# The Religion of Atheism



## Alter2Ego

*ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*

Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:

*1.* Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian." 

In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.

"See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)


*2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."


*3.* Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Courtthe highest court in the land.


----------



## AmyNation

Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.


----------



## martybegan

AmyNation said:


> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.



When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation. 

It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.


----------



## uscitizen

I have no hositlity towards any religion unless they have hostility towards me.

If they try and force their religion on me thru government or other avenues I will fight back.

I consider real christians to be fine folk and am proud to call several of them my friends.
I however hold only contempt for those who use religion for their own purposes and to justify their agendas.

I do not believe in any god or afterlife, not do I belong to any association that holds similar beliefs.


----------



## uscitizen

martybegan said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
Click to expand...


One would have to belong to or associate with a group who hold similiar beliefs of non belief to make it a religion.


----------



## martybegan

uscitizen said:


> I have no hositlity towards any religion unless they have hostility towards me.
> 
> If they try and force their religion on me thru government or other avenues I will fight back.
> 
> I consider real christians to be fine folk and am proud to call several of them my friends.
> I however hold only contempt for those who use religion for their own purposes and to justify their agendas.
> 
> I do not believe in any god or afterlife, not do I belong to any association that holds similar beliefs.



The problem comes when someone tries to determine what exactly hostility means. 

Mount Soledad cross controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder what your position on this would be?


----------



## martybegan

uscitizen said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One would have to belong to or associate with a group who hold similiar beliefs of non belief to make it a religion.
Click to expand...


Not really. a monastic hermit does not associate with anyone (the hermit thing), and while following the basic tenents of a religon may have their own view of exact beliefs. Is this person religous?


----------



## Alter2Ego

AmyNation said:


> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.


*ALTER2EGO -to- AMY NATION:*
Is that so?  Sorry, but that's not what the courts said.  

Below is evidence that exposes atheists as hypocrites for insisting they are not religious. This evidence involves the 2005 Wisconsin Federal Court ruling in the case of *Kaufman v. McCaughtry*, in which a judge recognized Atheism as a religion.  Keep your eyes on the words in red.


*EVIDENCE FOR THE HYPOCRISY OF ATHEISTS:*


> *Court Rules Atheism A Religion*
> Decides 1st Amendment protects prison inmate's right to start study group
> 
> Published: 08/20/2005 at 1:00 AM
> 
> A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmates rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.
> 
> "Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being," the 7th Circuit Court Of Appeals said."
> 
> The court decided the inmates First Amendment rights were violated because the prison refused to allow him to create a study group for atheists.
> 
> Brian Fahling, senior trial attorney for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy, called the courts ruling "a sort of Alice in Wonderland jurisprudence."
> 
> "Up is down, and atheism, the antithesis of religion, is religion," said Fahling.
> 
> The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being. In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described "secular humanism" as a religion."


Court rules atheism a religion


----------



## hipeter924

Of course Atheism or Agnosticism can be ruled as a religion, it is a religious viewpoint; in official statistics in multiple countries Atheism and Agnosticism is counted as a religion. But in terms of organization, it is not a religion; there are no tenets, rules or anything like that telling Atheists how to think or run their lives. Nor do all Agnostics or Atheists do the same things, or view other religions the same way.*

*In fact most Atheists are closet Atheists i.e. they live their lives without telling others that they hold no faith; and of those that admit to their Atheism a far smaller number attend Atheist conventions or engage in funding or supporting secular organizations.


----------



## uscitizen

"Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being," the 7th Circuit Court Of Appeals said."

Keyword here is "group".

As I said not believeing does not mean you are part of a religion, but you can form a religion by having a group.


----------



## pinqy

Alter2Ego said:


> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place.


 That is not a common belief among atheists.  Some believe it, sure, but most of realize that people can always find some reason to be assholes.  Case in point:



> For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."


Stalin was not acting under the name or color of "Atheism."  His philosophy was Communism.  Atheism had nothing to do with his acts, Communism did and that includes displacing Religion in favor of Communism.  Pol Pot, same thing.

And Hitler killed way more than 6 million.  6 million Jews, yes, but the Holocaust was not limited to Jews.  And his murder of the Jews wasn't Hitler acting on behalf of any religion, or even against Judaism as a religion, but against Jews as an ethnic group.



> In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths.


Almost right.  The problem is people who insist on using force/coercion to stifle other viewpoints and insist that only their views can possibly be correct and want to eliminate all others.  Traditionally, religion has been the viewpoint, though Communisim is also used.




> Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."


 Nope.  I'm an atheist, definitely not a secular humanist.




> Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Court&#8212;the highest court in the land.


 It is a religious position, equally guaranteed freedom under the 1st ammendment.  While it may be convenient in a legal respect to classify it as a religion, that's all it is...a convenience rather than strictly true.  Remember, according to the Supreme Court, the tomato is a vegetable, though any botanist will tell you it's a fruit.  But legally speaking, for tariffs and duties, it's a vegetable.


----------



## uscitizen

I could start a religion about blue eyed people and only blue eyed people could belong to my religion.

So by somes logic if you have blue eyes you belong to my religion.

think a bit folks.


----------



## jillian

martybegan said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
Click to expand...


most people aren't hostile to religion. they're hostile when people try to impose religion on them


----------



## uscitizen

jillian said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> most people aren't hostile to religion. they're hostile when people try to impose religion on them
Click to expand...


Actually the people that are most hostile to a religion are those who belong to a different religion.
Not those who do not believe in a religion.


----------



## jillian

uscitizen said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> most people aren't hostile to religion. they're hostile when people try to impose religion on them
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually the people that are most hostile to a religion are those who belong to a different religion.
> Not those who do not believe in a religion.
Click to expand...


true. i'm pretty sure it wasn't atheists protesting against a mosque being built in staten island.


----------



## Douger

Both sides are filled with idiots. Neither has any proof.


----------



## uscitizen

Douger said:


> Both sides are filled with idiots. Neither has any proof.



do I have to provide proof that the omnipetent great spaghetti monster lives?


----------



## rightwinger

Atheism is not a religion

It merely looks at the bizarre opinions of existing religions and says.......None of that makes sense


----------



## dblack

I think what I find intriguing about this thread is why it's so important, for some, to classify atheism as a religion. What's the motivation?


----------



## uscitizen

dblack said:


> I think what I find intriguing about this thread is why it's so important, for some, to classify atheism as a religion. What's the motivation?



Good question?
Pack mentality?  I belong to a group so everyone has to?  Which could be sourced from binary absolutist thinking either this or that?
Inability to comprehend someone acting as an individual and not part of a group?


----------



## courseofhistory

uscitizen said:


> I have no hositlity towards any religion unless they have hostility towards me.
> 
> If they try and force their religion on me thru government or other avenues I will fight back.
> 
> I consider real christians to be fine folk and am proud to call several of them my friends.
> I however hold only contempt for those who use religion for their own purposes and to justify their agendas.
> 
> I do not believe in any god or afterlife, not do I belong to any association that holds similar beliefs.



I'm agnostic and I don't like any organized religion or non-religion.  I don't care for what some athiests are doing to remove religious symbols, etc. from public view.  I was raised in the Christian faith so I have some connection to it.  I believe that Jesus was a mortal man and believe in many of his teachings.  The rest of religion (any religion) is man made to control the masses and for a certain few to have power.  Today religions on the average are more tolerant and civilized (with some obvious exceptions) but I do not like the stance of the Catholic church trying to say that Obama's mandate for women's birth control and abortion coverage is an assault against religious freedom.  Religious people are still free to practice or not practice birth control or have abortions.  They shouldn't impose what they believe on others who don't believe the way they do.  That's where I draw the line.


----------



## dblack

uscitizen said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think what I find intriguing about this thread is why it's so important, for some, to classify atheism as a religion. What's the motivation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good question?
> Pack mentality?  I belong to a group so everyone has to?  Which could be sourced from binary absolutist thinking either this or that?
> Inability to comprehend someone acting as an individual and not part of a group?
Click to expand...


I do think there is an agenda behind it, to a degree. It's definitely part of the ID movement. They're hoping to prevent darwinism from being taught by classifying it as atheist "dogma" and, therefore (in the view they're promoting) a religious teaching.

I know devout religious people who are deeply offended by the effort to equate atheism with their religious beliefs. Religious beliefs are characterized by their transcendent nature, which is not at all present in the mundane doubts of the atheist.


----------



## Katzndogz

Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all

It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.

Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK

Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.


----------



## dblack

dblack said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dblack said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think what I find intriguing about this thread is why it's so important, for some, to classify atheism as a religion. What's the motivation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good question?
> Pack mentality?  I belong to a group so everyone has to?  Which could be sourced from binary absolutist thinking either this or that?
> Inability to comprehend someone acting as an individual and not part of a group?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do think there is an agenda behind it, to a degree. It's definitely part of the ID movement. They're hoping to prevent darwinism from being taught by classifying it as atheist "dogma" and, therefore (in the view they're promoting) a religious teaching.
> 
> I know devout religious people who are deeply offended by the effort to equate atheism with their religious beliefs. Religious beliefs are characterized by their transcendent nature, which is not at all present in the mundane doubts of the atheist.
Click to expand...


Further, and more broadly, I think it's part of an effort to push religion into government in general. By classifying everything non-religious as "just another kind of" religious they can nullify the entire separation of church and state issue.


----------



## uscitizen

Katzndogz said:


> Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all
> 
> It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.
> 
> Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK
> 
> Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.



those people are nutz.
Or perhaps afraid to stand for their views on their won?

Pretty crazy to have a place of worship to praise non belief?

An atheist chaplin?
The link in the middle is an author building a temple to attract atheist "worshippers"?

loons


----------



## rightwinger

Katzndogz said:


> Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all
> 
> It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.
> 
> Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK
> 
> Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.



Chaplains in the service do more than just hold religious services. They provide valuable counseling to soldiers, are advocates with command and provide a ready ear to talk to

You shouldn't have to believe in god to recieve help


----------



## Katzndogz

It is actually laying the foundation for a state religion.  The state religion of atheism.  People who don't follow the state religion cannot hold political office or own businesses.   The state religion must be taught in school.   All competing religions have to be scrubbed from the public eye.  There is to be only the state religion.


----------



## uscitizen

rightwinger said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all
> 
> It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.
> 
> Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK
> 
> Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chaplains in the service do more than just hold religious services. They provide valuable counseling to soldiers, are advocates with command and provide a ready ear to talk to
> 
> You shouldn't have to believe in god to recieve help
Click to expand...


Good point, a councilor would be a better term.


----------



## Katzndogz

rightwinger said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all
> 
> It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.
> 
> Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK
> 
> Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chaplains in the service do more than just hold religious services. They provide valuable counseling to soldiers, are advocates with command and provide a ready ear to talk to
> 
> You shouldn't have to believe in god to recieve help
Click to expand...


The military does not provide psychological counseling for just that purpose?    Sorry, "counseling" is a failed premise.


----------



## uscitizen

Katzndogz said:


> It is actually laying the foundation for a state religion.  The state religion of atheism.  People who don't follow the state religion cannot hold political office or own businesses.   The state religion must be taught in school.   All competing religions have to be scrubbed from the public eye.  There is to be only the state religion.



Jesus taught us not to let fear distort reality.  Have faith in the lord your god.


----------



## martybegan

rightwinger said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all
> 
> It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.
> 
> Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK
> 
> Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chaplains in the service do more than just hold religious services. They provide valuable counseling to soldiers, are advocates with command and provide a ready ear to talk to
> 
> You shouldn't have to believe in god to recieve help
Click to expand...


The military has plenty of pyschologists and pychiatrists for those who want help from a non relgious source, although to be honest, I would love to see what the hell an atheist chapain looks like.


----------



## martybegan

rightwinger said:


> Atheism is not a religion
> 
> It merely looks at the bizarre opinions of existing religions and says.......None of that makes sense



That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground. 

Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.


----------



## Katzndogz

uscitizen said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is actually laying the foundation for a state religion.  The state religion of atheism.  People who don't follow the state religion cannot hold political office or own businesses.   The state religion must be taught in school.   All competing religions have to be scrubbed from the public eye.  There is to be only the state religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus taught us not to let fear distort reality.  Have faith in the lord your god.
Click to expand...


Recognizing reality will help you far more than distorting it.

The whole Chick Fil A controversy was about rejection of state religion and following Christianity.  The Mayors of Boston, Chicago and San Francisco intended to punish the company for not following the state religion.   One of the attacks on Mitt Romney is that he does not follow the state religion.  obama does and he receives a great deal of support from his religious followers.


