As others have said, the question makes no sense without defining the gods you are talking about.
As I’ve never had anyone define a god with the necessary specificity then I can’t answer with anything other than an honest “I don’t know”
Atheism is a lack of belief on a point of fact, the existence of God, so whether I want a god or don’t want a god is totally irrelevant. I’d love for gold to be buried in my backyard, but I have no belief that there is.
However, given the state of the world and the universe if there is a god he is a gigantic putz. Who just let a very nice set of islands get wiped out.
We’ve got a big putz in power already, we don’t need an even bigger one.
I don’t think it’s an unfair question. I don’t own a dog, but it’s a fair question to ask if I’d like if I owned a dog. Answers would vary.
ETA: And yes, it would probably matter what kind of dog it was.
Not voting, because it makes a huge difference what kind of god is meant.
Would I prefer there to be a god who tortures people forever for guessing wrong what name to call that god by or what sexual positions are permitted? Most definitely no.
Would I prefer there to be a god who could have made people so nobody wants to torture anybody but thought it was funny to make a percentage of people who think that it’s fun*? Most definitely no.
Would I prefer there to be a god who isn’t omniscient and just hasn’t noticed the mess over here yet, but who might eventually show up and straighten it out? Maybe, depending on what they thought “straightening it out” ought to involve.
*I know that the standard argument isn’t that god did that because god thinks it’s funny, but that god did that in order to allow free will. I just don’t see why allowing free will requires making people who enjoy torture. Wouldn’t making people who enjoyed the “wrong” kind of food have been enough? Or, for that matter, making people – as we are – so that our short-term desires for perfectly reasonable things are likely to cause long term damage to somebody else.
“Therefore, make peace with your god,
Whatever you perceive him to be - hairy thunderer, or cosmic muffin.”
-Deteriorata
Personally I wouldn’t mind it if one of the trickster gods(Loki, Coyote) were around to put purpose to the madness of this world.
Absolutely not… for all of the above reasons.
If it is anything like the insane jealous god of the bible, I want nothing to do with it. But if it isn’t, then I cannot imagine what “god” means. No, I want nothing to do with it.
The world isn’t consistent with there being a benevolent god, so no.
There could be a benevolent god; it just can’t also be aware of bad things and have power over them.
Once, a couple dozen years ago, I declared that the styrofoam cup sitting on my desk was a god. An omniscient, omnibenevolent god - though one that was quite limited in potency (in fact it only had the powers of a typical styrofoam cup). The cup was sad all the time about the state of the world, of course.
I can’t think of any argument by which a person could demonstrate that that cup wasn’t in fact a god.
(Also I believe that cup really existed, which technically means I’m not an atheist. I’m atheistic to the nonsense most theists actually believe, though, for what it’s worth.)
As mentioned in the OP, the thread states that the god could be up to your own description (as long as you don’t take it too far, like “god who gives me the winning lottery numbers,”) etc. I see a lot of Dopers here commenting that they don’t want a god who allows evil to happen, but that’s the point - you can have a god who doesn’t allow evil to happen.
The dodgy part is reconciling that with reality, of course. Unless you take the question as letting you not only will the god into existence but also remake the entire world in the same fell swoop.
Any deity that would create Quantum Mechanics has got to be a trickster.
I am an agnostic (I lack the courage to commit to atheism), but:
I would prefer that there be an afterlife. (Or, better yet, immortality in this life.)
I would prefer that there be a deity that would predictably, reliably cure disease and heal injuries when we perform the proper ritual.
I’d prefer to keep my universe godless; thanks.
I would be OK with the universe having a help desk/complaint office, if matters are usually resolved in a timely manner according to my personal ethics, without undue expense or inconvenience.
If we can’t have that, then I’ll take the universe as it is, thanks.
First thing, I love to be right, and so prefer that there are no gods. Second, hell no, just like I don’t want aliens to be visiting the earth. Gods/Aliens, assumed they are magnitudes more potent than us puny humans, can’t be so good for us. Third, I don’t wanna live forever (a nod to Lemmy).
This strikes me as a weird question. Like “If you are a Christian, would you prefer that Jesus had a twin brother?”
I voted that I would prefer that there be a god, because my preferring that there not be a god means I’m up to something shady.
It’s not up to me to wish for a god or not. God either is or ain’t. And I truly don’t know which it is or isn’t. So I claim to be a deist, because as Mike Royko said, “You never know what’ll give you the edge.”
No matter how perfect heaven were to be, an infinite period of consciousness would have to eventually become torture.
I like the idea of an afterlife. But I have no need for a God.
Okay, so with this I went ahead and settled on “no.”
Because I want god to conform to observable reality, subject to rational inquiry, and just in general not be playing games with us. And it’s pretty clear from the world we live in that no such god exists, which means that within this world, this framework of reality I am forced to live in, I must therefore say I prefer no god exists.
Now, if you are saying you really meant to ask “atheists: would you prefer to live in a better world, one compatible with a god that can be demonstrated to exist and to not be a total dick?” Then I would say you should just apply a razor to that question and ask “atheists: would you prefer to live in a better world?”
Because I can’t imagine a scenario in which god is a necessary entity to make the world better. Which I guess is kind of in line with secular humanism (a common traveling companion of atheists in the western world).