people who **never** think about or question anything would be considered brainwashed. Even if you question something and come to the same conclusion as before.  
  
You are asking for actual proof of the existence of God. No single person will be able to provide you that evidence. That is why they call it faith. But people who believe in God don't usually need proof.