----------



## dblack

Katzndogz said:


> It is actually laying the foundation for a state religion.  The state religion of atheism.  People who don't follow the state religion cannot hold political office or own businesses.   The state religion must be taught in school.   All competing religions have to be scrubbed from the public eye.  There is to be only the state religion.



Case in point. By defining the non-religious as religious - by pretending that omitting religion is, in itself a religion - they can render separation of church and state null and void. Fortunately, most sane people (religious and non-religious) see this as a line of bullshit. It hasn't gained much traction politically.


----------



## pinqy

Katzndogz said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all
> 
> It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.
> 
> Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK
> 
> Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chaplains in the service do more than just hold religious services. They provide valuable counseling to soldiers, are advocates with command and provide a ready ear to talk to
> 
> You shouldn't have to believe in god to recieve help
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The military does not provide psychological counseling for just that purpose?    Sorry, "counseling" is a failed premise.
Click to expand...


Military psychologists do not have doctor-patient confidentiality and it's all part of your official military record.  Chaplains do have (some) confidentiality and couselling with them is not official.


----------



## uscitizen

martybegan said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is not a religion
> 
> It merely looks at the bizarre opinions of existing religions and says.......None of that makes sense
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground.
> 
> Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.
Click to expand...


Well yes you would see the more agressive atheists in the news.
Duhhh!


----------



## uscitizen

Katzndogz said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is actually laying the foundation for a state religion.  The state religion of atheism.  People who don't follow the state religion cannot hold political office or own businesses.   The state religion must be taught in school.   All competing religions have to be scrubbed from the public eye.  There is to be only the state religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus taught us not to let fear distort reality.  Have faith in the lord your god.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Recognizing reality will help you far more than distorting it.
> 
> The whole Chick Fil A controversy was about rejection of state religion and following Christianity.  The Mayors of Boston, Chicago and San Francisco intended to punish the company for not following the state religion.   One of the attacks on Mitt Romney is that he does not follow the state religion.  obama does and he receives a great deal of support from his religious followers.
Click to expand...


Your reality is distorted.  Chick filet rejecting state religion and following christianity?
Pretty wacko stuff there.


----------



## nitroz

Alter2Ego said:


> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:
> 
> *1.* Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."
> 
> In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.
> 
> "See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3.* Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Courtthe highest court in the land.



People like you are the reason why many atheists have little to no regard towards the religious right. Atheism is NOT a religion. Atheism is someone who does NOT believe in any religion, or in any faith and atheists have their own, different ideals. To blame the rest for a few bad apples that aren't even affiliated is quite the act of stupidity.


You went full retard. You NEVER go full retard!


----------



## edthecynic

Alter2Ego said:


> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in having ANY sort of belief system. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3. Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Court&#8212;the highest court in the land.*


I pray to God that that ruling is true!  Do you have a link?
Then we Atheists can get the same special tax privileges believers get!!!


----------



## uscitizen

edthecynic said:


> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3. Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Court&#8212;the highest court in the land.*
> 
> 
> 
> I pray to God that that ruling is true!  Do you have a link?
> Then we Atheists can get the same special tax privileges believers get!!!
Click to expand...


by number 2 there Republicanism is a religion.  The belief that lowering taxes always creates jobs, etc.
Palintology is also a religion.
So is NASCARism, Footballism, Facebookism one of the worlds largest.

So nudism is also a religion?


----------



## Alter2Ego

edthecynic said:


> I pray to God that that ruling is true!  Do you have a link?
> Then we Atheists can get the same special tax privileges believers get!!!


*ALTER2EGO -to- ED THE CYNIC:*
Which God are you going to pray to?  By definition an atheist does not believe in any gods.

While we're on the topic of tax privileges, secular humanists aka atheists have used their "religion" status to get tax exemptions that are given to orthodox religions when it suits them to refer to themselves as a religion. Then when it suits their purposes, they claim they are not a religion so they can teach evolution in schools. This point is brought out by the following source quoted below. 



> *IS "SECULAR HUMANISM" A "RELIGION"?
> *
> Even the Supreme Court of the United States spoke in 1961 of Secular Humanism as a religion. It was a struggle to get atheism accepted as a religion, but it happened. From 1962-1980 this was not a controversial issue.
> 
> In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that Secular Humanism was a religion. Nevertheless, many Humanists deny the significance of the Court's assertion. In order to buttress the claim that the identification of Secular Humanism as a religion in a footnote in the Torcaso case is more than mere "dicta," here is a memorandum prepared "[a]t the request of the staff of the Committee on Education and Labor by Congressman John B. Conlan....
> 
> 
> *SECULAR HUMANISM IS A RELIGION
> "FOR FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE PURPOSES."*
> The Court has undeniably defined Secular Humanism as a religion "for free exercise purposes." When Secular Humanists want the benefits of a religion, they get them.
> 
> 
> *TAX EXEMPTION.* Secular Humanism has been granted tax-exempt status as a religion. The Torcaso quote cited the cases.
> 
> 
> *CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION.* Even though Congress originally granted conscientious objector status only to those who objected to war for religious reasons (i.e., because of a belief in God), the Supreme Court turned around and said that Humanists who don't believe in God are "religious" for C.O. purposes. U.S. v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 183, 85 S.Ct. 850, 13 L.Ed.2d 733, 746 (Holding that belief in a "Supreme Being" is not a necessary component of "religion," quoting a Secular Humanist source, "Thus the 'God' that we love . . . is . . . humanity.")
> 
> So Secular Humanism is emphatically and undeniably a religion -- "for free exercise purposes."
> 
> Any claim that "the clear weight of the caselaw" is against the proposition that Secular Humanism is a religion is a misleading claim. Secular Humanism is a religion ("for free exercise clause purposes").
> 
> 
> *SECULAR HUMANISM IS NOT A RELIGION
> "FOR ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE PURPOSES."*
> 
> But when Christians attempt to get the religion of Secular Humanism out of the government schools, based on the same emotional frame of mind which atheists had when they went to court against God in schools, then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.
> 
> But it explains why so many are confused about whether Secular Humanism is a religion.
> 
> Here is the rule: When Secular Humanists want the benefits of religion, Secular Humanism is a religion. When Secular Humanists are challenged for propagating their religion in public schools, it is not a religion. If that sounds insane, it is; but all insane people are still rational. This insanity is cloaked in the rational-sounding rhetoric of constitutional law. Remember:
> 
> *Secular Humanism is a religion "FOR FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE PURPOSES," and it is not a religion "FOR ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE PURPOSES."*
> 
> Thus a teacher who wants to tell his students about his religious beliefs is free to do so if his religion is the religion of Secular Humanism, but may not tell his students about his religious beliefs if his religion is Christianity. Christians are not even allowed to discuss Christianity with students during lunch break, while Secular Humanists are allowed to teach the tenets of the religion of Secular Humanism from the blackboard during class.


Secular Humanism is a Religion

*As you can see, the above is a classic example of hypocrisy.*


----------



## uscitizen

Hmm I have never even visited an atheist site on the net nor gone to any meeting, etc.


----------



## dblack

Alter2Ego said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I pray to God that that ruling is true!  Do you have a link?
> Then we Atheists can get the same special tax privileges believers get!!!
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- ED THE CYNIC:*
> Which God are you going to pray to?  By definition an atheist does not believe in any gods.
Click to expand...


*i·ro·ny/&#712;&#299;r&#601;n&#275;/*
Noun: The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.



> While we're on the topic of tax privileges, secular humanists aka atheists ...



While secular humanists might be atheists, the vast majority of atheists are not secular humanists. So, secular humanists are "aka" atheist as much as they are "aka" humans. You're not saying much here.



> Then when it suits their purposes, they claim they are not a religion so they can teach evolution in schools.



Again, the vast majority of the people teaching evolution in our schools aren't secular humanists, they're just ordinary humans. Most of them are even religious themselves. They're just not douchebags.


----------



## rightwinger

martybegan said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is not a religion
> 
> It merely looks at the bizarre opinions of existing religions and says.......None of that makes sense
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground.
> 
> Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.
Click to expand...


Most Atheists just shrug off religion and go about their lives


----------



## pinqy

Alter2Ego said:


> , then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.


 Please give us the links to the courts that ruled that.  Thanks.



> Secular Humanists are allowed to teach the tenets of the religion of Secular Humanism from the blackboard during class.


  I am not aware of this happening, do you have links.  Here's what I suspect though, any such claim will be teachers teaching something that is also to be found in Secular Humanist teachings even if the teach is not a secular humanist and the teaching wasn't part of some over secular humanist program.  But that's like claiming that if a teacher says that murder and stealing and lying are wrong and you should respect your parents that they're teaching religion...which is ridiculous.



> As you can see, the above is a classic example of hypocrisy.


 Actually I've always found the hypocrisy to be those who say there is no separation of church and state and that teachers should be free to lead prayer.....except when it's a prayer or religion they disagree with.


----------



## amrchaos

If Atheism is a religion, then, please,

Outline this belief system that all atheist adhere to.

There is a difference between a belief and a belief system.  But the theist try so hard to ignore that fact.


----------



## amrchaos

martybegan said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would have to belong to or associate with a group who hold similiar beliefs of non belief to make it a religion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not really. a monastic hermit does not associate with anyone (the hermit thing), and while following the basic tenents of a religon may have their own view of exact beliefs. Is this person religous?
Click to expand...


More like a heretic.  Remember why Jesus was cruxified.


----------



## Katzndogz

Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion.  A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.   Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons.  It is a belief usually held by atheists.  

Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State.  Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state.  Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State.  If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.   

The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.  

Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common.  That's worship.  It's a matter of who is worshipped.   It's how Kings become Gods in the first place.  When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God?  God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.


----------



## dblack

Katzndogz said:


> Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion.  A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.   Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons.  It is a belief usually held by atheists.
> 
> Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State.  Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state.  Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State.  If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.
> 
> The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.
> 
> Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common.  That's worship.  It's a matter of who is worshipped.   It's how Kings become Gods in the first place.  When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God?  God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.



W
T
F
????


----------



## rightwinger

Katzndogz said:


> Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion.  A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.   Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons.  It is a belief usually held by atheists.
> 
> Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State.  Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state.  Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State.  If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.
> 
> The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.
> 
> Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common.  That's worship.  It's a matter of who is worshipped.   It's how Kings become Gods in the first place.  When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God?  God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.



Completely batshit crazy

Atheists just hear what religions offer as explainations and say.....I don't believe that

Religion is not replaced with anything. It is just placed in the same box with Horoscopes, Voodoo, elves, fairies, fortune telling and Santa Clause


----------



## Alter2Ego

amrchaos said:


> If Atheism is a religion, then, please,
> 
> Outline this belief system that all atheist adhere to.
> 
> There is a difference between a belief and a belief system.  But the theist try so hard to ignore that fact.


*ALTER2EGO -to- AMRCHAOS:*

The atheist belief system is secular humanism.  I elaborated on that at Page 3, Post #41.


----------



## uscitizen

Katzndogz said:


> Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion.  A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.   Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons.  It is a belief usually held by atheists.
> 
> Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State.  Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state.  Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State.  If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.
> 
> The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.
> 
> Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common.  That's worship.  It's a matter of who is worshipped.   It's how Kings become Gods in the first place.  When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God?  God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.



So you are saying that our two party political system is religions?


----------



## Alter2Ego

pinqy said:


> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> , then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.
> 
> 
> 
> Please give us the links to the courts that ruled that.  Thanks.
Click to expand...

*ALTER2EGO -to- PINGY:*
I will do better than that.  I will provide a partial quotation in addition to the weblink to one of the cases.

The Scopes Monkey Trial was in 1925. That case opened the way for Atheism to be classified as a religion. It was not until 1961 that the U.S. Supreme Courtthe most important court in the landcemented atheism as a religion in the case of Torcaso v. Watkins. In its ruling, the 1961 court mentioned secular humanism, which is the religious ideology of atheism. Specifically, the 1961 Supreme Court said the following, and keep your eyes on the words that I bolded in the entire document. Pay particular note to what I bolded in red. 



