The absence of religion can never be correctly construed as a religion.
It's like saying that silence is a kind of sound.
Oh wait all that you have is faith though. Oops guess you cant prove the bible is anything more than just a collection of myths. The sad part was that i left you an out but you dont know too much about the word folklore so you missed it. oh well good day.
Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice....shame on me.
(avatar by Thomas Nast)
When you have Unitarian humanistic socialist churches just about any culture with sufficient believers could be considered a religion. There has to be something to believe in however; thus boobs and juice. (Very tangible I might add, an excellent choice)
"I can't abide women who poke their noses into other people's business."
“Men are strange. I think it has something to do with the hair on their chins.”
"Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists."
You sound like you are more defining agnostics...people that just dont know. Atheists are more like "hey...religious people...**** you!!! Yeah!!!"
Personally...I dont believe in atheists.
You're incorrect. Agnosticism is a completely different subject. Atheism and agnosticism are not part of a continuum.
Agnosticism is addressing the question of what kind of knowledge is possible. Atheism is not. It is only addressing what knowledge we have. For the overwhelming majority of atheist, that conclusion is that there is presently no reason to believe in a deity -- the positive claims made by theists. It is not that we can make a positive claim that there are no deities for certain.