Atheism Is Not A Religion!!!

[Carla_Danger]

Also by your own definition you would have to accept every single supernatural phenomenom ever described.

why?......are you incapable of making choices about what you believe?......

Interesting comment in terms of religious belief. It is almost exclusively a function of geography and familial circumstances. You christian fundies, had you been born in the Islamist Middle East, would be the suicide bombers and head choppers of ISIS. There is a certain personality type that is susceptible to mind control techniques that religions employ.

/shrugs.....and if you have been born in the ME you would already be dead.....be that as it may, we have examples in the form of frequent posters who have made choices, either for or against, the religion of their family......this merely proves that what you post is not true......we have to take it for granted that the things you post that we can't disprove are likewise untrue......

/shrugs.... how lucky I am that in the Infidel West, I'm protected from people like you.

This merely proves that you are a danger to yourselves and others. Society as a whole is protected by keeping you lovely cultists on a short choke collar.

LOL! That's funny!

 

[Carla_Danger]

Did everyone read that? Please everyone read what he just wrote to my response.

I called you a fucking coward who is afraid to say he believes anything.

 

[PratchettFan]

I originally suggested three attributes of religion and no one ever argued they were wrong or more were needed. These are them:

A group to which members identify themselves. "I am an Atheist along with my fellow Atheists"

Then the idea that atheism is a religion fails on your first criteria. 'Atheists' doesn't describe a cohesive group, any more than 'pessimists' does. It just identifies people who share a single trait.

Of course Atheists identify as a group. Atheists join in groups all of the time. Here is just one web site of many that will tell you how you can join a group How to Find an Atheist Support Group Atheist Revolution. People put up billboards, organize holiday displays, etc.

Yep. Some do. That's been addressed. If you want to point to some atheist groups, and show how they are operating as religions, go for it. I might agree with you. But that doesn't mean that the general concept of atheism represents a religion.

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

Whether or not it is a religion is entirely in how it is being treated and that is on an individual basis. I have known people who treated science as a religion, and I would certainly not call science a religion.

What I find interesting is this need to redefine belief. I truly don't get the issue with simply saying one believes there are no gods. That is as reasonable a belief as any other. I have come up with several explanations to this, but none with which I am yet satisfied. It is a fascinating subject and while I may never figure it out it has never bored me.

 

[asaratis]

I originally suggested three attributes of religion and no one ever argued they were wrong or more were needed. These are them:

A group to which members identify themselves. "I am an Atheist along with my fellow Atheists"

Then the idea that atheism is a religion fails on your first criteria. 'Atheists' doesn't describe a cohesive group, any more than 'pessimists' does. It just identifies people who share a single trait.

Of course Atheists identify as a group. Atheists join in groups all of the time. Here is just one web site of many that will tell you how you can join a group How to Find an Atheist Support Group Atheist Revolution. People put up billboards, organize holiday displays, etc.

Yep. Some do. That's been addressed. If you want to point to some atheist groups, and show how they are operating as religions, go for it. I might agree with you. But that doesn't mean that the general concept of atheism represents a religion.

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

I don't see it as the same sort of religion as the others you mention. There is no god for them, there is no need for prayer, or worship services, albeit their mentors certainly have their attention...and the church jester, Bill Maher swells them with pride using his corny jokes and simplistic analogies (just as does his "Pope"). Those that are practicing "religiously" are the ones that continuously parrot the idiotic Dawkins and attack other religions as if they are destroying the world. The doctrine of their religion appears to include ATTACK, RIDICULE and SCORN anyone that disagrees with the denial of the existence of deities. They proselytize just like most theistic churches do, yet they claim to have no common goals and no directives from the hierarchy that leads them to believe as they do. I suppose they figure if they can deny God, they can deny everything and claim to be acting alone in every regard. This too is horse shit disguised as food for thought.

There is no motivation in my claiming it's a religion. I'm simply disagreeing with the claim that it is not a religion. I think there has been ample evidence shown in this thread that Atheism is a religion. I would repeat the bullet item post I made several pages back, but I have tired of the childish comebacks and denial of known FACTS about Atheism, the courts and established Atheist Churches.

 

[sealybobo]

I insist, for the thousandth time, that is reasonable to disbelieve in the existence of something for which there is no evidence of its existence, whether it's God or Big Foot,

and one need not repeatedly inject the caveat that it's still 'possible' for something one doesn't believe in to actually exist.

Yes, we get it. Theoretically ANYTHING is possible. That doesn't make one's decision not to believe in something some sort of mystical exercise.

Funny, I never said that your beliefs are unreasonable, I just keep pointing out that they are beliefs. Why is that so hard for you to accept?