> U.S. Supreme Court
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)
> 367 U.S. 488
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, CLERK.
> APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
> No. 373.
> Argued April 24, 1961.
> Decided June 19, 1961.​
> Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public; but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement *violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments*, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission; but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing without need for implementing legislation and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally *invades his freedom of belief and religion* guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 489-496.
> 223 Md. 49, 162 A. 2d 438, reversed.
> 
> The appellant Torcaso was appointed to the office of Notary Public by the Governor of Maryland but was refused a commission to serve because he would not declare his belief in God. He then brought this action in a Maryland Circuit Court to compel issuance of his commission, charging that the State's requirement that he declare this belief *violated "the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States* . . . ." 1 The Circuit Court rejected these federal constitutional contentions, and the highest court of the State, the Court of Appeals, affirmed, 2 holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing and requires declaration of belief in God as a qualification for office without need for implementing legislation. The case is therefore properly here on appeal under 28 U.S.C. 1257 (2).
> 
> "We are all agreed that the First and Fourteenth Amendments have a secular reach far more penetrating [367 U.S. 488, 494] in the conduct of Government than merely to forbid an `established church.'. . . We renew our conviction that `we have staked the very existence of our country on the faith that complete separation between the state and religion is best for the state and best for religion.'"
> 
> [ Footnote 11 ] *Among religions* in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, *Secular Humanism* and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopaedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47.


FindLaw | Cases and Codes


----------



## dblack

Alter2Ego said:


> amrchaos said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Atheism is a religion, then, please,
> 
> Outline this belief system that all atheist adhere to.
> 
> There is a difference between a belief and a belief system.  But the theist try so hard to ignore that fact.
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- AMRCHAOS:*
> 
> The atheist belief system is secular humanism.  I elaborated on that at Page 3, Post #41.
Click to expand...


You elaborated incorrectly.


----------



## onecut39

Alter2Ego said:


> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:
> 
> *1.* Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."
> 
> In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.
> 
> "See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3.* Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Courtthe highest court in the land.




Again, a reference made to something the poster does not understand or has not bothered to read.  The court ruled that atheism was a religion "for Kaufman", only.

The word religion is in quotation marks.  Nice try.

Wisconsin: Equal Rights for Atheists in Prison


----------



## FA_Q2

martybegan said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all
> 
> It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.
> 
> Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK
> 
> Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chaplains in the service do more than just hold religious services. They provide valuable counseling to soldiers, are advocates with command and provide a ready ear to talk to
> 
> You shouldn't have to believe in god to recieve help
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The military has plenty of pyschologists and pychiatrists for those who want help from a non relgious source, although to be honest, I would love to see what the hell an atheist chapain looks like.
Click to expand...


No, there is a clear difference in the reporting requirements and the type of help that is rendered from chaplains and psychiatrists.  There is the point that religion is not required to speak to the Chaplin and that is likely why such an asinine call has not been answered.


----------



## FA_Q2

Katzndogz said:


> It is actually laying the foundation for a state religion.  The state religion of atheism.  People who don't follow the state religion cannot hold political office or own businesses.   The state religion must be taught in school.   All competing religions have to be scrubbed from the public eye.  There is to be only the state religion.



And here we are dblack.  The reason that you were asking for.

What you are essentially saying is that you should be able to supplant science because that is somehow connected to your perceived atheist religion with your own religious teachings.  That is complete bullshit by the way.  There is no atheist religion just as there is no atheist agenda in the schools.  Even if there were, that does not give you a free hand to push your religion on others anyway.

It all comes down to this in the end: you NEED to call atheists religious in order to justify your need to push your agenda.  Sorry, it is not going to fly.


----------



## martybegan

rightwinger said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is not a religion
> 
> It merely looks at the bizarre opinions of existing religions and says.......None of that makes sense
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground.
> 
> Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Atheists just shrug off religion and go about their lives
Click to expand...


Again, to me more agnosticism. If most just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.


----------



## rightwinger

martybegan said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground.
> 
> Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Atheists just shrug off religion and go about their lives
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, to me more agnosticism. If most just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.
Click to expand...


There are radical, in your face Atheists who see religion as the enemy. Most Atheists are just indifferent to religion. Agnostics still believe in a higher power. It is not the same

All most Atheists want is to be left alone. Respect that we do not believe what you do, leave us alone and don't force your religious beliefs on us


----------



## dblack

martybegan said:


> Again, to me more agnosticism.



Then you're misunderstanding the terms. Agnosticism has to do with whether we can know for sure if God exists, and is not (as is popularly misconceived) "weak atheism". Agnostics merely say that God's existence can't be proven one way or another. Some atheists are agnostic, some true-believers are agnostic.

Atheism is nothing more than lacking a belief in God. 



> If most [atheists] just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.



That's fair to say. It's also fair to say that bigoted religious zealots give religions a bad name. But it wouldn't be fair to judge either group by a minority of loudmouth assholes, would it?


----------



## dblack

FA_Q2 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is actually laying the foundation for a state religion.  The state religion of atheism.  People who don't follow the state religion cannot hold political office or own businesses.   The state religion must be taught in school.   All competing religions have to be scrubbed from the public eye.  There is to be only the state religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here we are dblack.  The reason that you were asking for.
> 
> What you are essentially saying is that you should be able to supplant &#8216;science&#8217; because that is somehow connected to your perceived &#8216;atheist&#8217; religion with your own religious teachings.  That is complete bullshit by the way.  There is no atheist religion just as there is no atheist agenda in the schools.  Even if there were, that does not give you a free hand to push your religion on others anyway.
> 
> It all comes down to this in the end: you NEED to call atheists religious in order to justify your need to push your agenda.  Sorry, it is not going to fly.
Click to expand...


Right. This agenda was promoted heavily by the Intelligent Design movement. The idea was to establish the teaching of evolution as an "atheist religious doctrine" and then demand that it either be prohibited, or that it be taught alongside ID as part of a comparative religions course or similar nonsense. It's been pursued lately as part of more general attack on separation of church and state.


----------



## onecut39

uscitizen said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One would have to belong to or associate with a group who hold similiar beliefs of non belief to make it a religion.
Click to expand...


No, that would make it a club.


----------



## onecut39

Katzndogz said:


> Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion.  A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.   Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons.  It is a belief usually held by atheists.
> 
> Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State.  Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state.  Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State.  If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.
> 
> The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.
> 
> Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common.  That's worship.  It's a matter of who is worshipped.   It's how Kings become Gods in the first place.  When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God?  God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.



Really?

You can call a cat a dog but that doesn't make it so.

Collins
World English Dictionary
religion  (r&#618;&#712;l&#618;d&#658;&#601;n)

 n
1. 	belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny
2. 	any formal or institutionalized expression of such belief: the Christian religion
3. 	the attitude and feeling of one who believes in a transcendent controlling power or powers
4. 	chiefly RC Church  the way of life determined by the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience entered upon by monks, friars, and nuns: to enter religion
5. 	something of overwhelming importance to a person: football is his religion
6. 	archaic
 	a. the practice of sacred ritual observances
 	b. sacred rites and ceremonies

[C12: via Old French from Latin religi&#333;  fear of the supernatural, piety, probably from relig&#257;re  to tie up, from re-  + lig&#257;re  to bind]


----------



## Katzndogz

That is an accurate description of religion, but not the only one.  Atheism is a religion, maybe it wasn't always a religion, but it is a religion now and well on its way to being the state religion.


----------



## onecut39

edthecynic said:


> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in having ANY sort of belief system. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3. Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Courtthe highest court in the land.*
> 
> 
> 
> I pray to God that that ruling is true!  Do you have a link?
> Then we Atheists can get the same special tax privileges believers get!!!
Click to expand...


I never thought of it like that.  PRAISE BE TO NO GOD!!!!!!


----------



## ConzHateUSA

AmyNation said:


> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.



Ignorant religious people need to think that us vastly superior atheists are dumb like they are

So if not believing in an invisible man in the sky is a religion, what is not believing in leprechauns?


----------



## onecut39

Katzndogz said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course atheism is a religion.   That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all
> 
> It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.
> 
> Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK
> 
> Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chaplains in the service do more than just hold religious services. They provide valuable counseling to soldiers, are advocates with command and provide a ready ear to talk to
> 
> You shouldn't have to believe in god to recieve help
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The military does not provide psychological counseling for just that purpose?    Sorry, "counseling" is a failed premise.
Click to expand...


Excerpted from the link:
"A number of counseling positions are available in the military, varying in scope and responsibility depending on the counselors background. Some branches also offer training programs for those wanting to become counselors. Civilian positions are also available for trained counselors wanting to work with military personnel and their families"

Military Counseling Career - Become a Military Counselor


----------



## amrchaos

Alter2Ego said:


> amrchaos said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Atheism is a religion, then, please,
> 
> Outline this belief system that all atheist adhere to.
> 
> There is a difference between a belief and a belief system.  But the theist try so hard to ignore that fact.
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- AMRCHAOS:*
> 
> The atheist belief system is secular humanism.  I elaborated on that at Page 3, Post #41.
Click to expand...


Secular Humanism is a philosphy, but it is not a philosophy on how to live this life--i.e. it cannot be a religion 

Possible Philosophies/religions are
1) Buddhism
2)Objectivism.
3)Confucianism

All do not require a god to pray to nor observe--all give advice/instructions on how to live this life.
They also include a code of morality as under said philosophy/religion definition of such.

Secular humanism do no such thing.

Editted Note--the above do not exhaust all possible "atheistic religions", yet secualr humanism is not a religion and it will requires tenets to observe/advisories and a code of morality to turn it into such.


----------



## Alter2Ego

onecut39 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common.  That's worship.  It's a matter of who is worshipped.   It's how Kings become Gods in the first place.  When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God?  God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> You can call a cat a dog but that doesn't make it so.
> 
> Collins
> World English Dictionary
> religion  (r&#618;&#712;l&#618;d&#658;&#601;n)
> 
>  n
> 1. 	belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny
> 2. 	any formal or institutionalized expression of such belief: the Christian religion
> 3. 	the attitude and feeling of one who believes in a transcendent controlling power or powers
> 4. 	chiefly RC Church  the way of life determined by the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience entered upon by monks, friars, and nuns: to enter religion
> 5. 	*something of overwhelming importance to a person*: football is his religion
> 6. 	archaic
> a. the practice of sacred ritual observances
> b. sacred rites and ceremonies
> 
> [C12: via Old French from Latin religi&#333;  fear of the supernatural, piety, probably from relig&#257;re  to tie up, from re-  + lig&#257;re  to bind]
Click to expand...

*ALTER2EGO -to- ONE CUT 39:*
Look at definition #5 in your above post.  It confirms what Katzndogz has been saying: that a religion need not be based on worship of the supernatural.  Below is another definition of religion that might interest you.  Keep your eyes on the words in bold print within the below quotation.

*EVIDENCE -- ATHEISM IS A RELIGION:**
DEFINITION OF "RELIGION":*
1. any specific system of belief and worship, often involving a code of ethics and a philosophy: the Christian religion, the Buddhist religion, etc.

2. any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, etc. resembling, suggestive of, or likened to such a system: *humanism as a religion*
Religion | Easy to understand definition of religion by Your Dictionary


*FYI:*  The U.S. Supreme Court, in the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, specifically stated that Secular Humanism is a religion.  The Atheist religious belief is secular humanism.


----------



## dblack

Alter2Ego said:


> onecut39 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common.  That's worship.  It's a matter of who is worshipped.   It's how Kings become Gods in the first place.  When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God?  God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> You can call a cat a dog but that doesn't make it so.
> 
> Collins
> World English Dictionary
> religion  (r&#618;&#712;l&#618;d&#658;&#601;n)
> 
>  n
> 1. 	belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny
> 2. 	any formal or institutionalized expression of such belief: the Christian religion
> 3. 	the attitude and feeling of one who believes in a transcendent controlling power or powers
> 4. 	chiefly RC Church  the way of life determined by the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience entered upon by monks, friars, and nuns: to enter religion
> 5. 	*something of overwhelming importance to a person*: football is his religion
> 6. 	archaic
> a. the practice of sacred ritual observances
> b. sacred rites and ceremonies
> 
> [C12: via Old French from Latin religi&#333;  fear of the supernatural, piety, probably from relig&#257;re  to tie up, from re-  + lig&#257;re  to bind]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- ONE CUT 39:*
> Look at definition #5 in your above post.  It confirms what Katzndogz has been saying: that a religion need not be based on worship of the supernatural.  Below is another definition of religion that might interest you.  Keep your eyes on the words in bold print within the below quotation.
> 
> *EVIDENCE -- ATHEISM IS A RELIGION:**
> DEFINITION OF "RELIGION":*
> 1. any specific system of belief and worship, often involving a code of ethics and a philosophy: the Christian religion, the Buddhist religion, etc.
> 
> 2. any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, etc. resembling, suggestive of, or likened to such a system: *humanism as a religion*
> Religion | Easy to understand definition of religion by Your Dictionary
> 
> 
> *FYI:*  The U.S. Supreme Court, in the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, specifically stated that Secular Humanism is a religion.  The Atheist religious belief is secular humanism.
Click to expand...


