Atheism is a religion [W:1586,2242]

[KokomoJojo]

Stupidest claim yet from someone trying to analyze atheists.

So one says " god does not exist " and is therefore a believer or religious person? Total and complete bull****.

Newburg is clearly a fool posing as an scholar or some other claim to being educated and has no research demonstrating what he claims to be demonstrated through research. What he has is only his own ideas.

Like it or not atheism is not a religon and that is simple fact. Just as NOT playing basketball is not a sport. Use of the negative results in the opposite and is much more than semantic.

It has nothing to do with "analyzing Atheists". How did you come up with that convoluted pile of woo.

All "ism's" are a religion. LOL

 

[Soupnazi630]

It has nothing to do with "analyzing Atheists". How did you come up with that convoluted pile of woo.

All "ism's" are a religion. LOL

Well yes that is what it is about and very clearly.

And no not all isms are religion the claim that they are is the real steaming pile of woo.

 

[KokomoJojo]

I do not have faith that the Sun will set. I thought that I made that clear. I used the word probably and the stated that one cant be sure that it will happen until it happens.

I also stated that it is my opinion that genocide is ****ed up. Take not of the word opinion. My opinion can be and is subjective. But genocide itself is frowned on because of a couple things. One being that we have seen it happen historically and deduced that the outcome sucked. Mainly because genocide must traverse against what we as Americans consider natural rights. Natural rights are what seem naturally right to humans. Sure some Americans assume that natural rights were given to humans by a magical god but that belief isnt relevant to me.


You asked me about something and I gave you a opinion. But I was fully aware of your canned tired point before I answered it. It isnt like I haven't seen this argument used before many times over. I cut to the chase and answered accordingly, but you were in the middle of a canned argument and despite being cut off before you even got started you ignored my answers and dogmatically went ahead anyways. That doesnt say much for your debating skills. What you needed to do was to admit that your canned argument went south or you could have just not responded. But instead you went on so here we are.

Your setup will still fail even if I had foolishly followed your lead.


You are attempting to claim that I have faith in science therefor I have a religion. But having faith that scientific principles will follow the laws of nature isnt at all the same as having faith in a god. Your huge mistake is that you are demonstrating that word faith has more than one meaning.

Lets inspect those definitions for the word Faith:

faith [feyth]
noun
1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability. [Having faith that the sun will set goes under this definition. We can then use the word confidence instead and say that we have confidence that the Sun will set.]


2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.

It doesnt matter how clear you made it, I cant imagine any reasonable person believing it. You are asking thinking people to believe you have never made plans to do any in a future date, which would require the sun to set and consequently rise and if it did not would extinguish all life on the planet in a matter of minutes. No one that I am aware are that short sighted to believe you have no calender.

The sun setting was an easy one, the genocide issue however that is the one where there is no place to hide because several moral determinations had to be made to get to that conclusion.

While quite large the core or root basis of religion is moral. So we now have an atheist expressing moral choices while simultaneously claiming there is no belief involved.

You cannot take a position or make any choice between two things (and definitely not moral things) without some attached set of beliefs, which has nothing to do with incorporating God into the criteria.

 

[RogueWarrior]

I'm glad that Reason.com supports atheists gaining tax exempt status.

I am a strong Christian...but if religions get tax-exempt status, so should atheist organizations. That is only fair.

You dont need to be a religious organization to gain tax exempt status.

Thanks, but you do understand what I mean.

I am an atheist and I don't support getting a tax exemption just for being an atheist organization. Nor do I support religious or theistic organizations getting tax exemptions.
Government (including the IRS) should not be messing around with religion/god(s) at all. By all means if said organizations want to receive an exemption as a non-profit charity, have at it.

No more of the automatic you-don't-have-to-show-us-your-books exemptions of any kind for anyone which is what government-approved-churches (why don't those 3 words raise the hackles of theists?) get now. Prove you deserve special status by proving you do actual good works.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Well yes that is what it is about and very clearly.

And no not all isms are religion the claim that they are is the real steaming pile of woo.

easy to say, why not win some followers and tell us which ones you think are not and why?

 

[Removable Mind]

I think that I'll start an Atheist Church, which will have only one sermon. It'll be about how ridiculous it is that religious folks want Atheism to be declared a religion.

And in some support to the religious. I do hope hope they'll pray for the ability to engage in logical, rationale thought about Atheism in a way that allows them to understand what it truly is, which is NOT a religion. That might be one of the greatest experiments to see if prayers do work.

Beside, I really need a tax deduction.

 

[RogueWarrior]

It has nothing to do with "analyzing Atheists". How did you come up with that convoluted pile of woo.

All "ism's" are a religion. LOL

That is just nonsense.
Theism is not a religion. Theism is an assertion regarding the existence of gods. Atheism is disbelief of that assertion. Neither is a religion. That is just silly talk.

 

[KokomoJojo]

I think that I'll start an Atheist Church, which will have only one sermon. It'll be about how ridiculous it is that religious folks want Atheism to be declared a religion.

And in some support to the religious. I do hope hope they'll pray for the ability to engage in logical, rationale thought about Atheism in a way that allows them to understand what it truly is, which is NOT a religion. That might be one of the greatest experiments to see if prayers do work.

Beside, I really need a tax deduction.

but one of your fellow atheists just made several moral determinations which are religious by that fact alone, the act of believing and relying on those beliefs to act (or not act) not withstanding.