By your measure, everything is a belief. Fine.

But common sense would tell us that every belief is not a religion. If that were not so, then there would be no category of humans that could be labeled 'non-religious' or 'irreligious'.

I know why they want to lump us in together with all the other organized religions.

Notice liberal Christians don't mind when people of other faiths don't believe their bible stories? Why? They're basically saying the same thing us atheists are saying about their stories. Only difference is they believe their own fairy tales, we don't.

So for example, a Christian doesn't mind if a Muslim believes his own stories of god. Christians don't seem to mind Jews don't think Jesus was the Messiah either. Us atheists aren't alone on that. Traditional Christians don't care what Mormons think about their church being corrupt. They don't care what Jehova's say about only they go to heaven. Catholics don't care what born against say about having to be baptized as an adult to be saved.

So, they want to lump us in with all the other religions they just agree to disagree with.

Atheism is not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding any claim.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more.

Wrong, silly bozo. Atheism, by definition is a belief that goes does not exist. It's okay that you believe that (if you are indeed an Atheist. If you have no belief regarding the question of existence, you're nothing but an agnostic.

I really don't care anymore if you get it or not you big dummy. This weekend I rented "angels and demons :are we alone" and I wanted to see what possible compelling facts they would give to prove that angels and demons exist. They provide NOTHING. All they did was tell the Christian stories and they explained how other religions also believe.

They had people on explaining that if you see a dark mist then it's a Demon or a spirit... OMG I couldn't fucking take it. I watched for about a half hour and realized this dvd was meant for really stupid and superstitious people not me.

Mysteries of angels demons are we alone DVD video 2009 WorldCat.org

Then I was watching Jesus TV and they had Kirk Cameron explaining why Evolution is not true. I have to admit he made some compelling arguments if they are true. For example, he says most scientists agree Lucy was not a human she was a monkey or a human with a deformity. Is that true?

 

[dblack]

Then the idea that atheism is a religion fails on your first criteria. 'Atheists' doesn't describe a cohesive group, any more than 'pessimists' does. It just identifies people who share a single trait.

Of course Atheists identify as a group. Atheists join in groups all of the time. Here is just one web site of many that will tell you how you can join a group How to Find an Atheist Support Group Atheist Revolution. People put up billboards, organize holiday displays, etc.

Yep. Some do. That's been addressed. If you want to point to some atheist groups, and show how they are operating as religions, go for it. I might agree with you. But that doesn't mean that the general concept of atheism represents a religion.

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

I don't see it as the same sort of religion as the others you mention. There is no god for them, there is no need for prayer, or worship services, albeit their mentors certainly have their attention...and the church jester, Bill Maher swells them with pride using his corny jokes and simplistic analogies (just as does his "Pope"). Those that are practicing "religiously" are the ones that continuously parrot the idiotic Dawkins and attack other religions as if they are destroying the world. The doctrine of their religion appears to include ATTACK, RIDICULE and SCORN anyone that disagrees with the denial of the existence of deities. They proselytize just like most theistic churches do, yet they claim to have no common goals and no directives from the hierarchy that leads them to believe as they do. I suppose they figure if they can deny God, they can deny everything and claim to be acting alone in every regard. This too is horse shit disguised as food for thought.

There is no motivation in my claiming it's a religion. I'm simply disagreeing with the claim that it is not a religion. I think there has been ample evidence shown in this thread that Atheism is a religion. I would repeat the bullet item post I made several pages back, but I have tired of the childish comebacks and denial of known FACTS about Atheism, the courts and established Atheist Churches.

I can't know your true intentions, but calling atheism a religion is clearly a philosophical hack. It's a game to conflate definitions and blur boundaries deliberately. I suspect that part of the motive is to intimidate people, to promote the idea that not believing in god is the equivalent of joining a cult.

 

[asaratis]

I insist, for the thousandth time, that is reasonable to disbelieve in the existence of something for which there is no evidence of its existence, whether it's God or Big Foot,

and one need not repeatedly inject the caveat that it's still 'possible' for something one doesn't believe in to actually exist.

Yes, we get it. Theoretically ANYTHING is possible. That doesn't make one's decision not to believe in something some sort of mystical exercise.

Funny, I never said that your beliefs are unreasonable, I just keep pointing out that they are beliefs. Why is that so hard for you to accept?

By your measure, everything is a belief. Fine.

But common sense would tell us that every belief is not a religion. If that were not so, then there would be no category of humans that could be labeled 'non-religious' or 'irreligious'.

I know why they want to lump us in together with all the other organized religions.