None of this matters though because atheism and humanism aren't the same thing.


----------



## uscitizen

The Atheist religious belief is secular humanism. 


Athesits like me have no religion.
some people are just so frightened of those who are different.

So every person on earth belongs to a religion is what at least one on here is saying.

bull.


----------



## amrchaos

uscitizen said:


> The Atheist religious belief is secular humanism.
> 
> 
> Athesits like me have no religion.
> some people are just so frightened of those who are different.
> 
> So every person on earth belongs to a religion is what at least one on here is saying.
> 
> bull.



You do have a philosophy you live by.It may not be something that is outlined and written out as a philosophy to study, but you live your life by some underlining concepts of how to behave and the whys and howcomes for such behavior.


The truth is--an atheistic religion is just that--a philosophy on how to live.

Theisticreligions(normally just called "religion") are also the same thing--except they tend to derive the basis of their philosophical understanding from a god or gods.

Or to understand it from a different direction:religion is a type of philosophy.  A philosophy that instructs you how to live and behave can be considered a religion.

Finally--this thing called secualr humanism is a body of different philosophies and various concepts of ethics that may contradict. It is not a single philosophy.  Also,an atheist do not need to subscribe to any of the philosophies of secular humanism to be an atheist.I listed three such philosophies that are not secular humanistic in any sense, but an atheist can follow and still be atheist.


----------



## Merchant_of_Meh

Very silly OP.

 Atheism is not a religion FFS. It's the anti-thesis of a religion to the degree where the word literally means "no god". How is that a religion again?

Atheism is a belief just about on par, but not quite there with Deism.

I'm not at all hostile about religion or towards it. I'm the only non-believer in my family and though they dislike my lack of belief, they respect it, albeit grudgingly, but to say that Atheism in itself is a religion? Utter rubbish of the highest order.


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant religious people need to think that us vastly superior atheists are dumb like they are
> 
> So if not believing in an invisible man in the sky is a religion, what is not believing in leprechauns?
Click to expand...


Be it believing leprechauns or the "invisible man in the sky" both are still better than being a smug self centered prick such as yourself.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

martybegan said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant religious people need to think that us vastly superior atheists are dumb like they are
> 
> So if not believing in an invisible man in the sky is a religion, what is not believing in leprechauns?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Be it believing leprechauns or the "invisible man in the sky" both are still better than being a smug self centered prick such as yourself.
Click to expand...




oh god, not being a gullible dumbshit who believes in invisible men makes me smug.

nope, makes me an adult, you can be one too if you want


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant religious people need to think that us vastly superior atheists are dumb like they are
> 
> So if not believing in an invisible man in the sky is a religion, what is not believing in leprechauns?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be it believing leprechauns or the "invisible man in the sky" both are still better than being a smug self centered prick such as yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh god, not being a gullible dumbshit who believes in invisible men makes me smug.
> 
> nope, makes me an adult, you can be one too if you want
Click to expand...



Remind me of when they changed the definition of "adult" to ignorant jack-hole?

When you can enter a discussion and ad meaningful content to it, then you can leave the kiddie table, until then keep eating the microwaved chicken tenders and let the adults (actual definition) talk now.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

I am the ignorant jack hole and you are the one who believes in an invisible man in the sky who prefers americans to iranians 

LLOLOL>OLLLLOOOLLLOOLLOOLLOO


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> I am the ignorant jack hole and you are the one who believes in an invisible man in the sky who prefers americans to iranians
> 
> LLOLOL>OLLLLOOOLLLOOLLOOLLOO



At least you admit you are an ignorant jack-hole.  Its a good start. Now you can stop fapping whn you post, and maybe go outside for a bit.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

martybegan said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am the ignorant jack hole and you are the one who believes in an invisible man in the sky who prefers americans to iranians
> 
> LLOLOL>OLLLLOOOLLLOOLLOOLLOO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least you admit you are an ignorant jack-hole.  Its a good start. Now you can stop fapping whn you post, and maybe go outside for a bit.
Click to expand...


marty it isnt a bad thing for you to admit you are a moron

that I am the adult and you are the child

it is where your education will begin


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am the ignorant jack hole and you are the one who believes in an invisible man in the sky who prefers americans to iranians
> 
> LLOLOL>OLLLLOOOLLLOOLLOOLLOO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least you admit you are an ignorant jack-hole.  Its a good start. Now you can stop fapping whn you post, and maybe go outside for a bit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> marty it isnt a bad thing for you to admit you are a moron
> 
> that I am the adult and you are the child
> 
> it is where your education will begin
Click to expand...


I notice you didn't deny you fap when you post.


----------



## uscitizen

Yeah about the same way most religious discussions turn out.


----------



## dblack

uscitizen said:


> Yeah about the same way most religious discussions turn out.



I dunno. Depends on who you're discussin' with. I've had some really interesting conversations about religion. it's one of the most fascinating things people do.


----------



## martybegan

uscitizen said:


> Yeah about the same way most religious discussions turn out.



It also depends on both sides having discussion. I can have a reasoned discussion with you.

The other jackhole, however, is an obvious troll (and a bad one) and I like playing with them from time to time, like a cat playing with a piece of string. A dumb, dumb, piece of string.


----------



## BreezeWood

can the sequence of DNA evolve without a Basis that is common to all of mankind that makes their mere existence the true religion no one can avoid - whether from God the OuterWorld (yes) or not.

the extinct Dinosaurs no longer have religion - Polar Bears have their own sequence from one generation to another ever evolving for the duration of their species.

the OuterWorld of the Everlasting is the Source for the Engineering of DNA.


----------



## JohnA

uscitizen said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> most people aren't hostile to religion. they're hostile when people try to impose religion on them
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually the people that are most hostile to a religion are those who belong to a different religion.
> Not those who do not believe in a religion.
Click to expand...

 correct  and most hostilities are started by religious folks shoving their beliefs down ones thoat 

a lot of religious folks  carry it around on their sleeve  .if the team wins 

<<<PRAISE  BE TO GOD >>> 
 what  would be the reaction if i said THEY WON WITH OUT THE HELP OF A DEITY would they  just ignore my words ? i dont think so 

i was at a council meeting new members they  wanted to pray at the start of the meeting  no said i lets just have *2 minutes silence * for each his own  .. didnt want that they  said  then  called me a wicked evil  atheist ,
 thats  religion for you  my way or  the high way 


  im atheist NEVER bring it up unless to answer another 
religion /belief is a  PRIVATE  matter


----------



## JohnA

Whatever the courts say we must abide by 
 but in all honesty i cant see why they ruled  as such 
 catholics  are catholics  and follow dotrine /  tenats   jews same thing , moslims also , what  they are  told by the leaders  to believe  in 
 atheists   generally are not in groups  athou i have heard there  are some, and in fact there are a   few atheist web  sites and chat  rooms 
 atheists can be republican . socialist , black, white ,old ,young rich ,poor .educated , illiterate  the ONLY thing they  share is a non belief  in a deity
 they  have no rules uniforms ,custom dress ,hierachy ,no tithing ,no organization  .no holy days , no official book ,no history of war . just a simple  belief of no god   .......and a wish to be left alone by religious  fanatics


----------



## uscitizen

BreezeWood said:


> can the sequence of DNA evolve without a Basis that is common to all of mankind that makes their mere existence the true religion no one can avoid - whether from God the OuterWorld (yes) or not.
> 
> the extinct Dinosaurs no longer have religion - Polar Bears have their own sequence from one generation to another ever evolving for the duration of their species.
> 
> the OuterWorld of the Everlasting is the Source for the Engineering of DNA.



Yeah and all diseases used to be caused by evil spirits or sins.
Just because we do not understand something does not mean it was cuased by some ultimate being in control of everything.

I still tounge in cheek somewhat believe that life on earth is the result of an alien school kids failed science project.
It is as valid of a hypothesis as that God did it.
Perhaps the kids name was God?


----------



## JohnA

onecut39 said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in having ANY sort of belief system. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3. Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Courtthe highest court in the land.*
> 
> 
> 
> I pray to God that that ruling is true!  Do you have a link?
> Then we Atheists can get the same special tax privileges believers get!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never thought of it like that.  PRAISE BE TO NO GOD!!!!!!
Click to expand...



 im a atheist i swear to god i am


----------



## JohnA

martybegan said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground.
> 
> Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Atheists just shrug off religion and go about their lives
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, to me more agnosticism. If most just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.
Click to expand...

 i dont want mangers taken out of town squares  i just want my flying spagetti monster statue sitting by the side of it ...are you happy with that ?


----------



## JohnA

pinqy said:


> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> , then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.
> 
> 
> 
> Please give us the links to the courts that ruled that.  Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Secular Humanists are allowed to teach the tenets of the religion of Secular Humanism from the blackboard during class.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am not aware of this happening, do you have links.  Here's what I suspect though, any such claim will be teachers teaching something that is also to be found in Secular Humanist teachings even if the teach is not a secular humanist and the teaching wasn't part of some over secular humanist program.  But that's like claiming that if a teacher says that murder and stealing and lying are wrong and you should respect your parents that they're teaching religion...which is ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, the above is a classic example of hypocrisy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually I've always found the hypocrisy to be those who say there is no separation of church and state and that teachers should be free to lead prayer.....except when it's a prayer or religion they disagree with.
Click to expand...

 which is always the case 

say a prayer at school.what  prayer ??
 why one of ours  of course 

allow a religious symbal in a public place at xmas 

 sure thing as long as its a manger


----------



## martybegan

JohnA said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most Atheists just shrug off religion and go about their lives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, to me more agnosticism. If most just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i dont want mangers taken out of town squares  i just want my flying spagetti monster statue sitting by the side of it ...are you happy with that ?
Click to expand...


Does the flying spaghetti monster have a holiday in December?

Also, people put up mangers as a sign of fate. You want the flying spaghetti monster up there as a sign of spite. 

Its the spite shown by these lawsuits that piss alot of a people off.


----------



## dblack

martybegan said:


> Does the flying spaghetti monster have a holiday in December?
> 
> Also, people put up mangers as a sign of fate. You want the flying spaghetti monster up there as a sign of spite.
> 
> Its the spite shown by these lawsuits that piss alot of a people off.



Well, the flying spaghetti monster examples are _facetious_. But the points raised are serious. There _are_ other religions. Should tax money be spent promoting (or celebrating) one over all the others?

Personally, I think griping about a small display put up by local government is petty, but there is a point where the line ought to be drawn - certainly somewhere between a creche and "National Christian Prayer Hour". At what point would you limit government promotion of religion?


----------



## martybegan

dblack said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does the flying spaghetti monster have a holiday in December?
> 
> Also, people put up mangers as a sign of fate. You want the flying spaghetti monster up there as a sign of spite.
> 
> Its the spite shown by these lawsuits that piss alot of a people off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, the flying spaghetti monster examples are _facetious_. But the points raised are serious. There _are_ other religions. Should tax money be spent promoting (or celebrating) one over all the others?
> 
> Personally, I think griping about a small display put up by local government is petty, but there is a point where the line ought to be drawn - certainly somewhere between a creche and "National Christian Prayer Hour". At what point would you limit government promotion of religion?
Click to expand...

 
The government shouldnt pay for it, what I am against is government banning the use of the land. I would even make those putting up the manger provide thier own snow removal in the area while in use to avoid the use of government money for it. 

As for the "National Christian Prayer hour" you cant make it compulsory, or spend any government money on it, but you shouldnt be able to prevent a government offical from declaring it.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

martybegan said:


> As for the "National Christian Prayer hour" you cant make it compulsory, or spend any government money on it, but you shouldnt be able to prevent a government offical from declaring it.



a govt employee declaring it would be the definition of violation of church state


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for the "National Christian Prayer hour" you cant make it compulsory, or spend any government money on it, but you shouldnt be able to prevent a government offical from declaring it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a govt employee declaring it would be the definition of violation of church state
Click to expand...


Not according to the federal court so far,

National Day of Prayer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## pinqy

martybegan said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for the "National Christian Prayer hour" you cant make it compulsory, or spend any government money on it, but you shouldnt be able to prevent a government offical from declaring it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a govt employee declaring it would be the definition of violation of church state
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not according to the federal court so far,
> 
> National Day of Prayer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


You're talking about National Day of Prayer, not "National CHRISTIAN Prayer.  There is enough of a difference to be important.


