Atheism Is Not A Religion!!!

[Carla_Danger]

Hollie, no one is caring what you reject or accept except you.

Since you cannot or will not deal empirically, then you are right there with koshergrl on religion or stephanie on anti-obama or LadyGunSlinger on everybody haters: but none of them have the evidence. Just like you.

Getting upset will not make you feel better: doesn't work that way.

Go take comfort in your faith that a God that does not exist will not get you. Boo!

I'm calling BS, and I think you know you're full of it.

I don't have faith that there is no God, I have no proof one way or the other. I'm just not buying it. I normally spend very little time thinking about my lack of faith. It's not a priority.

You seem hell bent on bringing atheism down to your level of witchcraft and wizardry, for some strange reason, and I'm not going to let you. I'm assuming you're not very secure with your own faith.

 

[Carla_Danger]

In a related story, we do have evidence that trolls exist. And that they practice when they've lost the argument.

/thread

Now that I believe in. I even have faith they'll be around tomorrow. Is that a religion?

 

[Pogo]

In a related story, we do have evidence that trolls exist. And that they practice when they've lost the argument.

/thread

Now that I believe in. I even have faith they'll be around tomorrow. Is that a religion?

Ah, not unless it addresses the Mysteries, hell no.

 

[Pogo]

Hollie, no one is caring what you reject or accept except you.

Since you cannot or will not deal empirically, then you are right there with koshergrl on religion or stephanie on anti-obama or LadyGunSlinger on everybody haters: but none of them have the evidence. Just like you.

Getting upset will not make you feel better: doesn't work that way.

Go take comfort in your faith that a God that does not exist will not get you. Boo!

I'm calling BS, and I think you know you're full of it.

I don't have faith that there is no God, I have no proof one way or the other. I'm just not buying it. I normally spend very little time thinking about my lack of faith. It's not a priority.

You seem hell bent on bringing atheism down to your level of witchcraft and wizardry, for some strange reason, and I'm not going to let you. I'm assuming you're not very secure with your own faith.

You get that impression too? I noticed when this thread started and the naysayers kept rambling on and on about atheist proselytizing, at least two of its participants went feverishly starting atheism-bashing threads. Leaves ya wondering who the proselytizers are.

Well, maybe "wondering" isn't the right word...

 

[Carla_Danger]

Hollie, no one is caring what you reject or accept except you.

Since you cannot or will not deal empirically, then you are right there with koshergrl on religion or stephanie on anti-obama or LadyGunSlinger on everybody haters: but none of them have the evidence. Just like you.

Getting upset will not make you feel better: doesn't work that way.

Go take comfort in your faith that a God that does not exist will not get you. Boo!

I'm calling BS, and I think you know you're full of it.

I don't have faith that there is no God, I have no proof one way or the other. I'm just not buying it. I normally spend very little time thinking about my lack of faith. It's not a priority.

You seem hell bent on bringing atheism down to your level of witchcraft and wizardry, for some strange reason, and I'm not going to let you. I'm assuming you're not very secure with your own faith.

You get that impression too? I noticed when this thread started and the naysayers kept rambling on and on about atheist proselytizing, at least two of its participants went feverishly starting atheism-bashing threads. Leaves ya wondering who the proselytizers are.

Well, maybe "wondering" isn't the right word...

If they make atheism a religion, they don't have to look at the holes in their own religion. I just looked at one of the threads you mentioned. (I'm still shaking my head)





.

 

[HUGGY]

Hollie, no one is caring what you reject or accept except you.

Since you cannot or will not deal empirically, then you are right there with koshergrl on religion or stephanie on anti-obama or LadyGunSlinger on everybody haters: but none of them have the evidence. Just like you.

Getting upset will not make you feel better: doesn't work that way.

Go take comfort in your faith that a God that does not exist will not get you. Boo!

I'm calling BS, and I think you know you're full of it.

I don't have faith that there is no God, I have no proof one way or the other. I'm just not buying it. I normally spend very little time thinking about my lack of faith. It's not a priority.

