Well, I agree with you that it CAN take years of growth. However, it can also come in a "revelation", if you will excuse the pun. If, for years a person has been railing against evidence because of their belief that it is invalid because of a religion, when that vale drops, that person can come to accept a LOT of information as true that the day before, so to speak, they denied the truth of. People change in a lot of ways, it's not necessarily a long, slow gradual process.
That being said, yes, you are right. For a lot of people, it tends to be a longer process.
Welcome to the light! :)
So, would you say it was more effective for people to just point out the "hypocrisy" (as you describe it) with your belief system rather than trying to play on your emotions, so to speak?
I believe that, when trying to get a person to see reason, it is crucial to be as unemotional and concise as possible when having a conversation with them. It seems that once a "personal attack" happens, the unreasoning person just shuts down and almost feels justified in their belief because they were able to fluster their debate partner. Did you find this to be true or am I off the mark in my reasoning?