----------



## martybegan

pinqy said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> a govt employee declaring it would be the definition of violation of church state
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the federal court so far,
> 
> National Day of Prayer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're talking about National Day of Prayer, not "National CHRISTIAN Prayer.  There is enough of a difference to be important.
Click to expand...


good point, but the end result is your more militant atheists would oppose both.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

atheist equals thinking adult

sorry, i know that pisses you rightwing so called xtians off, but it is true


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> atheist equals thinking adult
> 
> sorry, i know that pisses you rightwing so called xtians off, but it is true



You were so close to a rational discussion, then you went back off your meds. 

For future reference, QID means "four times per day."  Try to stick to it.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

martybegan said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> atheist equals thinking adult
> 
> sorry, i know that pisses you rightwing so called xtians off, but it is true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You were so close to a rational discussion, then you went back off your meds.
> 
> For future reference, QID means "four times per day."  Try to stick to it.
Click to expand...


Marty, I rarely argue with my 7 yr old grandson, and I wont argue with you, for the same reason

Now, why are you a vile and filthy racist?

just wondering, wish one of you would answer me someday on this


----------



## pinqy

martybegan said:


> pinqy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the federal court so far,
> 
> National Day of Prayer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're talking about National Day of Prayer, not "National CHRISTIAN Prayer.  There is enough of a difference to be important.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> good point, but the end result is your more militant atheists would oppose both.
Click to expand...


Militant atheists like Thomas Jefferson, who refused to call for a day of Prayer or Thanksgiving because he believed it to be contrary to the 1st Ammendment?

The panel of the Seventh District dismissed the case on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked standing.  I'm not convinced that was the right call.

However, since a day of Prayer or Thanksgiving goes back to Washington, it's pretty firmly entrenched in US History and precedent.  And since the wording fo the Day of Prayer is general in nature and includes the phrase "...to pray, or otherwise give thanks, in accordance with their own faiths or consciences..." it pretty much passes establishment clause muster.


----------



## Katzndogz

Thomas Jefferson wasn't an atheist.   Thanksgiving didn't come along for a good many years after Thomas Jefferson so he didn't get the choice to make.


----------



## pinqy

Katzndogz said:


> Thomas Jefferson wasn't an atheist.


 That was my sarcasm voice.  The claim was that "militant atheists" would object to a day of prayer.  Jefferson was not a militant atheist, but he also objected to a day of prayer and refused to follow the precedents of Washington and Adams.  So it's not just "militant atheists" that would object.



> Thanksgiving didn't come along for a good many years after Thomas Jefferson so he didn't get the choice to make.



George Washington declared a day of Thanksgiving Oct 3, 1789 and again in 1795.  Adams declared Thanksgivings in 1798 and 1799.  Madison did it in 1814 and twice in 1815.  Not sure about the Presidents in between Madison and Lincoln. It wasn't formalized as a holiday with a set day until Lincoln.


----------



## uscitizen

MOst militants in the US are Christians.  Or so they claim anyway.


----------



## JohnA

martybegan said:


> JohnA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, to me more agnosticism. If most just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.
> 
> 
> 
> i dont want mangers taken out of town squares  i just want my flying spagetti monster statue sitting by the side of it ...are you happy with that ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Does the flying spaghetti monster have a holiday in December?
> 
> Also, people put up mangers as a sign of fate. You want the flying spaghetti monster up there as a sign of spite.
> 
> Its the spite shown by these lawsuits that piss alot of a people off.
Click to expand...

 how dare you insinuate my beloved  spaghetti monster is full of spite .
how would  you feel if i said the  same thing about your jesus ,yes he has a holiday every month .he is fun happy relaxed and a truly loving person loves  everybody  all races ,and creeds  including gays   so we celebrate  him every month with a holiday .
what *fate* does a manger convey to the public ?


http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster#The_Noodles_Prayer


----------



## JohnA

pinqy said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> a govt employee declaring it would be the definition of violation of church state
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the federal court so far,
> 
> National Day of Prayer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're talking about National Day of Prayer, not "National CHRISTIAN Prayer.  There is enough of a difference to be important.
Click to expand...

 i dont think a national day of prayer /thanksgivin/praising  would be opposed by atheists i as  one would not if it was a national day of for ALL, praying .chanting ,singingwhatever  was not mandated i dont think it would do any harm  tolerance would be the key 
 much like i support 2 min silence at  start of official  meetings  
to each his own


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> atheist equals thinking adult
> 
> sorry, i know that pisses you rightwing so called xtians off, but it is true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You were so close to a rational discussion, then you went back off your meds.
> 
> For future reference, QID means "four times per day."  Try to stick to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Marty, I rarely argue with my 7 yr old grandson, and I wont argue with you, for the same reason
> 
> Now, why are you a vile and filthy racist?
> 
> just wondering, wish one of you would answer me someday on this
Click to expand...


Lets see what we have here..

Unverifiable reference to ones age, purporting to be old enough to be a grandfather. This is to establish experience. 

Out of the blue reference to racism, not currently being discussed on the thread in question. 

Statement implying this reference to said racism has been made before, thus trying to establish a pattern.

The typical troll tool-kit. Also i noted you turned off your rep, as you are gutless as well.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Wont answer, will you...you can talk or puke all you want, but you are a racist and until you tell me why i cant take you seriously


----------



## martybegan

JohnA said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JohnA said:
> 
> 
> 
> i dont want mangers taken out of town squares  i just want my flying spagetti monster statue sitting by the side of it ...are you happy with that ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does the flying spaghetti monster have a holiday in December?
> 
> Also, people put up mangers as a sign of fate. You want the flying spaghetti monster up there as a sign of spite.
> 
> Its the spite shown by these lawsuits that piss alot of a people off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> how dare you insinuate my beloved  spaghetti monster is full of spite .
> how would  you feel if i said the  same thing about your jesus ,yes he has a holiday every month .he is fun happy relaxed and a truly loving person loves  everybody  all races ,and creeds  including gays   so we celebrate  him every month with a holiday .
> what *fate* does a manger convey to the public ?
> 
> 
> Flying Spaghetti Monster - Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


I really wouldn't care, havent been to church in years.  I unlike some people also do not get butthurt when people type things I dont like to hear, say prayers in public not of my religon, or post religous symbols on public property. 

and fate was a typo, most people could gather I meant faith.


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> Wont answer, will you...you can talk or puke all you want, but you are a racist and until you tell me why i cant take you seriously



ignoring the previous post, and continuing on with the rant. another priceless troll tactic. 

I put your age around mid 20's, living in parents basement. Figure horde troll huntard.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

I have said this before Marty and I will say it again, $500K to the first guy that makes me 20 again

Now listen up you vile and filthy bigot, I am superior to you even asleep and drunk...that will be all, son


----------



## martybegan

ConzHateUSA said:


> I have said this before Marty and I will say it again, $500K to the first guy that makes me 20 again
> 
> Now listen up you vile and filthy bigot, I am superior to you even asleep and drunk...that will be all, son



You think you are typing some internet gold, but all that comes out is

herp derp derp, herp derp herp, herp herp herp derp.


derp.


----------



## JohnA

martybegan said:


> JohnA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does the flying spaghetti monster have a holiday in December?
> 
> Also, people put up mangers as a sign of fate. You want the flying spaghetti monster up there as a sign of spite.
> 
> Its the spite shown by these lawsuits that piss alot of a people off.
> 
> 
> 
> how dare you insinuate my beloved  spaghetti monster is full of spite .
> how would  you feel if i said the  same thing about your jesus ,yes he has a holiday every month .he is fun happy relaxed and a truly loving person loves  everybody  all races ,and creeds  including gays   so we celebrate  him every month with a holiday .
> what *fate* does a manger convey to the public ?
> 
> 
> Flying Spaghetti Monster - Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I really wouldn't care, havent been to church in years.  I unlike some people also do not get butthurt when people type things I dont like to hear, say prayers in public not of my religon, or post religous symbols on public property.
> 
> and fate was a typo, most people could gather I meant faith.
Click to expand...

 didnt catch that as a typo sorry bout that .i make many of them 
nice  to see  you are tolarant ,my answer was not to be taken seriously cant be serious  over fictional characters


----------



## martybegan

JohnA said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JohnA said:
> 
> 
> 
> how dare you insinuate my beloved  spaghetti monster is full of spite .
> how would  you feel if i said the  same thing about your jesus ,yes he has a holiday every month .he is fun happy relaxed and a truly loving person loves  everybody  all races ,and creeds  including gays   so we celebrate  him every month with a holiday .
> what *fate* does a manger convey to the public ?
> 
> 
> Flying Spaghetti Monster - Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really wouldn't care, havent been to church in years.  I unlike some people also do not get butthurt when people type things I dont like to hear, say prayers in public not of my religon, or post religous symbols on public property.
> 
> and fate was a typo, most people could gather I meant faith.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> didnt catch that as a typo sorry bout that .i make many of them
> nice  to see  you are tolarant ,my answer was not to be taken seriously cant be serious  over fictional characters
Click to expand...


No worries, Im toying with a troll in this thread, and it makes my trigger finger a little itchy.


----------



## FA_Q2

dblack said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, to me more agnosticism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then you're misunderstanding the terms. Agnosticism has to do with whether we can know for sure if God exists, and is not (as is popularly misconceived) "weak atheism". Agnostics merely say that God's existence can't be proven one way or another. Some atheists are agnostic, some true-believers are agnostic.
> 
> Atheism is nothing more than lacking a belief in God.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If most [atheists] just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's fair to say. It's also fair to say that bigoted religious zealots give religions a bad name. But it wouldn't be fair to judge either group by a minority of loudmouth assholes, would it?
Click to expand...


It is also worth pointing out that those are the ONLY people that you are going to hear from as far as atheists go.  I find it amusing that people just cant get their head around that little fact.  With religions, you are going to hear the good sometimes because they have something to preach.  Atheists do not.  The VAST majority of atheists have nothing to say on the subject mostly because that is exactly what atheists have; nothing on the subject.  Then one or two loudmouths come along that are religious in the extent that they take their nonbelief and the theists point to them and declare we are all religious.  It is hogwash.   

It is equally interesting that not one single coherent argument has been able to be used here to make atheists religious (and this is not the first time such a thread has been down this road) yet I can almost guarantee that people are going to claim that atheists are religious all over these boards.  Starkey is a common offender of this.  I do grow ever so tired of idiots trying to label ME with THEIR beliefs.  It gets old.


----------



## JohnA

martybegan said:


> JohnA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really wouldn't care, havent been to church in years.  I unlike some people also do not get butthurt when people type things I dont like to hear, say prayers in public not of my religon, or post religous symbols on public property.
> 
> and fate was a typo, most people could gather I meant faith.
> 
> 
> 
> didnt catch that as a typo sorry bout that .i make many of them
> nice  to see  you are tolarant ,my answer was not to be taken seriously cant be serious  over fictional characters
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No worries, Im toying with a troll in this thread, and it makes my trigger finger a little itchy.
Click to expand...

 I   dont mess with trolls ignore make them they  go away ,im looking for a bonefide  discussion with a little  bit of  humor of course


----------



## dblack

FA_Q2 said:


> ...With religions, you are going to hear the good sometimes because they have something to preach.  Atheists do not.



That's not entirely true. Though, in my experience, in general, atheist aren't nearly as interested in proselytizing as the religious. But there are obvious exceptions. And some of them do focus on the "good" - not just leveling criticisms at religious. There are compelling arguments for rational, materialist moral foundations as well as people advocating for various forms of 'non-religious' spiritual life.


----------



## FA_Q2

dblack said:


> FA_Q2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...With religions, you are going to hear the good sometimes because they have something to preach.  Atheists do not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not entirely true. Though, in my experience, in general, atheist aren't nearly as interested in proselytizing as the religious. But there are obvious exceptions. And some of them do focus on the "good" - not just leveling criticisms at religious. There are compelling arguments for rational, materialist moral foundations as well as people advocating for various forms of 'non-religious' spiritual life.
Click to expand...


Thats what I said though with the rest of my post.  There are very few that have something to say on the matter but there are always going to be that few.  There are fringe people in all areas of life.  

Granted, I DID say that most are shouting the negatives.  Do you actually have an example of any of them EVER stating something positive from the standpoint of atheism.  Usually such conversations that you are referring to have nothing in connection with atheism itself, rather they are based on science and research.  

Either way, the Dawkins are far louder than the normal individual and they give people a bad name.


----------



## ItsjustmeIthink

I'm agnositc, but in my opinion, religion isn't a problem. Its Man's interpretation and use of religion that creates problems.


----------



## FA_Q2

ItsjustmeIthink said:


> I'm agnositc, but in my opinion, religion isn't a problem. Its Man's interpretation and use of religion that creates problems.



Has anyone said that religion was a problem in this thread?