You seem hell bent on bringing atheism down to your level of witchcraft and wizardry, for some strange reason, and I'm not going to let you. I'm assuming you're not very secure with your own faith.

You get that impression too? I noticed when this thread started and the naysayers kept rambling on and on about atheist proselytizing, at least two of its participants went feverishly starting atheism-bashing threads. Leaves ya wondering who the proselytizers are.

Well, maybe "wondering" isn't the right word...

If they make atheism a religion, they don't have to look at the holes in their own religion. I just looked at one of the threads you mentioned. (I'm still shaking my head)





.

Who are these "they" that would have the authority to proclaim atheism a religion?

Atheism is an individual outcome of rational observation.

That is the WHOLE point.

It is NOT becoming a member of anything.

Even as dear Emily points out the Buhdists are on an individual path BUT they get the map to and through this path from an organization no matter how loosely arranged. Nobody just sat down and on their own became a Buhdist.

Atheism requires NO outside guidlines or inspiration. It is like I have said .... "The results of a personal observation".

Here on this thread many theists have stated to nauseum that there are in existance atheist churches. I can't imagine why. I know that I personally don't need anyone to talk to about something so obvious. There are probably people that sit around together and discuss how fascinating it is that the sky is blue also. "The Church Of The Blue Sky" no doubt.

I am curious though why an outsider to the obvious conclusion that sky fairies are a myth and not real have such an interest in defining my personal conclusion as a religion. That is what drew me to this thread. I'm seeing this and thinking..."WTF are these fools talking about?" I have no need to "defend" my personal conclusion that religists myths are bunk or that being an atheist automatically makes me a religion of one. Seeing some of them make these rediculous statements as if they had a clue what they where talking about is humorous. They do not. it is as simple as that.

 

[asaratis]

Atheism is not a religion? Richard Dawkins might disagree with you.

Pantheism as Sexed-up Atheism World Pantheism
Richard Dawkins, in his book The God Delusion, has described Pantheism as "sexed-up atheism." That may seem flippant, but it is accurate. Of all religious or spiritual traditions, Pantheism - the approach of Einstein, Hawking and many other scientists - is the only one that passes the muster of the world's most militant atheist.

....

If you are looking for atheist groups or freethought groups or brights groups and email lists, and if you would like ones that do a lot more than just attack religion, then you may well find World Pantheism the place you were looking for.

....

If atheism, humanism and naturalism are to advance, then they need approaches that don't simply leave the individual alone in the face of an increasingly threatening physical, social and international environment. They need ways of life that offer as rich a range of benefits as traditional religious ones.

....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Those free from faith do not 'practice' a 'religion' as perceived by theists; indeed, it's a false comparison fallacy.


Moreover, there is nothing to be 'advanced,' just as the Earth orbiting the Sun doesn't need to be 'advanced.' One either accepts the fact that there is no 'god' as perceived by theists or he rejects it; one acknowledges a fact because it is a fact, not because one is enticed to do so by doctrinal incentives or promises made by religious dogma.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Hollie has so lost this discussion,

It is amazing that people who claim they have no beliefs in gods seem incapable of separating gods from their thoughts.

^^^ that

Hollie, you got to support empirically that deity does not exist, you can't, yet you believe it. Faith

And there it is. Absolutely nothing posted rebuts this fact. Logic is fact, not unsupported belief, yo.

 

[PratchettFan]

False. There is no requirement for faith to reach conclusions.

Conclusions reached, and strongly held, absent any evidence, are based on faith.

What about this fact do you not grasp?

The absence of evidence applies to every single model, configuration and proposal for gods.

What part of that fact are you having difficulty grasping?

The part where you present your evidence. Simply saying you don't have any is not the same as having it.

You say there is an absence of evidence. Tell me what evidence you would expect to find if there were a God and provide your objective support for identifying it as the required evidence. Until you do that, then saying there is no evidence is itself a statement of pure belief.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disappoint you. I spend no greater amount of time disproving your gods than I do disproving the gods of others, the Easter Bunny, Bigfoot or Nessie.