Notice liberal Christians don't mind when people of other faiths don't believe their bible stories? Why? They're basically saying the same thing us atheists are saying about their stories. Only difference is they believe their own fairy tales, we don't.

So for example, a Christian doesn't mind if a Muslim believes his own stories of god. Christians don't seem to mind Jews don't think Jesus was the Messiah either. Us atheists aren't alone on that. Traditional Christians don't care what Mormons think about their church being corrupt. They don't care what Jehova's say about only they go to heaven. Catholics don't care what born against say about having to be baptized as an adult to be saved.

So, they want to lump us in with all the other religions they just agree to disagree with.

Atheism is not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding any claim.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more.

Wrong, silly bozo. Atheism, by definition is a belief that goes does not exist. It's okay that you believe that (if you are indeed an Atheist. If you have no belief regarding the question of existence, you're nothing but an agnostic.

I really don't care anymore if you get it or not you big dummy. This weekend I rented "angels and demons :are we alone" and I wanted to see what possible compelling facts they would give to prove that angels and demons exist. They provide NOTHING. All they did was tell the Christian stories and they explained how other religions also believe.

They had people on explaining that if you see a dark mist then it's a Demon or a spirit... OMG I couldn't fucking take it. I watched for about a half hour and realized this dvd was meant for really stupid and superstitious people not me.

Mysteries of angels demons are we alone DVD video 2009 WorldCat.org

Then I was watching Jesus TV and they had Kirk Cameron explaining why Evolution is not true. I have to admit he made some compelling arguments if they are true. For example, he says most scientists agree Lucy was not a human she was a monkey or a human with a deformity. Is that true?

Thanks for posting something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I believe in evolution myself, and the billions of years it took to arrive where we are today. That doesn't mean God didn't make it happen....and I don't care at all whether you get that or not. I never did, you big dummy.

 

[sealybobo]

Most atheists are gay or lesbian. They are cast-aways of normal society, pitied, scorned, and marveled at.

Last week we were communists or socialists.

Fact is, most of us are intelligent progressive liberals.

And if I were gay I'd tell your god that says I'll go to hell to suck my dick.

I doubt most atheists are in the US, so using the label progressive liberals probably doesn't apply the way you seem to be using it.

He should know. He's Black, a racist, an atheist, gay, and a Liberal. He's also an Obama lap-dog.

You forgot commy or socialist. I'm sorry if I'm not rich enough to think corporations should be running this country instead of a government that is elected and represents We the People. You right wing fools actually think CEO's & Corporations should decide policy, even after the George Bush Great Recession of 07.

Shhhhh. Corporations ARE running the country. Ever hear of LOBBYISTS?

See, poor and middle class Republicans don't realize how stupid they sound when they complain about the economy. They only prove when they complain that they don't realize they are in the wrong party. The rich are doing great!

And remember back when Bush ruined the economy they said if we were complaining then we needed to go back to school or start a business and that we are the only ones at fault for our economic situation? Funny today they want to cry that Democrats have failed to bring wages up when they have no plan to increase wages.

Their falures are not Obama's failure. This is corporations cutting wages so they can increase their profits. Middle class and poor Republican voters can't complain about this when they cried for years that the American workers are overpaid and hurting corporate profits.

Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs Growth And Investing - Forbes

 

[sealybobo]

Of course Atheists identify as a group. Atheists join in groups all of the time. Here is just one web site of many that will tell you how you can join a group How to Find an Atheist Support Group Atheist Revolution. People put up billboards, organize holiday displays, etc.

Yep. Some do. That's been addressed. If you want to point to some atheist groups, and show how they are operating as religions, go for it. I might agree with you. But that doesn't mean that the general concept of atheism represents a religion.

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

I don't see it as the same sort of religion as the others you mention. There is no god for them, there is no need for prayer, or worship services, albeit their mentors certainly have their attention...and the church jester, Bill Maher swells them with pride using his corny jokes and simplistic analogies (just as does his "Pope"). Those that are practicing "religiously" are the ones that continuously parrot the idiotic Dawkins and attack other religions as if they are destroying the world. The doctrine of their religion appears to include ATTACK, RIDICULE and SCORN anyone that disagrees with the denial of the existence of deities. They proselytize just like most theistic churches do, yet they claim to have no common goals and no directives from the hierarchy that leads them to believe as they do. I suppose they figure if they can deny God, they can deny everything and claim to be acting alone in every regard. This too is horse shit disguised as food for thought.

There is no motivation in my claiming it's a religion. I'm simply disagreeing with the claim that it is not a religion. I think there has been ample evidence shown in this thread that Atheism is a religion. I would repeat the bullet item post I made several pages back, but I have tired of the childish comebacks and denial of known FACTS about Atheism, the courts and established Atheist Churches.

