Atheism is a religion!

[Fantome]

Many atheists talk, argue, and discuss as though it were a religion…ya know, the fervor thing.

We can discuss any topic with fervor. That doesn’t make any one of those things seem like a religion. If I discuss why Birthers or Truthers are idiots with “fervor”, does that make the non-belief in those causes seem like a religion? Of course not. Theists just like to pretend that’s the case when we discuss religion or theism for pretty much the reason Vorpal Blade brought up. They want to put the lack of belief in their silly beliefs on the same plane and pretend we’re being just as irrational. They’re wrong. Let’s look at what religion is:

1. Belief in supernatural beings (gods).
2. A distinction between sacred and profane objects.
3. Ritual acts focused on sacred objects.
4. A moral code believed to be sanctioned by the gods.
5. Characteristically religious feelings (awe, sense of mystery, sense of guilt, adoration), which tend to be aroused in the presence of sacred objects and during the practice of ritual, and which are connected in idea with the gods.
6. Prayer and other forms of communication with gods.
7. A world view, or a general picture of the world as a whole and the place of the individual therein. This picture contains some specification of an over-all purpose or point of the world and an indication of how the individual fits into it.
8. A more or less total organization of one’s life based on the world view.
9. A social group bound together by the above.

Main Differences Between Atheists and Agnostics

Hell, theism isn’t like a religion and discussing it on its own doesn’t make it seem like one either.

Many atheists “adhere” to a set of ideas…and to a cause. They are widely diverse, but most adherents to “a set of ideas” and “to a cause” have widely divergent notions of the ideas and causes.

You really have no idea how stupid that statement is, do you? That atheists can have causes that are “wildly diverse” than other atheists makes atheism seem like a religion? Are you kidding?

I am not trying to do anything…I AM making a parallel between the hard-headedness and inflexibility of atheists with theists. And that connection does exist…IN SPADES.

So everyone is hard-headed and inflexible? Because everyone fits in one of the two categories. There are many more atheists and theists that don’t give a damn about arguing these things on the internet (if that’s how you’re defining hard-headed). I guess if atheists aren’t swayed to become theists they’re inflexible? And again, theism isn’t a religion either. Saying theists are hard-headed and since atheists are also, that makes atheism seem like a religion is stupid.

Right…not a little. A LOT!

I guess you got a snow day today and got to stay home from school?

Could you try that one again in English?

Try reading it again.

I am not an atheist…and you don’t sound like much of one either.

I am an atheist. If you’re without belief in the existence of any gods, you are too.

Agnostics tend to highlight the fact that they do not know the answers to questions about the Reality of existence such as: “Are there gods involved?” “Are there no gods involved?”

Atheism and theism aren’t relied on by knowledge, but by belief. You don’t have to know there is a god to be a theist and you don’t have to know there isn’t to be an atheist.

Nothing I’ve said goes contrary to what most agnostics accept as agnosticism. If you have a particular item in mind, bring it up…and we’ll discuss it.

You separated yourself from both theists and atheists and put yourself in a separate “agnostic” group. As you’ve been told in another thread, agnosticism is not mutually exclusive from atheism or theism. That is contrary to what most agnostics accept as agnosticism. If you’re without belief in the existence of any gods, you’re an atheist.

[figure9]

Cool. So there’s a 50-50 probability that unicorns exist too, right? And then a 50-50 probability that fairies exist. And a 50-50 probability that Bigfoot exists. That means odds are at least one of them exists. Hmmm.

On the other hand there is also a 50-50 probability that unicorns and so on don’t exist. So you can see that it is just as likely that they all do exist except for the ones that don’t. Your logic shows that the odds say at least one of them is likely to exist. My logic shows that only one of them is unlikely to exist. You could argue with me, but you might be wasting your time because there is only a 50-50 chance that I exist, and only a 50-50 chance that I would see your post and, only a 50-50 that I would read it and only a 50-50 chance that I would understand it and there is only a 50-50 chance I would change my mind. Since 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x1/2 x1/2 = 1/32 arguing with me is likely a waste of time.

[kanicbird]

Atheism is a belief system which one uses to chose certain paths in life. Atheism places the state as the highest authority one can appeal to, and the legal system one falls under. As such it does have rules and laws to follow, and a higher authority to call in times of trouble. In many ways Atheism is a religion of the flesh, it is a very unspiritual religion in general, but does have all the factors of a religion.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Frank_apisa

I’m sure you meant “supercilious” not “supersillious”, Diogenes.

I didn’t spell it with an s, and pouncing on typos is one of the poorest internet tactics imaginable.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Frank_apisa

I’ve already answered the “involved in the Reality of existence” question.

In what post? I must have missed it. Why don’t you tell me again, what does “reality of existence” mean? How is it different from either the words “reality” or “existence” by themselves. What does it mean to say a god is “involved” with it?