 

[KokomoJojo]

That is just nonsense.
Theism is not a religion. Theism is an assertion regarding the existence of gods. Atheism is disbelief of that assertion. Neither is a religion. That is just silly talk.

If there is no action (or nonaction) attached I would agree, however take the genocide example once again the determination results in non action, ie dont do it.

We have already established that disbelief and belief to the contrary are the same.

 

[maquiscat]

Surveys are made for such purposes. Usually a significant majority would do.

So you'd want a survey to see how many people have seen this specific buck with the unusually high number of antler points? Given that this is obviously going to be limited to a certain area, we're talking a majority of what? A small village? If 20 people were to claimed to have seen this animal yet none saw it in the presence of someone else is that sufficient?

Present actual empirical evidence for Unicorn's existence. There is no actual empirical evidence of the supernatural neither.

Mind you I did note that the legend and reports of the supposed supernatural powers have grown beyond the reality to the myth that we have today. Just as you might agree that Jesus was real but the legends and reports of his divine nature has grown to the myth we have today.

The reason why they do not repeat is because they never existed. There should be actual empirical evidence to support something existence otherwise the statement of its existence should drop.

So if you were to meet an individual and spend the entire day with them and then you never seen them again and can't even find anyone who saw them with you that day, you would dismiss their existence? Would you do the same for your friend's claim of such a person? What about a stranger's?

 

[Removable Mind]

but one of your fellow atheists just made several moral determinations which are religious by that fact alone, the act of believing and relying on those beliefs to act (or not act) not withstanding.

Okay....and...so? Look, if you believe what you just posted, then my newly form Atheist congregation will be happy to add that to the list of things we thing you need to pray about for clarification about what atheism is and isn't.

 

[Manc Skipper]

but one of your fellow atheists just made several moral determinations which are religious by that fact alone, the act of believing and relying on those beliefs to act (or not act) not withstanding.

His moral determinations are uniquely his. You may interpret them as religious in nature, but that's you imposing your criteria on his opinions, not him. The fact of his atheism is incidental to his opinion, not the driver.

 

[The Mark]

If religion is merely a belief upon which you act, then taking antibiotics for an infection makes medical science a religion too.

By casting the net out so broadly with this definition, you make everything a person does religious.

Science is a religion.










:mrgreen:

Under that definition, at least.

 

[KokomoJojo]

His moral determinations are uniquely his. You may interpret them as religious in nature, but that's you imposing your criteria on his opinions, not him. The fact of his atheism is incidental to his opinion, not the driver.

thats true for any religion.

they are religious in nature since it fulfills the belief then will to action requirements which is the substantial definition for religion.

 

[TobyOne]

If proof of a god or gods were shown to atheists, there heads would explode in the same way that a believers head would explode if shown proof that there was no god.

Of course, there are different types of atheists. Most don' care about discussing religion, god, spirituality etc. Then there are the evangelical atheists who are emotionally invested in their beliefs and spend many hours on the internet talking about them.

 

[Soupnazi630]

easy to say, why not win some followers and tell us which ones you think are not and why?

Religion involves worshipping something which is based on faith. Ideas and philosophies are not always based on faith or worship and that is that.

Probably too nuanced for you to grasp

 

[Manc Skipper]

thats true for any religion.

they are religious in nature since it fulfills the belief then will to action requirements which is the substantial definition for religion.

What belief? Atheism is defined by lack of belief in gods.

 

[The Mark]

What belief? Atheism is defined by lack of belief in gods.

I would say that Atheism is defined as believe that no god or gods exist.

Lack of belief is more like agnosticism or something - undecided and not really believing in anything one way or another.

 

[shrubnose]

Well yes that is what it is about and very clearly.

And no not all isms are religion the claim that they are is the real steaming pile of woo.

Are you saying that you don't recognize flying Spaghetti Monsterism as a religion?

Its adherents will be mighty sorry to hear that. :roll:

 

[KokomoJojo]

Are you saying that you don't recognize flying Spaghetti Monsterism as a religion?

Its adherents will be mighty sorry to hear that. :roll:

Here is something you wont like to hear.

If belief in Spaghetti Monsterism infringes on no one you dang well better recognize it or you just infringed on their rights.

 

[KokomoJojo]

What belief? Atheism is defined by lack of belief in gods.

I would say that Atheism is defined as believe that no god or gods exist. <-agreed with this part

Lack of belief is more like agnosticism or something - undecided and not really believing in anything one way or another.

Think about this, lack of belief is, is taking no recognizable position. Imagine a void in the mind.

 

[The Mark]

Think about this, lack of belief is, is taking no recognizable position. Imagine a void in the mind.

Indeed.

Yet just as (to my knowledge) there is no way to prove the existence of supernatural entities, neither is there a way to DISprove it.

This, in my mind, means that you have to believe in the lack of any such beings.

 

[shrubnose]

Here is something you wont like to hear.

If belief in Spaghetti Monsterism infringes on no one you dang well better recognize it or you just infringed on their rights.

That's my point.

Anyone on this planet can call any wacky set of ideas a religion, with or without a Supreme Being.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Are you saying that you don't recognize flying Spaghetti Monsterism as a religion?

Its adherents will be mighty sorry to hear that. :roll:

Sure I do but I do not consider capitalsim, or humanism , or secularism to be religions. They are based on ideas not faith in an unprovable deity even if I disagree with some of the ideas.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

I am beginning to think that Christians do not read dictionaries anymore.