You commit the fallacy of requiring others to "disprove" your gods when it is the one making the positive claim who bears the burden of proof. So, yes, my disproof of your gods stands until you disprove my disproof.

You are the one who said you could easily do it. I am simply asking you to back up your claim. I assume you can't, so your position is faith based. There really is no other option. Either you have objective evidence to support your position or your position is belief.

I have asked this before and haven't gotten an answer from anyone. Why is having beliefs such a horrible thing that you would spend so much energy denying it?

I'm aghast that you're unable to disprove my disproof. If proof of the gods was as overwhelming as the many believers of many different gods and religions claim it is, it should be a simple matter to present the evidence that establishes the reality of your gods vs. all the other gods.

Why is asking for you to prove your argument such a horrible thing? I am simply asking you, the one making the positive claim, to support your argument.

I think I have proven my argument. My argument is that yours is a position of pure belief. As evidence, I present your posts which are entirely lacking in an objective evidence while stating you think gods are improbable. That is the only argument I have made here.

Now, I take it your statement of how easily you could disprove gods was a mistake on your part. It would help if you just said "oops".

You can think whatever you wish. Your desperate need to assign conclusions regarding the supernatural as a "religion" is a fallacy of many believers.

You still haven't disproven by disproof of your gods and other gods. It's actually comical that you demand others disprove claims that you offer no support for and claim that you are under no obligation to do so.

It would help if you just append "... because I say so", to your claims.

I have made no claims about gods, you have. I would not even attempt to prove gods as there is no evidence. It is a matter of pure belief. I fully admit it is a matter of pure belief. In the absence of evidence, one belief is no superior to any other belief. You, on the other hand, insist your belief is not belief. You have no evidence, you make claims you cannot support, and then you blame me because you can't support your unsupportable claims.

Atheism is not of itself a religion. But you have clearly shown it can be turned into one. What you are currently doing is accusing me of blasphemy, of questioning the holy writ. But while I may be a believer, I am not confused into thinking my beliefs are anything more than beliefs and I am certainly not confused that yours are either.

You're a bit reality challenged. I have made no positive claims about gods. I've simply required people like you to support your claims to the supernatural.

I have no more beliefs about your gods than I have beliefs about Bigfoot. And by the way, I suppose that your inability to disprove Bigfoot makes him/ her just as likely as your gods, of which you require belief until disproved.

You think because your beliefs are negative you get off scot free? It doesn't work that way. I do not require belief from you. I require you support your claims. I don't have to prove you wrong, you have to prove you right. Or admit your just operating on faith.

You have said you can disprove gods. Do it.
You have said you think gods are improbable. Produce the objective evidence you used to arrive at that conclusion.

These are claims you have made. The onus is on you, not me.

I have already disproven your gods. Prove I haven't.

Have you still not seen the futility of your nonsensical "prove it isn't" fallacy you use to prop-up your gods?

I haven't seen your proof yet, so I can't respond to it. And the only reason I have asked that you "prove it isn't" is because you made the claim you could. Is this an example of the "reason and rationality" you spoke of?

I have no proof of your gods or anyone else's gods. Neither do you.

I never claimed I did. You, however, made exactly that claim.

False. Nowhere did I claim to have proof of anyone's gods.

Sigh..... Do you bother to read what you write? "I have already disproven your gods." It's just a few lines up.

Are you really that out of touch?

"I have no proof of your gods" is a different statement than "I have already disproven your gods."

How did you miss that?

I didn't miss it. I also didn't miss where you said "I have already disproven your gods." Are you going to pretend you didn't now?

 

[PratchettFan]

It's just a fact that you can provide no supportable evidence for your gods.

I don't need faith to understand that. I can conclude your claims to absurdities of nature are false until proven true. Identify for us a single, verifiable supernatural event. Just one that is connected to your gods. You can't, right? I knew you couldn't.