----------



## ItsjustmeIthink

FA_Q2 said:


> ItsjustmeIthink said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm agnositc, but in my opinion, religion isn't a problem. Its Man's interpretation and use of religion that creates problems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone said that religion was a problem in this thread?
Click to expand...


did I say religion was a problem?



> According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place



I wonder what on earth I was talking about.


----------



## FA_Q2

ItsjustmeIthink said:


> FA_Q2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ItsjustmeIthink said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm agnositc, but in my opinion, religion isn't a problem. Its Man's interpretation and use of religion that creates problems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone said that religion was a problem in this thread?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> did I say religion was a problem?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder what on earth I was talking about.
Click to expand...


Lol  I forgot the op apparently.  Well, I stand corrected.  The OP made an asinine assertion about what atheists believe and that was what you were responding to.


----------



## JohnA

Alter2Ego said:


> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:
> 
> *1.* Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."
> 
> In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.
> 
> "See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3.* Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Court&#8212;the highest court in the land.


 STALIN did his killing under the  banner of communism not theism  if you count human right violation committed under  any religiuos  flag history   it far surpasses any # you can come up with even if we include stalin and its still going on .
Its  not a believe  in a supreme being that  causes humans to kill each other its ORGANIZED RELIGION in its many forms  .
 catholics against jews 
jews against muslims
 muslims agianst chriistians 
 catholics  against  protestants 
 the  crusades
 etc etc 
 add them up and there is a mass of millions killed by some religion or another since time began  ALL  IN THE NAME OF GOD 

  i dont know any atheists who want  to remove  religion the bible and a belief in god from the world and i know many . if thats  what you believe  GO FOR IT.
 all they  want if for religion to be a *private matter*  if you want to praise  g-d  any g-d  keep   it to  yourself  and out of the  laws of the country .
 atheists dont go around preaching and we dont  expect you to 
 if i want to hear what you say about g-d ,,eternal  life etc  etc i  will come visit  your church .

 You are so wrong its laughable.

 now if you KNOW  SO MANY atheists  who want to do away with religion please give me there  names i would like to meet them 
 orherwise when you make a statement like you made in the 1st paragraph  please  label it  MY OPINION ONLY

 Since you have done a lot of lecturing lets give you some back 
listen carefully 

there are many religions in this world  and some that were are now extinct . all rely on faith ,superstition ,and  fear of the  unknown for there  existence 
 they have differant   g-ds some are more popular than  others 
 they all  have two   things in common 
(1)they all believe they are the  *RIGHT ONE *
(2 )  they all are as VALID  as each other .
 thats the way it is and always has been 
 LIVE WITH IT


----------



## BreezeWood

JohnA said:


> there are many religions in this world  and some that were are now extinct . all rely on faith ,superstition ,and  fear of the  unknown for there  existence
> they have differant   g-ds some are more popular than  others
> they all  have two   things in common
> (1)they all believe they are the  *RIGHT ONE *
> (2 )  they all are as VALID  as each other .
> thats the way it is and always has been
> LIVE WITH IT




* all rely on faith ,superstition ,and  fear of the  unknown for there  existence* 



> (1)they all believe they are the  *RIGHT ONE *
> (2 )  they all are as VALID  as each other .



that would not include Atheism  -  by your own definition as a religion.

.


----------



## JohnA

BreezeWood said:


> JohnA said:
> 
> 
> 
> there are many religions in this world  and some that were are now extinct . all rely on faith ,superstition ,and  fear of the  unknown for there  existence
> they have differant   g-ds some are more popular than  others
> they all  have two   things in common
> (1)they all believe they are the  *RIGHT ONE *
> (2 )  they all are as VALID  as each other .
> thats the way it is and always has been
> LIVE WITH IT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * all rely on faith ,superstition ,and  fear of the  unknown for there  existence*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (1)they all believe they are the  *RIGHT ONE *
> (2 )  they all are as VALID  as each other .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that would not include Atheism  -  by your own definition as a religion.
> 
> .
Click to expand...

correct i dont believe atheism is a religion


----------



## Alter2Ego

*ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*

The 2005 Wisconsin Federal Court is not the only one that said atheism is a religion. The U.S. Supreme Court has said on numerous occasions that atheism is a religion. The U.S. Supreme Court in its 1961 ruling said: "a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being." In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described "secular humanism" as a religion. 
Court rules atheism a religion


An atheist is a secular humanist by default, because a secular humanist is someone who insists he/she can make wise decisions without the need of instructions from a supernatural god. In other words, arguing that atheists aren't secular humanists is a lost cause. Ask any of them if they can do better without a supernatural god, and see what they'll tell you. If they didn't feel they could do better for themselves without God, they would not have become atheists from the get-go.


----------



## uscitizen

People can gather together and "worship" atheism as a religion.
People can also just be atheists.  ie do not believe in any god or afterlife.
Just as those who worship God can be involved in a religion or not.


----------



## FA_Q2

Alter2Ego said:


> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> The 2005 Wisconsin Federal Court is not the only one that said atheism is a religion. The U.S. Supreme Court has said on numerous occasions that atheism is a religion. The U.S. Supreme Court in its 1961 ruling said: "a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being." In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described "secular humanism" as a religion.
> Court rules atheism a religion
> 
> 
> An atheist is a secular humanist by default, because a secular humanist is someone who insists he/she can make wise decisions without the need of instructions from a supernatural god. In other words, arguing that atheists aren't secular humanists is a lost cause. Ask any of them if they can do better without a supernatural god, and see what they'll tell you. If they didn't feel they could do better for themselves without God, they would not have become atheists from the get-go.



That has already been addressed in this thread and shown that you are absolutely incorrect.  

It does not matter anyway, what the SCOTUS says is a matter of law and it is not law that we are talking about in this thread.


----------



## Alter2Ego

JohnA said:


> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:
> 
> *1.* Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."
> 
> In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.
> 
> "See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3.* Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Court&#8212;the highest court in the land.
> 
> 
> 
> STALIN did his killing under the  banner of communism not theism  if you count human right violation committed under  any religiuos  flag history   it far surpasses any # you can come up with even if we include stalin and its still going on .
Click to expand...

*ALTER2EGO -to- JOHN A:*

And it just so happens his belief system was atheism, which is itself a religious system that is broken down into various ideologies or denominations.  Secular Humanism is one of those ideologies according to the U.S. Supreme Court. Although U.S. court rulings do not apply overseas, if Stalin were alive today, the minute he set foot on U.S. soil, he would have been declared a member of the Religion of Atheism/Secular Humanism.


----------



## Alter2Ego

JohnA said:


> *Its  not a believe  in a supreme being that  causes humans to kill each other its ORGANIZED RELIGION in its many forms  . *
> catholics against jews
> jews against muslims
> muslims agianst chriistians
> catholics  against  protestants
> the  crusades
> etc etc
> add them up and there is a mass of millions killed by some religion or another since time began  ALL  IN THE NAME OF GOD


*ALTER2EGO -to- JOHN A:*
Why are you telling me what I already said in Paragraph 3 of my opening post?  I also mentioned in Paragraph 3 of my OP that false religious teachings is the root cause of the problem.  So although people in various religions claim they are doing the killings in the name of god, the question one should be asking is: "Which god?"  Especially since the word "god" is merely a title that can be assigned to anyone and anything.  

Below is the dictionary definition of the word "god".  Keep your eyes on the words in bold print within the definition.


*WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY DEFINITION OF "GOD":*
1. *any of various beings* conceived of as supernatural, immortal and having special powers over the lives and affairs of people and the course of nature

2. *a person or thing* deified or excessively honored or admired
God | Easy to understand definition of god by Your Dictionary


*~***~​*


----------



## uscitizen

2. a person or thing deified or excessively honored or admired


So Palin IS a god?


----------



## newpolitics

martybegan said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
Click to expand...


Behavior does not make a religion. Belief makes a religion. Just because people speak up against religion, doesn't mean they themselves are a religion. This is a "tu quoque" fallacy.


----------



## Alter2Ego

JohnA said:


> Its  not a believe  in a supreme being that  causes humans to kill each other its ORGANIZED RELIGION in its many forms  .
> catholics against jews
> jews against muslims
> muslims agianst chriistians
> catholics  against  protestants
> the  crusades
> etc etc
> * add them up and there is a mass of millions killed by some religion or another since time began  ALL  IN THE NAME OF GOD*


*ALTER2EGO -to- JOHN A: *
Unrighteous killings by members of false religions was not done by authority of Jehovah.  Since those that committed the acts were following religious teachings not found anywhere in the Judeo-Christian Bible, you could hardly expect God to take responsibility for what false religion did, especially since God made it clear in his inspired Word, the Bible, that people's works/actions show them up for what they truly are.

"They publicly declare they know God, but *they disown him by their works*, because they are detestable and disobedient and not approved for good work of any sort."   (Titus 1:16) 


*~***~*​


----------



## Tuatara

Alter2Ego

How can you say your religion is true when other religions had been around long before Judaism-Christianity?


----------



## uscitizen

amrchaos said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> One would have to belong to or associate with a group who hold similiar beliefs of non belief to make it a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. a monastic hermit does not associate with anyone (the hermit thing), and while following the basic tenents of a religon may have their own view of exact beliefs. Is this person religous?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More like a heretic.  Remember why Jesus was cruxified.
Click to expand...


He was crucified at the request of the leaders of the Jewish religion.
Right after he ran the moneychangers from the temple.


----------



## Alter2Ego

Tuatara said:


> Alter2Ego
> 
> How can you say your religion is true when other religions had been around long before Judaism-Christianity?


*ALTER2EGO -to- TUATARA:*
Several centuries, the argument was made that earth is the center of the universe. The majority of the Europeans went with that ideology. It turns out, it was wrong. It was *later* found that earth actually revolves around the sun. So are you telling me that anything that happens first is automatically correct, and what comes after is automatically wrong? 


Exactly what is your point?


----------



## theword

Alter2Ego said:


> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:
> 
> *1.* Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."
> 
> In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.
> 
> "See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3.* Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Courtthe highest court in the land.



Why did you leave out the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church (the iron feet of Christianity) who's laws had millions and millions of people killed, which goes directly against God's laws (Thou shalt NOT KILL). 

I wouldn't judge any atheists if I were you. Otherwise, you're disobeying another one of God's commandments, "Thou shalt NOT bear false witness against they neighbor".


----------



## Youwerecreated

theword said:


> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:
> 
> *1.* Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."
> 
> In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.
> 
> "See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3.* Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Courtthe highest court in the land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why did you leave out the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church (the iron feet of Christianity) who's laws had millions and millions of people killed, which goes directly against God's laws (Thou shalt NOT KILL).
> 
> I wouldn't judge any atheists if I were you. Otherwise, you're disobeying another one of God's commandments, "Thou shalt NOT bear false witness against they neighbor".
Click to expand...


Thou shall not kill is a bad translation saint. The law is thou shall not commit murder.


----------



## Tuatara

Alter2Ego said:


> Several centuries, the argument was made that earth is the center of the universe. The majority of the Europeans went with that ideology. It turns out, it was wrong. It was *later* found that earth actually revolves around the sun. So are you telling me that anything that happens first is automatically correct, and what comes after is automatically wrong?
> 
> 
> Exactly what is your point?


There are so many things science has found out that people didn't know about years ago. What does that have to do with the question I asked. The religion you believe in didn't exist for thousands of years. If you apply any kind of logic why would a creator wait so long to expose himself. Why only expose himself to a minute amount of illiterate people. Why not expose himself to all people in every culture. Or is playing favourites his kind of game?


----------



## ErikViking

I don't think Atheism is a religion. It is a philosophy of life. Just like religions are. 

........Philosophy of life......
............/......\................
..Atheism......Religion........
....................................


----------



## theword

Youwerecreated said:


> theword said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*
> 
> Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:
> 
> *1.* Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."
> 
> In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.
> 
> "See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
> 
> 
> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."
> 
> 
> *3.* Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Courtthe highest court in the land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why did you leave out the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church (the iron feet of Christianity) who's laws had millions and millions of people killed, which goes directly against God's laws (Thou shalt NOT KILL).
> 
> I wouldn't judge any atheists if I were you. Otherwise, you're disobeying another one of God's commandments, "Thou shalt NOT bear false witness against they neighbor".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thou shall not kill is a bad translation saint. The law is thou shall not commit murder.
Click to expand...


Okay, the Vatican murdered the flesh of millions of native americans in the name of their false god, Jesus. Then they stole (thieves) their gold and silver and anything else they coveted in the america's to bring back to build their golden altars for their false gods in the sky. 

