# Are Fundamentalists the Atheist's best friend? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 27, 2010, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678 "2010-01-27T19:57:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![kevlaw](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kevlaw/32/2281_2.png) [@kevlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevlaw)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/261 "2010-01-29T23:01:10Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I spend a _lot_ of time doing this, actually. If you spent all of your time doing it you would be a fundamentalist not-a-stamp-collector. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/262 "2010-01-29T23:03:14Z")
So, **mswas** , what totalitarian religion are you attempting to impose on society, then? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/263 "2010-01-29T23:10:12Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > comments like this certainly are a strong argument against the existence of god Yeees, your insistence I get involved in your buddy **mswas** new interesting load of rhetoric, which wouldn’t convince a four year old (though it might stun him long enough to take his lolly) is duly noted. My core statement remains : road apples. A more involved rebutal of his… well, I guess I have to call them “points”, would need to start by attacking the root of his argument : Chewbacca does not, and has in fact \*\*never \*\*lived on Endor. Adress. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2010, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/264 "2010-01-30T00:29:02Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > more involved rebutal of his… well, I guess I have to call them “points”, would need to start by attacking the root of his argument : Chewbacca does not, and has in fact \*\*never \*\*lived on Endor. Adress. No, Chewbacca is from Kashyyk. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2010, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/265 "2010-01-30T00:35:59Z")
> [@kevlaw](#): > > If you spent all of your time doing it you would be a fundamentalist not-a-stamp-collector. Oh my Thor I _am_ a fundamentalist not-a-stamp-collector! :eek: Clearly I’m going to start oppressing society _any minute now!_ ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2010, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/266 "2010-01-31T07:09:51Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > This is the crux of the entire argument. You should go back and re-read my posts because that’s the entire thesis of my argument and I don’t have time to reprise what I spent all afternoon addressing. If I understand correctly, you’re saying if atheism replaces theism entirely, some social structure that functionally resembles religion in all meaningful ways will arise? No argument from me, and I welcome it, because whatever it is, it will be grounded in a correct belief, not a fantasy. I’m holding out for some form of humanism, myself (which is now pretty much ideologically divorced from the Christian Humanism it shares a name with). ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2010, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/267 "2010-02-01T19:50:54Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > By this standard **all** theists are fundamentalists. That’s not true. There are those who don’t believe in a(ny) god(s) and there are those who claim to know that there is no god. This has been the subject of an extended thread hijack. Someone has even commented that this argument is so worn that it does not bear repeating. Yet, this distinction is the basis for my “fundamentalist” comment. I will reiterate, a fundamentalist atheist is someone who claims to know that there is(are) no god(s), _i.e._, someone who has a strict adherence to the denial of (not disbelief in) god. One may be an atheist and still not fit this description. > [@begbert2](#): > > And, given how carefully you’ve avoided defining “gods”, nobody does. As noted, given that strict lack of definition I am certainly a theist, since I believe in my styrofoam cup. Regarding the a hypothetical god, in this thread, I have made the following comments indicating a concept of god that would exclude your styrofoam cup and still not be subject to the arguments against the existence of an Abrahamic god: Post 124: quoting Trey Parker” there’s this big giant universe and it’s expanding, it’s all gonna collapse on itself and we’re all just here just 'cause … just ‘cause’.” Post 140: deity that is supernatural Post 152: A creator who made the world. The world is evidence of its creation. Post 197: the dilemma . . . [created by] the removal of the concept of a god(s) - namely, who, how, why, from whence? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2010, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/268 "2010-02-01T20:17:56Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > If I understand correctly, you’re saying if atheism replaces theism entirely, some social structure that functionally resembles religion in all meaningful ways will arise? No argument from me, and I welcome it, because whatever it is, it will be grounded in a correct belief, not a fantasy. I’m holding out for some form of humanism, myself (which is now pretty much ideologically divorced from the Christian Humanism it shares a name with). Was Communism then grounded in a correct belief? You do not believe that a person can hold erroneous materialist beliefs? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2010, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/269 "2010-02-01T21:37:02Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > That’s not true. There are those who don’t believe in a(ny) god(s) and there are those who claim to know that there is no god. This has been the subject of an extended thread hijack. Someone has even commented that this argument is so worn that it does not bear repeating. Yet, this distinction is the basis for my “fundamentalist” comment. I will reiterate, a fundamentalist atheist is someone who claims to know that there is(are) no god(s), _i.e._, someone who has a strict adherence to the denial of (not disbelief in) god. One may be an atheist and still not fit this description. A soft atheist is fully as much an atheist as a hard atheist, when it comes to the one “fundamental” of atheism: a lack of belief in a god. You are an atheist if you are not a theist. It’s really that simple, and the position that soft atheists/atheistic agnostics are not “full” atheists is simply incorrect, and remains incorrect regardless of how often you reiterate it or try to warp the definition of “fundamentalist”. And again, you’d be surprised at how few real hard atheists there are, when you get down to hair-splitting levels, as you are doing. Most “hard” atheists know that there’s no god the same way you know there are no seven-legged ducks. “Knowing” is an assertion of 100% certainty in a belief, and there’s not any doubt in our minds that these silly god-things are made up - but if persuasive evidence turned up to show us that some seven-legged god _did_ exist, we’d believe it. Not to say we’d _worship_ the thing or anything - but when it comes to unprovables, most or all atheists are _technichally_ agnostic about literal unknowables. Certainly all the atheists you’ve seen in _this_ thread are. > [@whole\_bean](#): > > Regarding the a hypothetical god, in this thread, I have made the following comments indicating a concept of god that would exclude your styrofoam cup and still not be subject to the arguments against the existence of an Abrahamic god: > > Post 124: quoting Trey Parker” there’s this big giant universe and it’s expanding, it’s all gonna collapse on itself and we’re all just here just 'cause … just ‘cause’.” > > Post 140: deity that is supernatural > > Post 152: A creator who made the world. The world is evidence of its creation. > > Post 197: the dilemma . . . [created by] the removal of the concept of a god(s) - namely, who, how, why, from whence? Funny, I didn’t see where you demonstrated that my styrofoam cup didn’t have a supernatural side or that it didn’t create the universe. But anyway… Have you _read_ the Jewish/Christian creation myths? You know, the ones in the same book of myths that gave us the flood and the little ark and the tower of babel? Yeah. Didn’t happen. I’d say that’s an argument that your Abrahamic god _is_ subject to. Supernatural is poorly defined. Might as well leave it at that. And for fun: who: nobody how: a whole _passel_ of processes, all based in the natural laws. why: for the same reason a row of dominos fall. from whence: Kaboom! ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2010, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/270 "2010-02-02T05:13:19Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Was Communism then grounded in a correct belief? Nope, state control is still state control, an (IMO) incorrect belief. But so what, Communism isn’t _grounded_ in atheism, which was the correct belief I referenced. > [@](#): > > You do not believe that a person can hold erroneous materialist beliefs? Of course they can. But I didn’t say they couldn’t, just that being grounded in a correct belief is better than being grounded in a lie. I gave a specific example of one that I think is grounded in correct belief, but a culture grounded in, say, the materialist belief of eugenics, would be abbhorent. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2010, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/271 "2010-02-02T05:22:34Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > Post 124: quoting Trey Parker” there’s this big giant universe and it’s expanding, it’s all gonna collapse on itself and we’re all just here just 'cause … just ‘cause’.” What’s wrong with “just 'cause”? Do events need reasons? > [@](#): > > Post 140: deity that is supernatural Does not, and can not, exist. > [@](#): > > Post 152: A creator who made the world. The world is evidence of its creation. Piss-poor evidence. \*How \*is the world evidence for a creator? > [@](#): > > Post 197: the dilemma . . . [created by] the removal of the concept of a god(s) - namely, who, how, why, from whence? False dilemma - we know the who and how and wherefrom, and “why?” is a meaningless question in this context. The Universe doesn’t need a purpose, that’s your human failing speaking. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/272 "2010-02-11T04:34:16Z")
If you mean by fundamentalists people like these than yes, in fact I’d say they’re the best friends of Satan also: [http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/](http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/) [http://www.godhatesfags.com/](http://www.godhatesfags.com/) [http://amazinggracebaptistchurchkjv.com/](http://amazinggracebaptistchurchkjv.com/) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678.md?page=13)