I happen to live in a reality where your claims to supernatural entities are utterly absent substantiation.

No. I can't. I never once claimed I could. Do you see how that works? I don't make a claim so I don't have to support it. You do make a claim so you do have to support it.

My only claim made on this or any of the other threads on the subject is that Atheism is not a matter of non-belief. The claim that it is just non-belief is utter bullshit. It is false. Untrue. Pure crap.

Sorry, that's false. Untrue. Pure crap.

I don't believe in the Easter Bunny. That doesn't make not believing in the Easter Bunny a "religion".

That's all there is to it. You yourself admitted it earlier. And I quote:

Not smoking itself is not a religion, but it be treated like one. Same with Atheism. In and of itself, it is not a religion. But that does not mean there are no Atheists who don't treat it that way. Science is not a religion, but I have certainly known people who treated it as one.

And you were right. So the revisionistas can stop treating it like one.

You spend a lot of time discussing your non-belief of the Easter Bunny on message boards, do you? It's so important that you actually apply a label to yourself as an Alepidist to identify yourself as someone who has no beliefs in the Easter Bunny? Remember what I said about the value of pithy little sayings?

Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. But it sure as hell is being treated as one. Just a simple little statement of "I believe there are no gods" has been so twisted, defined and encased in doctrine that you have turned it into one. So don't blame others. You're the ones who did it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It is NOT a religion, and if you keep saying it is, I'm going to start my own tax exempt church, and start pounding on your door at dinner time.

Seriously, it sounds ridiculous when you say it.


re·li·gion
riˈlijən/
noun

1. the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
   "ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
   

   synonyms:

   faith, belief, worship, creed; More

   [TBODY] [/TBODY]

Since the atheistic Zionists founded Israel it is not a religious nation. It is a fraud.

Thanks for you input, Adolf.

 

[Carla_Danger]

It's just a fact that you can provide no supportable evidence for your gods.

I don't need faith to understand that. I can conclude your claims to absurdities of nature are false until proven true. Identify for us a single, verifiable supernatural event. Just one that is connected to your gods. You can't, right? I knew you couldn't.

I happen to live in a reality where your claims to supernatural entities are utterly absent substantiation.

No. I can't. I never once claimed I could. Do you see how that works? I don't make a claim so I don't have to support it. You do make a claim so you do have to support it.

My only claim made on this or any of the other threads on the subject is that Atheism is not a matter of non-belief. The claim that it is just non-belief is utter bullshit. It is false. Untrue. Pure crap.

Sorry, that's false. Untrue. Pure crap.

I don't believe in the Easter Bunny. That doesn't make not believing in the Easter Bunny a "religion".

That's all there is to it. You yourself admitted it earlier. And I quote:

Not smoking itself is not a religion, but it be treated like one. Same with Atheism. In and of itself, it is not a religion. But that does not mean there are no Atheists who don't treat it that way. Science is not a religion, but I have certainly known people who treated it as one.

And you were right. So the revisionistas can stop treating it like one.

You spend a lot of time discussing your non-belief of the Easter Bunny on message boards, do you? It's so important that you actually apply a label to yourself as an Alepidist to identify yourself as someone who has no beliefs in the Easter Bunny? Remember what I said about the value of pithy little sayings?

Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. But it sure as hell is being treated as one. Just a simple little statement of "I believe there are no gods" has been so twisted, defined and encased in doctrine that you have turned it into one. So don't blame others. You're the ones who did it.

Here you are, talking out of both sides of your mouth. If you know atheism is not a religion, why are YOU treating it as one?

 

[Uncensored2008]

The answer to your questions is satisfied by "The gawds did it"

And you demonstrate what it means to be an Atheist, cocksure that your ignorance is the ultimate truth.

Reality is that we don't know shit, we can't even explain why gravity is a weak force.

Lisa Randall says that Brane Worlds are an answer, Stephen Hawking says they are not - which of these superlative minds do we believe?