Not one Christian is obedient to the Laws of God. That's because they're sinners who are under the old covenant, not sinless saints who know that Christianity is a false religion.


----------



## FA_Q2

ErikViking said:


> I don't think Atheism is a religion. It is a philosophy of life. Just like religions are.
> 
> ........Philosophy of life......
> ............/......\................
> ..Atheism......Religion........
> ....................................



It is, quite literally, the LACK of a religion.  That makes it impossible to be a religion in and of itself.

The real fallacy here is that SOME religious people cannot imagine a lack of faith so they immediately reflect a religious philosophy on that which is not religious.


----------



## dblack

FA_Q2 said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think Atheism is a religion. It is a philosophy of life. Just like religions are.
> 
> ........Philosophy of life......
> ............/......\................
> ..Atheism......Religion........
> ....................................
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is, quite literally, the LACK of a religion.  That makes it impossible to be a religion in and of itself.
> 
> The real fallacy here is that SOME religious people cannot imagine a lack of faith so they immediately reflect a religious philosophy on that which is not religious.
Click to expand...


I think that often it's not so much a lack of imagination as a deliberate equivocation. Many people (on both sides of the argument) seem to have the perception that atheism is more 'rational', giving it an inherent advantage in logical debate. So defenders of 'faith' want to even the score by putting atheism on equal footing.

But to me that seems to miss the point of faith in the first place. What makes faith distinct as a deliberate act is that it's not based on reason and instead requires an irrational commitment. That's what gives it its power and meaning. To equate it with atheism and a lack of faith is to diminish it; or perhaps to elevate atheism to something it is not.


----------



## Tuatara

uscitizen said:


> I could start a religion about blue eyed people and only blue eyed people could belong to my religion.
> 
> So by somes logic if you have blue eyes you belong to my religion.
> 
> think a bit folks.


If I wore contacts can I join your religion or it it only for true blues?


----------



## BreezeWood

Youwerecreated said:


> Thou shall not kill is a bad translation saint. The law is thou shall not commit murder.




oh, and do you have the original Tablet to prove "your" preference ?


----------



## FA_Q2

BreezeWood said:


> Youwerecreated said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thou shall not kill is a bad translation saint. The law is thou shall not commit murder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh, and do you have the original Tablet to prove "your" preference ?
Click to expand...


Funny enough, murder would be a terrible translation.  Trying to change it to murder is a worthless attempt to justify killing that they want to support but cant square the act with the bible.

Murder is a terrible word to use there because the term is completely controlled by manmade law.  What constitutes a murder changes country to country and state to state.  What might be murder in CA could not be murder in FL.  The term refers to legalities.


----------



## thewanderer

I don't really care whether atheists consider themselves religious or not, although they care...quite a bit IME.  It undermines their superiority complex if they admit that they might be anywhere near equal footing with believers.

The way I look at it we all have some belief about a Deity, unless we simply have never considered the possibility.  A belief that there is no deity is still a belief about deity.  You're still taking a position relative to the question.  That's why I think atheists' claim that they "have no god belief" is simply factually incorrect.  The only way to have no belief is to have never considered the question.

No, atheists don't typically participate in an organized community (although some do), but that seems to be the wrong peg to hang this hat on to me anyway.  To me the defining characteristic of deist vs atheist is each one's belief regarding deity, and in prioritizing that defining characteristic I think each is equal to the other.


----------



## Alter2Ego

ErikViking said:


> I don't think Atheism is a religion. It is a philosophy of life. Just like religions are.
> 
> ........Philosophy of life......
> ............/......\................
> ..Atheism......Religion........
> ....................................


*ALTER2EGO -to- ERIK VIKING:*
According to the U.S. Supreme Court and numerous other courts around the country, Atheism is Religion. In fact, at Post 8, I quoted a newspaper article in which the Wisconsin Federal Appeals Court clearly stated that Atheism is Religion.  Here is the weblink to that post.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/5775890-post8.html


----------



## HUGGY

Alter2Ego said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think Atheism is a religion. It is a philosophy of life. Just like religions are.
> 
> ........Philosophy of life......
> ............/......\................
> ..Atheism......Religion........
> ....................................
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- ERIK VIKING:*
> According to the U.S. Supreme Court and numerous other courts around the country, Atheism is Religion. In fact, at Post 8, I quoted a newspaper article in which the Wisconsin Federal Appeals Court clearly stated that Atheism is Religion.  Here is the weblink to that post.
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/5775890-post8.html
Click to expand...


You and most if not all christians are idiots.  The US Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that it is affirmed that "there shall be no religious test" regarding atheists rights.  That is hardly the same thing as affirming that atheism is a religion.  Did I mention that you are an idiot?


----------



## Alter2Ego

HUGGY said:


> You and most if not all christians are idiots.  The US Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that it is affirmed that "there shall be no religious test" regarding atheists rights.  That is hardly the same thing as affirming that atheism is a religion.  Did I mention that you are an idiot?


*ALTER2EGO -to- HUGGY:*
In its 1961 ruling in the case of *Torcaso v. Watkins*, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Atheism is Religion under the First Amendment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution--from that day forward--as follows:



> U.S. Supreme Court
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)
> 367 U.S. 488
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, CLERK.
> APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
> No. 373.
> Argued April 24, 1961.
> Decided June 19, 1961.​
> 
> Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public; but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement violated his rights under *the First and Fourteenth Amendments*, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission; but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing without need for implementing legislation and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally *invades his freedom of belief and religion* guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 489-496.
> 223 Md. 49, 162 A. 2d 438, reversed.
> 
> 
> [ Footnote 11 ]*Among religions* in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, *Secular Humanism* and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopaedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47.


FindLaw | Cases and Codes


As soon as you can show me where that 1961 ruling was overturned in 2009, I will acknowledged that you are not confused after all.  Meanwhile, go ahead and deny.  See where that will get you.  And if you think calling me an idiot will change reality, keep it up and you will land on my "Ignore" list.


----------



## edthecynic

Alter2Ego said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and most if not all christians are idiots.  The US Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that it is affirmed that "there shall be no religious test" regarding atheists rights.  That is hardly the same thing as affirming that atheism is a religion.  Did I mention that you are an idiot?
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- HUGGY:*
> In its 1961 ruling in the case of *Torcaso v. Watkins*, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Atheism is Religion under the First Amendment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution--from that day forward--as follows:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Supreme Court
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)
> 367 U.S. 488
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, CLERK.
> APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
> No. 373.
> Argued April 24, 1961.
> Decided June 19, 1961.​
> 
> Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public; but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement violated his rights under *the First and Fourteenth Amendments*, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission; but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing without need for implementing legislation and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally *invades his freedom of belief and religion* guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 489-496.
> 223 Md. 49, 162 A. 2d 438, reversed.
> 
> 
> [ Footnote 11 ]*Among religions* in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, *Secular Humanism* and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopaedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FindLaw | Cases and Codes
> 
> 
> As soon as you can show me where that 1961 ruling was overturned in 2009, I will acknowledged that you are not confused after all.  Meanwhile, go ahead and deny.  See where that will get you.  And if you think calling me an idiot will change reality, keep it up and you will land on my "Ignore" list.
Click to expand...

I do not see "Atheism" listed  in the footnote. Do you?

Fundamentalists try to declare everything a "religion" so they can say that Christianity is being discriminated against. They declared Science a religion to try to get Creationism taught in Science class. They are very liberal with the title "religion" until it comes to giving them the same SPECIAL tax privileges their religion gets. Then suddenly they are not religion enough.


----------



## HUGGY

Alter2Ego said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and most if not all christians are idiots.  The US Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that it is affirmed that "there shall be no religious test" regarding atheists rights.  That is hardly the same thing as affirming that atheism is a religion.  Did I mention that you are an idiot?
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- HUGGY:*
> In its 1961 ruling in the case of *Torcaso v. Watkins*, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Atheism is Religion under the First Amendment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution--from that day forward--as follows:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Supreme Court
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)
> 367 U.S. 488
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, CLERK.
> APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
> No. 373.
> Argued April 24, 1961.
> Decided June 19, 1961.​
> 
> Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public; but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement violated his rights under *the First and Fourteenth Amendments*, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission; but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing without need for implementing legislation and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally *invades his freedom of belief and religion* guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 489-496.
> 223 Md. 49, 162 A. 2d 438, reversed.
> 
> 
> [ Footnote 11 ]*Among religions* in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, *Secular Humanism* and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopaedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FindLaw | Cases and Codes
> 
> 
> As soon as you can show me where that 1961 ruling was overturned in 2009, I will acknowledged that you are not confused after all.  Meanwhile, go ahead and deny.  See where that will get you.  And if you think calling me an idiot will change reality, keep it up and you will land on my "Ignore" list.
Click to expand...


You being an idiot will not change reality.  Your "ignore list" has little to do with me.  I can still see your posts and make comments for everyone to else to see.  I'm not so stupid as to believe I can persuade an idiot of anything.


----------



## Agit8r

Alter2Ego said:


> An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations.



Wrong:

*"Moses was angry with the officers of the armythe commanders of thousands and commanders of hundredswho returned from the battle. 'Have you allowed all the women to live?' he asked them. 'They were the ones who followed Balaams advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORDs people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.'"*
-- Numbers 31:14-18

*"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."*
-- 1 Samuel 15:2-3



Alter2Ego said:


> *2.* Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in *having ANY sort of belief system*. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."



This is untrue.  There are secular humanists who are not atheists, and there are atheists like Ayn Rand, and Vlad Lenin who are not humanists.


----------



## Alter2Ego

edthecynic said:


> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- HUGGY:*
> In its 1961 ruling in the case of *Torcaso v. Watkins*, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Atheism is Religion under the First Amendment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution--from that day forward--as follows:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Supreme Court
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)
> 367 U.S. 488
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, CLERK.
> APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
> No. 373.
> Argued April 24, 1961.
> Decided June 19, 1961.​
> 
> Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public; but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement violated his rights under *the First and Fourteenth Amendments*, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission; but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing without need for implementing legislation and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally *invades his freedom of belief and religion* guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 489-496.
> 223 Md. 49, 162 A. 2d 438, reversed.
> 
> 
> [ Footnote 11 ]*Among religions* in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, *Secular Humanism* and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopaedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47.
> 
> 
> 
> FindLaw | Cases and Codes
> 
> 
> As soon as you can show me where that 1961 ruling was overturned in 2009, I will acknowledged that you are not confused after all.  Meanwhile, go ahead and deny.  See where that will get you.  And if you think calling me an idiot will change reality, keep it up and you will land on my "Ignore" list.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *I do not see "Atheism" listed  in the footnote*. Do you?
> 
> Fundamentalists try to declare everything a "religion" so they can say that Christianity is being discriminated against. They declared Science a religion to try to get Creationism taught in Science class. They are very liberal with the title "religion" until it comes to giving them the same SPECIAL tax privileges their religion gets. Then suddenly they are not religion enough.
Click to expand...

*ALTER2EGO -to- EDTHECYNIC:*
There is none so blind than they who choose not to see.  

The footnote clearly provides a list of atheist religions and precedes the list with the expression: *"among religions ... which do not teach ... a belief in the existence of God."*  I went so far as to bold in red *SECULAR HUMANISM*, which is one of the listed  atheist religions. 

In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court also mentions "invades his freedom of belief and religion" in the body of the text.  And in case you still want to argue, the Plaintiff is an atheist suing for his atheist religion rights under the First and the Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. He won the lawsuit.  The Court in paragraph 1 said the Plaintiff had a right to RELIGIOUS PROTECTION.


----------



## Alter2Ego

Agit8r said:


> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong:
> 
> *"Moses was angry with the officers of the armythe commanders of thousands and commanders of hundredswho returned from the battle. 'Have you allowed all the women to live?' he asked them. 'They were the ones who followed Balaams advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORDs people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.'"*
> -- Numbers 31:14-18
> 
> *"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."*
> -- 1 Samuel 15:2-3
Click to expand...


*ALTER2EGO -to- AGIT8R:*

If you think posting in red will make your argument more credible, think again. The incidents you listed above are in reality direct instructions from the Creator against nations and people that were depraved and wicked.  

You deliberately ignored the context as well as the fact that as Creator, Jehovah has authority to execute judgment.  It's called *righteous execution* by direct authority of Almighty God.  


As Creator of all life, Jehovah has the right to decide who is fit to live.  Therefore, the incidents you referenced above cannot be compared to the human rights violations committed by false religions throughout the centuries, since the false religionists did not operate under authority of Jehovah.