I can't know your true intentions, but calling atheism a religion is clearly a philosophical hack. It's a game to conflate definitions and blur boundaries deliberately. I suspect that part of the motive is to intimidate people, to promote the idea that not believing in god is the equivalent of joining a cult.

That's what I said the other day. They would love to lump us in with all the other religions they don't agree with. That would be easier for them to just lump us in with the Muslims, Jehovas, Mormons & Jews who like us don't believe Jesus was the Messiah.

The problem is, we don't believe. You don't start a church or religion on a non faith. Who do we pray to no one?

 

[sealybobo]

Funny, I never said that your beliefs are unreasonable, I just keep pointing out that they are beliefs. Why is that so hard for you to accept?

By your measure, everything is a belief. Fine.

But common sense would tell us that every belief is not a religion. If that were not so, then there would be no category of humans that could be labeled 'non-religious' or 'irreligious'.

I know why they want to lump us in together with all the other organized religions.

Notice liberal Christians don't mind when people of other faiths don't believe their bible stories? Why? They're basically saying the same thing us atheists are saying about their stories. Only difference is they believe their own fairy tales, we don't.

So for example, a Christian doesn't mind if a Muslim believes his own stories of god. Christians don't seem to mind Jews don't think Jesus was the Messiah either. Us atheists aren't alone on that. Traditional Christians don't care what Mormons think about their church being corrupt. They don't care what Jehova's say about only they go to heaven. Catholics don't care what born against say about having to be baptized as an adult to be saved.

So, they want to lump us in with all the other religions they just agree to disagree with.

Atheism is not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding any claim.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more.

Wrong, silly bozo. Atheism, by definition is a belief that goes does not exist. It's okay that you believe that (if you are indeed an Atheist. If you have no belief regarding the question of existence, you're nothing but an agnostic.

I really don't care anymore if you get it or not you big dummy. This weekend I rented "angels and demons :are we alone" and I wanted to see what possible compelling facts they would give to prove that angels and demons exist. They provide NOTHING. All they did was tell the Christian stories and they explained how other religions also believe.

They had people on explaining that if you see a dark mist then it's a Demon or a spirit... OMG I couldn't fucking take it. I watched for about a half hour and realized this dvd was meant for really stupid and superstitious people not me.

Mysteries of angels demons are we alone DVD video 2009 WorldCat.org

Then I was watching Jesus TV and they had Kirk Cameron explaining why Evolution is not true. I have to admit he made some compelling arguments if they are true. For example, he says most scientists agree Lucy was not a human she was a monkey or a human with a deformity. Is that true?

Thanks for posting something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I believe in evolution myself, and the billions of years it took to arrive where we are today. That doesn't mean God didn't make it happen....and I don't care at all whether you get that or not. I never did, you big dummy.

Thank you for agreeing with me that many theists like Kirk Cameron are stupid and wrong when they deny evolution.

Way Of The Master Evolution - Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort - YouTube

 

[PratchettFan]

Yep. Some do. That's been addressed. If you want to point to some atheist groups, and show how they are operating as religions, go for it. I might agree with you. But that doesn't mean that the general concept of atheism represents a religion.

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

I don't see it as the same sort of religion as the others you mention. There is no god for them, there is no need for prayer, or worship services, albeit their mentors certainly have their attention...and the church jester, Bill Maher swells them with pride using his corny jokes and simplistic analogies (just as does his "Pope"). Those that are practicing "religiously" are the ones that continuously parrot the idiotic Dawkins and attack other religions as if they are destroying the world. The doctrine of their religion appears to include ATTACK, RIDICULE and SCORN anyone that disagrees with the denial of the existence of deities. They proselytize just like most theistic churches do, yet they claim to have no common goals and no directives from the hierarchy that leads them to believe as they do. I suppose they figure if they can deny God, they can deny everything and claim to be acting alone in every regard. This too is horse shit disguised as food for thought.

There is no motivation in my claiming it's a religion. I'm simply disagreeing with the claim that it is not a religion. I think there has been ample evidence shown in this thread that Atheism is a religion. I would repeat the bullet item post I made several pages back, but I have tired of the childish comebacks and denial of known FACTS about Atheism, the courts and established Atheist Churches.

I can't know your true intentions, but calling atheism a religion is clearly a philosophical hack. It's a game to conflate definitions and blur boundaries deliberately. I suspect that part of the motive is to intimidate people, to promote the idea that not believing in god is the equivalent of joining a cult.