Atheists are fools, declaring absolutes with no evidence to support their position - working purely on faith, no different than the Christians they hate so much.

My most honest assessment is that an Atheist is one who hates Christians.

 

[Carla_Danger]

The answer to your questions is satisfied by "The gawds did it"

And you demonstrate what it means to be an Atheist, cocksure that your ignorance is the ultimate truth.

Reality is that we don't know shit, we can't even explain why gravity is a weak force.

Lisa Randall says that Brane Worlds are an answer, Stephen Hawking says they are not - which of these superlative minds do we believe?

Atheists are fools, declaring absolutes with no evidence to support their position - working purely on faith, no different than the Christians they hate so much.

My most honest assessment is that an Atheist is one who hates Christians.

faith
fāTH/
noun

1. 1.
   complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
   "this restores one's faith in politicians"
   

   synonyms:

   trust, belief, confidence, conviction; More

   [TBODY] [/TBODY]
2. 2.
   strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
   

   synonyms:

   religion, church, sect, denomination, (religious) persuasion, (religious) belief, ideology, creed, teaching, doctrine "she gave her life for her faith"

   [TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[PratchettFan]

It's just a fact that you can provide no supportable evidence for your gods.

I don't need faith to understand that. I can conclude your claims to absurdities of nature are false until proven true. Identify for us a single, verifiable supernatural event. Just one that is connected to your gods. You can't, right? I knew you couldn't.

I happen to live in a reality where your claims to supernatural entities are utterly absent substantiation.

No. I can't. I never once claimed I could. Do you see how that works? I don't make a claim so I don't have to support it. You do make a claim so you do have to support it.

My only claim made on this or any of the other threads on the subject is that Atheism is not a matter of non-belief. The claim that it is just non-belief is utter bullshit. It is false. Untrue. Pure crap.

Sorry, that's false. Untrue. Pure crap.

I don't believe in the Easter Bunny. That doesn't make not believing in the Easter Bunny a "religion".

That's all there is to it. You yourself admitted it earlier. And I quote:

Not smoking itself is not a religion, but it be treated like one. Same with Atheism. In and of itself, it is not a religion. But that does not mean there are no Atheists who don't treat it that way. Science is not a religion, but I have certainly known people who treated it as one.

And you were right. So the revisionistas can stop treating it like one.

You spend a lot of time discussing your non-belief of the Easter Bunny on message boards, do you? It's so important that you actually apply a label to yourself as an Alepidist to identify yourself as someone who has no beliefs in the Easter Bunny? Remember what I said about the value of pithy little sayings?

Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. But it sure as hell is being treated as one. Just a simple little statement of "I believe there are no gods" has been so twisted, defined and encased in doctrine that you have turned it into one. So don't blame others. You're the ones who did it.

Here you are, talking out of both sides of your mouth. If you know atheism is not a religion, why are YOU treating it as one?

Please do try to take the time to read what I say. I'm not treating it as a religion. The only people who can treat Atheism as a religion are Atheists. All I am doing is pointing out that that is happening.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Atheism is not a religion? Richard Dawkins might disagree with you.

Pantheism as Sexed-up Atheism World Pantheism
Richard Dawkins, in his book The God Delusion, has described Pantheism as "sexed-up atheism." That may seem flippant, but it is accurate. Of all religious or spiritual traditions, Pantheism - the approach of Einstein, Hawking and many other scientists - is the only one that passes the muster of the world's most militant atheist.

....

If you are looking for atheist groups or freethought groups or brights groups and email lists, and if you would like ones that do a lot more than just attack religion, then you may well find World Pantheism the place you were looking for.

....

If atheism, humanism and naturalism are to advance, then they need approaches that don't simply leave the individual alone in the face of an increasingly threatening physical, social and international environment. They need ways of life that offer as rich a range of benefits as traditional religious ones.

....

LOL...are there any pantheist around here to dispute the above? I am an atheist, and atheism is not a religion.

 

[Carla_Danger]

It's just a fact that you can provide no supportable evidence for your gods.