As for “ambiguous evidence”…look up the word “ambiguous” and look up the word “evidence.”

Why do you ask these questions when you have the resources at hand?

This is just childish. I wasn’t asking for word definitions, I was asking you for some actual examples of this “ambiguous evidence” for gods that you keep referring to. I’m starting to think you don’t actually know what the word “evidence” means.

[MyFootsZZZ]

Athiests don’t ask for money, they don’t hold a service. Most I know just try to argue their Non-beleifs if someone ‘charges at them’ from being called an athiest. Withought religion or God there would be no athiests.

I still think it’s a belief. I still think you’re saying “there’s no God” means that you’re making a bit of a leap, (a smart leap comparatively), but a little leap non-the less. I don’t think Atheists should feel threatened by that. To me, belief in anything we can see, touch, hear, taste, and/or smell actually existing is a bit of a leap, (we would be putting faith in our senses and our consciousness… which is the only thing I feel comfortable saying exist… ‘my consciousness’).

[kaylasdad99]

@RitterSport

I also can’t paint my house clear. But don’t tell anyone!

Your fault for choosing to buy a house in an HOA, with CC&Rs.

[Fantome]

@Frank_apisa

As for “ambiguous evidence”…look up the word “ambiguous” and look up the word “evidence.” Why do you ask these questions when you have the resources at hand?

Are you kidding? You actually think he was asking for the definitions to “ambiguous” and “evidence”?

[MaxTheVool]

@Eternal

We had a lot of fun here tonight, but I’m sure we can all agree that when a bunch of people form a group based on similar perspectives and beliefs that it will ultimately perform the same function in terms of shaping and enforcing acceptable conduct. It will attempt to spread through proselytizing when necessary and brute force when possible.

Speaking as an atheist, one of the things that bugs me the most when people discuss religion is that people ascribe some of the characteristics of SOME religions; in particular the door-to-door proselytizing, the belief that their religion requires them to convert as many others as possible; to ALL religions. Many branches of Christianity, which is of course the religion we Americans are most exposed to, have as one of their basic tenets that spreading the good word is something that good true believers must do, and that non-believers are going to hell. I think Islam has something at least vaguely comparable, although I won’t claim to speak with authority on the topic. Thus, people kind of assume that that’s just an immutable characteristic of religions. But it isn’t at all. Judaism, for instance, does NOT go around trying to seek converts, pretty much ever. It’s HARD to convert to Judaism. And Jews don’t believe that non-Jews are going to hell. In fact, Jews believe that it’s EASIER for non-Jews to go to heaven (I think it’s a bit trickier than that, but that’s the basic idea).
Anyhow, if ACTUAL religions don’t automatically start proselytizing, there’s certainly no reason to think that groups of people who share in common a particular lack of belief automatically will, either.

[MyFootsZZZ]

Just curious, do the Athiests here admit saying; “There is no God”, or hell, even saying; “There is no Flying Spaghetti Monster” is stating a beleif? That there’s no ‘leap’ in those claims?

Not talking about religion.

[MaxTheVool]

@Frank_apisa

Atheism definitely is NOT a religion…buts its adherents often talk, discuss, and argue as though it were. And its adherents, diverse though they may be, often are as hard-headed and unyielding in their protestations as theists—often to the point where it seems like a religion.

This is a weird paragraph. Your chain of logic seems to be:
-Lots of atheists are vocally arrogant/stubborn/argumentative about their atheism
-Religious people are known to be arrogant/stubborn/argumentative
-Therefore atheism seems like a religion

Lots of Dallas Cowboys fans are vocally arrogant/stubborn/argumentative about their fandom. Does that make it in any way meaningfully similar to a religion? Religions are LOTS of things that are in no way similar to atheism or Dallas Cowboy fandom. Finding one random point of similarity is just a coincidence.

So, yes, atheism is “like a religion” in that some people are fervent about it. And the choir I used to sing in was “like a religion” in that we gathered once a week and sang songs. It’s a meaningless comparison.

(And of course, plenty of atheists are NOT arrogant/stubborn/argumentative about it. And bear in mind that you’re someone who obviously takes great glee in arguing about this topic. Therefore, when you encounter Joe Atheist, the odds of the topic come up and being argued about at great length are reasonably high. So you end up thinking “man, of all the time I spend with Joe Atheist, he’s arguing passionately about atheism 35% of the time!” or something, and you infer from that that he spends 35% of his life arguing about atheism. But that’s not true at all… there’s observer bias going on here.)

Ya know what I mean. Theists often point around to their surroundings and say, “Look at this. Everything points to a GOD!” And the atheists point around to their surroundings and say, “Look at this, obviously there are no gods.”