----------



## HUGGY

Alter2Ego said:


> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong:
> 
> *"Moses was angry with the officers of the armythe commanders of thousands and commanders of hundredswho returned from the battle. 'Have you allowed all the women to live?' he asked them. 'They were the ones who followed Balaams advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORDs people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.'"*
> -- Numbers 31:14-18
> 
> *"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."*
> -- 1 Samuel 15:2-3
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- AGIT8R:*
> 
> If you think posting in red will make your argument more credible, think again. The incidents you listed above are in reality direct instructions from the Creator against nations and people that were depraved and wicked.
> 
> You deliberately ignored the context as well as the fact that as Creator, Jehovah has authority to execute judgment.  It's called *righteous execution* by direct authority of Almighty God.
> 
> 
> As Creator of all life, Jehovah has the right to decide who is fit to live.  Therefore, the incidents you referenced above cannot be compared to the human rights violations committed by false religions throughout the centuries, since the false religionists did not operate under authority of Jehovah.
Click to expand...


Your reference to "direct instructions" is laughable.  It's bad enough that people like you believe in this nonsense but quoting god is a bit of an over reach don't you think?  

If there was an all knowing god logically his communications would be as perfect as you think he is.  If he was capable of creating all this stuff in the universe a trillion trillion squared and then squared again in complexity a rational person would expect any "directive" to be plain and straight forward so there would be no abiguity in following his orders or not.  Leaving an "interpetaion" of "his words" to idiots like you seems to be dropping the ball.


----------



## FA_Q2

Alter2Ego said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- HUGGY:*
> In its 1961 ruling in the case of *Torcaso v. Watkins*, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Atheism is Religion under the First Amendment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution--from that day forward--as follows:
> 
> 
> FindLaw | Cases and Codes
> 
> 
> As soon as you can show me where that 1961 ruling was overturned in 2009, I will acknowledged that you are not confused after all.  Meanwhile, go ahead and deny.  See where that will get you.  And if you think calling me an idiot will change reality, keep it up and you will land on my "Ignore" list.
> 
> 
> 
> *I do not see "Atheism" listed  in the footnote*. Do you?
> 
> Fundamentalists try to declare everything a "religion" so they can say that Christianity is being discriminated against. They declared Science a religion to try to get Creationism taught in Science class. They are very liberal with the title "religion" until it comes to giving them the same SPECIAL tax privileges their religion gets. Then suddenly they are not religion enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- EDTHECYNIC:*
> There is none so blind than they who choose not to see.
> 
> The footnote clearly provides a list of atheist religions and precedes the list with the expression: *"among religions ... which do not teach ... a belief in the existence of God."*  I went so far as to bold in red *SECULAR HUMANISM*, which is one of the listed  atheist religions.
> 
> In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court also mentions "invades his freedom of belief and religion" in the body of the text.  And in case you still want to argue, the Plaintiff is an atheist suing for his atheist religion rights under the First and the Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. He won the lawsuit.  The Court in paragraph 1 said the Plaintiff had a right to RELIGIOUS PROTECTION.
Click to expand...


The courts ruling is irrelevant.  Atheism is defined as a lack of faith in a god.  LACK.  Period dot.  There is simply no way around the fact that atheism is NOT equivalent to a religion whether or not the law wants to recognize it as one.  As you cannot identify a single belief that is atheist there is no way to fit it in as a religion.


----------



## eots

AmyNation said:


> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.



Atheist are zealots as much as anyone claiming absolutes


----------



## Agit8r

Alter2Ego said:


> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alter2Ego said:
> 
> 
> 
> An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong:
> 
> *"Moses was angry with the officers of the armythe commanders of thousands and commanders of hundredswho returned from the battle. 'Have you allowed all the women to live?' he asked them. 'They were the ones who followed Balaams advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORDs people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.'"*
> -- Numbers 31:14-18
> 
> *"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."*
> -- 1 Samuel 15:2-3
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- AGIT8R:*
> 
> If you think posting in red will make your argument more credible, think again. The incidents you listed above are in reality direct instructions from the Creator against nations and people that were depraved and wicked.
> 
> You deliberately ignored the context as well as the fact that as Creator, Jehovah has authority to execute judgment.  It's called *righteous execution* by direct authority of Almighty God.
> 
> 
> As Creator of all life, Jehovah has the right to decide who is fit to live.  Therefore, the incidents you referenced above cannot be compared to the human rights violations committed by false religions throughout the centuries, since the false religionists did not operate under authority of Jehovah.
Click to expand...


I'm just pointing out that the god of Hebrew mythology has worse standards than most human beings, and therefore ought never to be thought of as a standard to follow.  Comparative human rights abuses notwithstanding.


----------



## Osomir

eots said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Atheist are zealots as much as anyone claiming absolutes
Click to expand...


Most atheists probably wouldn't claim absolutes in the way you are thinking. We don't think God is an impossibility, we just don't currently believe that God exists due to lack of evidence. It is always dangerous of course to generalize, but I'll do it here for the sake of correcting a common misunderstanding concerning general mainstream atheism.

There are plenty of things that people might not believe in like aliens, ghosts, mythological creatures, etc. Just because you don't believe that they exist doesn't mean that you would be closed off to believing in their existence (or shouldn't be at least) should adequate evidence of said existence becomes available. 

It's the same methodology that we all utilize to one extent or another only applied to religion.


----------



## HUGGY

eots said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Atheist are zealots as much as anyone claiming absolutes
Click to expand...


So recognising a fact or the lack of a fact makes someone a zealot?

zealot - definition of zealot by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

"zealot [&#712;z&#603;l&#601;t]
n
an immoderate, fanatical, or extremely zealous adherent to a cause, esp a religious one"

Is the medical community a pack of "zealots" for commiting the mentally insane into institutions for not buying into the patients delusions?

I make no apology for trying to rid my world of the disease of religion.  As long as people of religion insist on poluting the minds of the public with thier nonsense it is the duty of intelligent people to beat back the noise with resistance.


----------



## FA_Q2

Osomir said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Atheist are zealots as much as anyone claiming absolutes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most atheists probably wouldn't claim absolutes in the way you are thinking. We don't think God is an impossibility, we just don't currently believe that God exists due to lack of evidence. It is always dangerous of course to generalize, but I'll do it here for the sake of correcting a common misunderstanding concerning general mainstream atheism.
> 
> There are plenty of things that people might not believe in like aliens, ghosts, mythological creatures, etc. Just because you don't believe that they exist doesn't mean that you would be closed off to believing in their existence (or shouldn't be at least) should adequate evidence of said existence becomes available.
> 
> It's the same methodology that we all utilize to one extent or another only applied to religion.
Click to expand...

Correct.  You can count me in as another one of the lack of evidence category.  There is a rather large difference in atheists and those that are atheist anti-theists.   One is religiously against God and the other simply accepts the fact that there is a glaring lack of evidence and is unwilling to believe in something that lacks that evidence.


----------



## FA_Q2

HUGGY said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Atheist are zealots as much as anyone claiming absolutes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So recognising a fact or the lack of a fact makes someone a zealot?
> 
> zealot - definition of zealot by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
> 
> "zealot [&#712;z&#603;l&#601;t]
> n
> an immoderate, fanatical, or extremely zealous adherent to a cause, esp a religious one"
> 
> Is the medical community a pack of "zealots" for commiting the mentally insane into institutions for not buying into the patients delusions?
> 
> I make no apology for trying to rid my world of the disease of religion.  As long as people of religion insist on poluting the minds of the public with thier nonsense it is the duty of intelligent people to beat back the noise with resistance.
Click to expand...


No, lack of faith does NOT make you a religious zealot.  THIS makes you a zealot:


> I make no apology for trying to rid my world of the disease of religion.  As long as people of religion insist on poluting the minds of the public with thier nonsense it is the duty of intelligent people to beat back the noise with resistance.


----------



## Alter2Ego

*ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE: *

Joseph Stalin, proud member of the Religion of Atheism, ordered the deaths of 40 million to 62 million people. Keep in mind that many of Stalin's victims were his own Soviet citizens.


*SOURCE #1:*
Author Robert Conquest in his appendix on casualty figures calculates that the number of Joseph Stalin executions from 1936 to 1938 was probably about 1,000,000. He then added that from 1936 to 1950 about 12,000,000 died in the camps and that 3,500,000 died in the 1930-1936 collectivization. Overal, he concludes: 

"Thus we get a figure of 20 million dead, which is almost certainly too low and might require an increase of 50 percent or so, as the debit balance of the Stalin regime for twenty-three years." (Source: The Great Terror: Stalin's Purge of the Thirties (Macmillan 1968)


----------



## HUGGY

Alter2Ego said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and most if not all christians are idiots.  The US Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that it is affirmed that "there shall be no religious test" regarding atheists rights.  That is hardly the same thing as affirming that atheism is a religion.  Did I mention that you are an idiot?
> 
> 
> 
> *ALTER2EGO -to- HUGGY:*
> In its 1961 ruling in the case of *Torcaso v. Watkins*, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Atheism is Religion under the First Amendment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution--from that day forward--as follows:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Supreme Court
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)
> 367 U.S. 488
> TORCASO v. WATKINS, CLERK.
> APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
> No. 373.
> Argued April 24, 1961.
> Decided June 19, 1961.​
> 
> Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public; but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement violated his rights under *the First and Fourteenth Amendments*, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission; but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing without need for implementing legislation and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally *invades his freedom of belief and religion* guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 489-496.
> 223 Md. 49, 162 A. 2d 438, reversed.
> 
> 
> [ Footnote 11 ]*Among religions* in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, *Secular Humanism* and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopaedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FindLaw | Cases and Codes
> 
> 
> As soon as you can show me where that 1961 ruling was overturned in 2009, I will acknowledged that you are not confused after all.  Meanwhile, go ahead and deny.  See where that will get you.  And if you think calling me an idiot will change reality, *keep it up and you will land on my "Ignore" list*.
Click to expand...


Oh My...


----------



## HUGGY

Alter2Ego said:


> *ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE: *
> 
> Joseph Stalin, proud member of the Religion of Atheism, ordered the deaths of 40 million to 62 million people. Keep in mind that many of Stalin's victims were his own Soviet citizens.
> 
> 
> *SOURCE #1:*
> Author Robert Conquest in his appendix on casualty figures calculates that the number of Joseph Stalin executions from 1936 to 1938 was probably about 1,000,000. He then added that from 1936 to 1950 about 12,000,000 died in the camps and that 3,500,000 died in the 1930-1936 collectivization. Overal, he concludes:
> 
> "Thus we get a figure of 20 million dead, which is almost certainly too low and might require an increase of 50 percent or so, as the debit balance of the Stalin regime for twenty-three years." (Source: The Great Terror: Stalin's Purge of the Thirties (Macmillan 1968)



You can only preach your stupidity as allowed by those that don't put YOU on thier ignore list idiot.

There is no god therefore religion is a fraud.  Having a moral compass does not require a "membership".  My conscience is my own.  You completely fail in your ignorant rant.

NOW I will put YOU on my ignore list...you will be lonely there as I have no one else onn it.

Enjoy!


----------



## Alter2Ego

*ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:*

The Scopes Monkey Trial was in 1925. That case opened the way for Atheism to be classified as a religion. It was not until 1961 that the U.S. Supreme Courtthe most important court in the landcemented atheism as a religion in the case of *Torcaso v. Watkins*. 

As you know, U.S. Supreme Court rulings become the law of the land. In its ruling, the 1961 court mentioned Secular Humanism, which as we all know is the default religious ideology of atheism. Specifically, the 1961 Supreme Court said the following, and keep your eyes on the words that I bolded in red at Footnote 11.




> [ Footnote 11 ] *Among religions* in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, *Secular Humanism* and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopaedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47.


FindLaw | Cases and Codes


----------



## HUGGY

martybegan said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.
> 
> It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.
Click to expand...


Bogus logic Marty.

Believing or not believing you might commit murder, under the proper circumstance and provocation,  does not disqualify one from being annoyed by people that do murder.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

United Nations Declaration of Human Rights includes Atheism/disbelief in gods as a 'religion' that's protected.


----------



## midcan5

"Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby."  Anon


----------



## justinacolmena

AmyNation said:


> Atheism is a religion as much as abstinence is a sexual position.


And in fact abstinence is a sexual position: and people who refuse to respect that are guilty of promoting rape and compelling prostitution.

Whether or not one person believes in God, or wishes to admit of the existence of God in any particular situation, is not for another person to promote or compel.

They cut too much hair straight from the pulpit in church on Sunday, and there's a barbershop quartet of choirboys.


----------