I don't need faith to understand that. I can conclude your claims to absurdities of nature are false until proven true. Identify for us a single, verifiable supernatural event. Just one that is connected to your gods. You can't, right? I knew you couldn't.

I happen to live in a reality where your claims to supernatural entities are utterly absent substantiation.

No. I can't. I never once claimed I could. Do you see how that works? I don't make a claim so I don't have to support it. You do make a claim so you do have to support it.

My only claim made on this or any of the other threads on the subject is that Atheism is not a matter of non-belief. The claim that it is just non-belief is utter bullshit. It is false. Untrue. Pure crap.

Sorry, that's false. Untrue. Pure crap.

I don't believe in the Easter Bunny. That doesn't make not believing in the Easter Bunny a "religion".

That's all there is to it. You yourself admitted it earlier. And I quote:

Not smoking itself is not a religion, but it be treated like one. Same with Atheism. In and of itself, it is not a religion. But that does not mean there are no Atheists who don't treat it that way. Science is not a religion, but I have certainly known people who treated it as one.

And you were right. So the revisionistas can stop treating it like one.

You spend a lot of time discussing your non-belief of the Easter Bunny on message boards, do you? It's so important that you actually apply a label to yourself as an Alepidist to identify yourself as someone who has no beliefs in the Easter Bunny? Remember what I said about the value of pithy little sayings?

Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. But it sure as hell is being treated as one. Just a simple little statement of "I believe there are no gods" has been so twisted, defined and encased in doctrine that you have turned it into one. So don't blame others. You're the ones who did it.

Here you are, talking out of both sides of your mouth. If you know atheism is not a religion, why are YOU treating it as one?

Please do try to take the time to read what I say. I'm not treating it as a religion. The only people who can treat Atheism as a religion are Atheists. All I am doing is pointing out that that is happening.

I treat atheism as the exact opposite of religion, but I'm glad we both agree that atheism is not a religion. You are 100 % correct to say that atheism is not a religion.

 

[HUGGY]

This isn't about whether Atheism is a religion. This thread is about religists who have been caught still with their hands in the philosophical cookie jar after 3000 years and angry at anyone with the audacity to call them on it. Most religists know full well that what they espouse has holes in it. The thought that their very expensive and invested house of cards could and should be tumbling down around them at any minute scares the crap out of them.

So...they fight and scream like banshees whenever someone serious calls them on their ponzi scheme. With cries of "what would the world do without religion?". We would all go straight to hell in a handbasket. All law and morality would evaporate without their presence gaurding all humanity from total annialation. All the while attempting like diseased ticks burrowing deeper into our fabric and legal structure.

Their greatest fear is that as people become better informed and less afraid of the boogerman that we as humanity will see them for what they are and reclaim what is left of their treasure and leave them penniless and eventually prosecuted simply for their fraud.

 

[PratchettFan]

Atheism is not a religion? Richard Dawkins might disagree with you.

Pantheism as Sexed-up Atheism World Pantheism
Richard Dawkins, in his book The God Delusion, has described Pantheism as "sexed-up atheism." That may seem flippant, but it is accurate. Of all religious or spiritual traditions, Pantheism - the approach of Einstein, Hawking and many other scientists - is the only one that passes the muster of the world's most militant atheist.

....

If you are looking for atheist groups or freethought groups or brights groups and email lists, and if you would like ones that do a lot more than just attack religion, then you may well find World Pantheism the place you were looking for.

....

If atheism, humanism and naturalism are to advance, then they need approaches that don't simply leave the individual alone in the face of an increasingly threatening physical, social and international environment. They need ways of life that offer as rich a range of benefits as traditional religious ones.

....

LOL...are there any pantheist around here to dispute the above? I am an atheist, and atheism is not a religion.

I guess that would be me. I didn't read the book and I don't want to assume where he was going with it based upon the opinion of someone else. Pantheism, however, is only akin to Atheism if you begin from the perspective of monotheism. This is an extremely narrow perspective which I do not accept.