Where to Draw the Line?

Being a skeptic that's a question I find myself asking quite often. It seems that almost everyone has some type of supernatural or pseudoscientific belief which my skepticism bangs up against on a regular basis. The dilemma that I find myself in is, do I leave it be and not challenge their spurious belief, or do I instead question it. And if I do start down that road, how aggressively do I pursue it?

I think here in lies one of the greatest challenges to widespread acceptance of a skeptical mindset. It's a very fine line I find myself treading, one that requires a lot of contemplation, I find.

Now obviously each situation requires a slightly different approach, depending on the person or group you're dealing with, but here are the rough guidelines that I've set for myself.

Rarely do I engage with guns blazing as it were, hell bent on destroying the opposing opinion. But here are a few instances where I feel an aggressive approach is warranted. Creationists, specifically anti-evolution IDers. These people and what they're peddling needs to be squashed, period end of sentence. What they want to do is bring about another dark ages by suppressing scientific inquiry and rational thought, two things which I will defend vigorously, even more so when their ignorance is aimed towards subverting the education of our children.
The only other time where I'll go all out is when specifically challenged by what is commonly referred to as "True Believers". This is usually in the desire on their part to convert me to their religion. Something I try to nip in the bud as quickly as possible.

Which leads me to the situations where I just keep my mouth shut. It's typically with the above mentioned True Believers. In my experience there is no intellectual curiosity in these folks, they've accepted their chosen dogma hook, line and sinker and nothing I could say will change their mind. So I just don't waste my energy on them anymore.

That leaves the middle ground. The territory that I find myself most often in. I find that most of the time I'll be talking with a person and discover that they hold some belief that they tend to "think" is true. Now I used quotes there because there tends to be a kernel of doubt in these people. The level of doubt will typically determine just how in depth I'm willing to go in questioning those beliefs. In the vast majority of encounters though, unless I see an opening to inject some skeptical reasoning, I'll just say something along the lines of, "Well, I'm pretty skeptical about the evidence for that." Or if the topic is religious I'll just drop the fact that I'm an atheist. More often than not, this will elicit a question from them as to why I think so, and in my experience someone is far more likely to remember the answer to a question they've asked, as opposed to just having facts thrust upon them.
Either that or, I'll ask just why they believe what they do, what evidence they think supports the claim they're making. The more questions I ask, the more it forces someone to really think about the logic behind the answers.

In an earlier post I talked about planting a seed, and that's exactly what I'm trying to do in these instances. Never have I had someone say to me that they've abandoned their faith based on conversations with me, and I don't ever expect to either. but as long as people are more willing to question the reasons for whatever they believe... Well what more could a skeptic ask for?