Wow, Lib! Been visiting the Secular Web?
:::faints:::
Don’t get me wrong, one of my favorite sites on the 'net (including the forum) when I’m in the mood for some good old fashioned religious fisty-cuffs – though over the years I’ve almost no interest left on the ‘debate’ side of it, simply too sterile and futile. How does one go about debating “a belief without evidence” anyway? Just surprised you’d go there. Good on you anyway.
I should hope so since you are one of the people that has handed my ass to me when I have made that mistake 
Having said what I said, I do also think that the liberal minded Christian Dopers [LMCD] tend to underestimate the sheer number of Christians who hold a strong conservative view on the bible. Maybe the LMCDs are just really optimistic, and I wish they were right, but the current flurry over the so-called “debate” over Creation v. Evolution leads me to think they are really Humanists at heart
I’m an n - strong n.
That’s because Humanists are really Liberal Christians at heart. 
I thought my only beef was with those whose every mention of religion comes off as smug and condescending, heavily implying a certainty that they are right and you are wrong - something I hate about a lot of fundie theists too - but this thread has proven me wrong. Now I also am annoyed by the use of the term Godist. It offends me by not being a real word. A grating non-word that sounds too much like goddess. I wish the nonbelieverists would just stick with the more than serviceable theist.
This doesn’t address the false assumptions about atheists I’ve often seen (but not much around here.) The first is that atheists must believe there is no god, not simply lack god belief as the basic requirement. The second, more serious, is the charge that an atheist must claim to know there is no god. (Thus the call to prove that there is no god, an absurd request.)
I think the contention that a lack of god belief is enough is to increase the distance between the true requirement of atheism and the strawman requirement of knowledge.
And to get back to the OP, my beef with atheism is that it doesn’t allow me the pleasure of anticipating that some assholes will rot in hell.
Voyager (someone with a big smile on his face considering that he hasn’t had sex in 20 years according to some people. )
This is an often made distinction, but as a practical matter, I don’t think it’s useful. The difference between a hard and a soft atheist is not like the difference between a Christian and a Muslim, or even between a Mennonite and an Amishperson.
I think that this is because the statement “I believe X” as made by a non-believer is quantitatively different than as made by a believer. It doesn’t carry with it the same degree of psychological commitment and identity.
After all, I think that any non believer would say that given repeatable, observable, testable evidence of the supernatural, he or she would be willing to reconsider. Whereas, I think that most non-believers would claim that belief in the absence of or in contradiction of evidence is critical to their beliefs.
Thus, as a practical matter “I do not believe X” and “I believe not X” in terms of non-belief aren’t very different at all.
Rather pale by comparison, I suppose, is the Schadenfreude derived from picturing said asshole lying on his deathbed, clutching his Bible and tearfully proclaiming his readiness to be welcomed into the arms of the Lord, only to have his consciousness blink back into eternal non-existence at the moment of death.
Sadly, assuming that is what happens (as I personally tend to believe), he’ll never even realize he’d been wrong.
You don’t come around here, very often, do you?
(Judging by the number of threads, tangents, and hijacks addressing the issue, I would guess the distinction is the single most important aspect of atheism.)
Yeah, I know, which is what prompted me to finally make this point. I don’t see the value in differentiating between a hard atheist and a soft atheist.
Speaking personally, I agree with both the statements “I believe there is no god” and “I do not believe there is a god.”
If god appeared in front of me, I would reconsider my “beliefs,” but I would have no regrets regarding my previous beliefs. And I think this would be true of any “hard” or “soft” atheist.
I believe X because that is what seems to me the most logical conclusion given the evidence and I think this underlies both hard and soft atheism.
How subtle does the difference have to be to make a difference?
Do you suppose there is any difference between how hard or soft atheists deal with theists?
It didn’t for me. In fact it made no difference at all.
Belief in many gods involves a set of responsibilities demanded of you by that god - whether keeping Kosher or spreading the gospel or cutting the hearts out of your enemies. Belief in no god entails nothing additional at all.
Discussing the subtle differences is fun, but I agree it is functionally meaningless.
If the implication is that a “hard atheist” is more likely to be an obnoxious provocateur, like … hm … Christopher Hitchens, then, no, I do not accept that you can make any legitimate generalization on that point.
You can “praise” (marvel at? Appreciate?) the pleasing aspects of nature (as opposed to exhibiting gratitude…to me that implies a gift and I think nature just is). Works for me, anyway.
Can’t say that I do, actually. I venerate in general. I praise non-directionally.
I’m one big fucker of an n for tomndebb’s list.
It occurred to me after I wrote this that in the same circumstances, I will never realize I’ve been right, either. Another dissatisfying thing about atheism (or at least, the belief that consciousness ends with death): even if you’re right, there’s no Nelson Muntz moment.
Death should really have an epilogue, or at least some expository ending titles.
What about getting your own holiday? Call it Notjustanotherday or hopefully something more fanciful. Christians have Easter and Christmas while Jews have Passover and so on. Before someone says April Fools Day should be the Atheists’ holiday, what I mean is an official holiday with time off from work. That would be fair.
You are probably correct. I can understand anyone, agnostic, atheist or even deist, saying enough is enough when it comes to certain theistic beliefs. It’s probably a matter of personal experience and how pissed off you are that day.