No they don’t. Or at least, I don’t, and pretty much every other self-identified atheist who has responded to you in this or the other thread also doesn’t. Instead, we say “Look at this. Let’s see if we can come up with explanations for why all these things exist. (Then science happens.) Well, those are good explanations. I see no evidence for the existence of God in this, thus I assume he/it does not exist, and live my life based on that assumption, but am ready to be convinced otherwise when someone presents evidence to the contrary… same as ghosts, ESP, unicorns, and other supernatural phenomena”.

If you find a group of people all of whom claim to be able to look around at the world and use what they see to PROVE with absolute certainty that no God could possibly exist, well, I tend to think that those people would be overreaching, although I think their position is still more reasonable than that of lots of religious people. But very very few people hold that position.

[MaxTheVool]

@MyFootsZZZ

Just curious, do the Athiests here admit saying; “There is no God”, or hell, even saying; “There is no Flying Spaghetti Monster” is stating a beleif? That there’s no ‘leap’ in those claims?

Not talking about religion.

Who’s saying that? Or at least, who’s saying it as anything other than shorthand for a more nuanced “I see no evidence for that phenomenon, therefore my default logical position is to proceed as if it does not exist” type of position?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@MyFootsZZZ

Athiests don’t ask for money, they don’t hold a service. Most I know just try to argue their Non-beleifs if someone ‘charges at them’ from being called an athiest. Withought religion or God there would be no athiests.

I still think it’s a belief. I still think you’re saying “there’s no God” means that you’re making a bit of a leap, (a smart leap comparatively), but a little leap non-the less.

Atheism isn’t saying, “there’s no God,” it’s saying, “I have no been persuaded that there IS a God.” Atheism is not a leap because involves no movement off the dime. Atheism IS the dime, the starting block, the “Go” square, the default.

[Czarcasm]

@MyFootsZZZ

Just curious, do the Athiests here admit saying; “There is no God”, or hell, even saying; “There is no Flying Spaghetti Monster” is stating a beleif? That there’s no ‘leap’ in those claims?

Not talking about religion.

“There is no God” is shorthand for “Up to this point no one has come up with enough evidence to even consider the possibility of God existing.”

[MyFootsZZZ]

No one here… that I know of.

I’m glad you asked that, because that’s why I distinguish myself as an agnostic… If atheists aren’t flat-out saying that there IS NO God, then perhaps I’m an Atheist…

But, that confuses me, aren’t all Athiest’s then agnostics? I’ve looked up both, and I always had a hard time understanding the differences at times.

[MyFootsZZZ]

Sorry, was replying to Max… when he asked “Who’s saying that?”

But some clarity would be nice…

[kanicbird]

Rule #1 of Atheism

• ignore your God your creator.
  Rule #2 of Atheism
  -Impose conditions on your God your creator. “I won’t believe in my God my creator unless He shows Himself to me.”
  Rule #3 of Atheism
• Accuse your God your creator. "If there is a God why has He not shown Himself to me.
  Rule # 4 of Atheism
• Disrespect your God your creator, do not capitalize, nor show respect when referring to your God your Creator.

Admittedly these rules only work if there really is a creator God, which there is btw. So taking that there is a creator God as a starting premise, Atheists is nothing more then a stubborn rebellious child of God who is just choosing to ignore their parent.

God still Loves them and Jesus came to redeem them too.

[MaxTheVool]

@MyFootsZZZ

Sorry, was replying to Max… when he asked “Who’s saying that?”

But some clarity would be nice…

That’s a good question, and one that there is some confusion about, and no Official Answer.

I think everyone agrees that someone who says they have proven there is no God and never could be is a “hard atheist” (except that very few people fit that definition). And someone who says something like “boy howdy I sure don’t know… I mean, I guess I don’t really believe in God, but I guess I don’t really believe in NOT God, I mean, that seems arrogant” is an agnostic. And somewhere in between is something called “soft atheism”. Where the precise borders are is a bit hard to define, except that lots of people (including me) disagree strongly with the way Frank aspia is trying to frame things.

[MyFootsZZZ]

Thanks,
I always thought I was a “hard agnostic”.

I guess they blend together.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@MyFootsZZZ

No one here… that I know of.

I’m glad you asked that, because that’s why I distinguish myself as an agnostic… If atheists aren’t flat-out saying that there IS NO God, then perhaps I’m an Atheist…

But, that confuses me, aren’t all Athiest’s then agnostics? I’ve looked up both, and I always had a hard time understanding the differences at times.

Agnosticism is simply the position that the answer can’t be currently known by the available evidence.

Atheism is a lack of belief.

Agnosticism is a position on what is knowable, atheism is a position of belief (or lack thereof). They are not mutually exclusive. One can be an atheist (or even a theist) and still think the answer isn’t actually knowable.

The word agnosticism is so often used to designate weak atheism, though, that these distinctions are often lost in discussions.