bolster your position. You don't look for other texts that don't. That wouldn't be prudent.

Of course, if you find your proof texts somewhere all ready for use, you don't have to look any further. That happens a lot, too.

Einstein's quote is couched more in terms of HIS personal beliefs. Yes they would apply equally to others, but Brand points the finger outward. A subtle distinction, but maybe Atheists would benefit from taking the personal approach more often. "i believe it would be foolish of me to believe in a God" is more palatable than "you are a fool because you believe in a God" (and less rude).

See, I don't at all care what others believe, only what they do. But if someone were to point their finger at me and call me contmptable for what I believe, I'm probably going to feel a little hostile.

He very clearly points outward, which you should note from the emphasized text.

I suspect neither would be openly hostile towards theism, were it not for the far greater hostility received from believers on a biblical scale. Words might sometimes feel hurtful even when they reflect reality, but by themselves don't deny people basic human rights.

It undermines what you think you have proven here.

Name calling generally does not lead to dialogue. The name caller is trying to shut down dialogue. So when Russel was employing a brutal ad hominem attack, he was "speaking to the choir", as it were. He was not engaging in dialogue at all.

It is Bertrand Russell in the first quote. Albert Einstein was the source of the others. Perhaps you're conflating Bertrand Russell with Russell Brand. They could not be more dissimilar, really.

From the OP: "Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.

Whose feeble souls do you suppose he meant? Whose ridiculous egotisms?