That's what I said the other day. They would love to lump us in with all the other religions they don't agree with. That would be easier for them to just lump us in with the Muslims, Jehovas, Mormons & Jews who like us don't believe Jesus was the Messiah.

The problem is, we don't believe. You don't start a church or religion on a non faith. Who do we pray to no one?

As a side note to Dblack on our discussion about the group. You will notice the reference here to "us". Identification with the group.

 

[asaratis]

Of course Atheists identify as a group. Atheists join in groups all of the time. Here is just one web site of many that will tell you how you can join a group How to Find an Atheist Support Group Atheist Revolution. People put up billboards, organize holiday displays, etc.

Yep. Some do. That's been addressed. If you want to point to some atheist groups, and show how they are operating as religions, go for it. I might agree with you. But that doesn't mean that the general concept of atheism represents a religion.

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

I don't see it as the same sort of religion as the others you mention. There is no god for them, there is no need for prayer, or worship services, albeit their mentors certainly have their attention...and the church jester, Bill Maher swells them with pride using his corny jokes and simplistic analogies (just as does his "Pope"). Those that are practicing "religiously" are the ones that continuously parrot the idiotic Dawkins and attack other religions as if they are destroying the world. The doctrine of their religion appears to include ATTACK, RIDICULE and SCORN anyone that disagrees with the denial of the existence of deities. They proselytize just like most theistic churches do, yet they claim to have no common goals and no directives from the hierarchy that leads them to believe as they do. I suppose they figure if they can deny God, they can deny everything and claim to be acting alone in every regard. This too is horse shit disguised as food for thought.

There is no motivation in my claiming it's a religion. I'm simply disagreeing with the claim that it is not a religion. I think there has been ample evidence shown in this thread that Atheism is a religion. I would repeat the bullet item post I made several pages back, but I have tired of the childish comebacks and denial of known FACTS about Atheism, the courts and established Atheist Churches.

I can't know your true intentions, but calling atheism a religion is clearly a philosophical hack. It's a game to conflate definitions and blur boundaries deliberately. I suspect that part of the motive is to intimidate people, to promote the idea that not believing in god is the equivalent of joining a cult.

Hey, I didn't start this thread. I do not care who does or does not believe in God. I am a live-and-let-live person. Just don't try to push your beliefs on me with no factual evidence to support them...and don't belittle me for having whatever beliefs I do. I don't push my beliefs on others except maybe in scientific matters where I try to teach them proven facts about science, nature or how to craft physical things from steel shapes, wood, building materials and hardware. When it comes to believing in God, not believing in God or believing that God does not exist, you are totally on your on. The modern day Atheists have turned Atheism into a religion, with human idols and an agenda juxtaposed to long established religions. But you do make a good point. I suppose it does have some attributes of a cult.

 

[asaratis]

By your measure, everything is a belief. Fine.

But common sense would tell us that every belief is not a religion. If that were not so, then there would be no category of humans that could be labeled 'non-religious' or 'irreligious'.

I know why they want to lump us in together with all the other organized religions.

Notice liberal Christians don't mind when people of other faiths don't believe their bible stories? Why? They're basically saying the same thing us atheists are saying about their stories. Only difference is they believe their own fairy tales, we don't.

So for example, a Christian doesn't mind if a Muslim believes his own stories of god. Christians don't seem to mind Jews don't think Jesus was the Messiah either. Us atheists aren't alone on that. Traditional Christians don't care what Mormons think about their church being corrupt. They don't care what Jehova's say about only they go to heaven. Catholics don't care what born against say about having to be baptized as an adult to be saved.

So, they want to lump us in with all the other religions they just agree to disagree with.

Atheism is not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding any claim.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more.

Wrong, silly bozo. Atheism, by definition is a belief that goes does not exist. It's okay that you believe that (if you are indeed an Atheist. If you have no belief regarding the question of existence, you're nothing but an agnostic.

I really don't care anymore if you get it or not you big dummy. This weekend I rented "angels and demons :are we alone" and I wanted to see what possible compelling facts they would give to prove that angels and demons exist. They provide NOTHING. All they did was tell the Christian stories and they explained how other religions also believe.

They had people on explaining that if you see a dark mist then it's a Demon or a spirit... OMG I couldn't fucking take it. I watched for about a half hour and realized this dvd was meant for really stupid and superstitious people not me.

Mysteries of angels demons are we alone DVD video 2009 WorldCat.org

Then I was watching Jesus TV and they had Kirk Cameron explaining why Evolution is not true. I have to admit he made some compelling arguments if they are true. For example, he says most scientists agree Lucy was not a human she was a monkey or a human with a deformity. Is that true?

Thanks for posting something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I believe in evolution myself, and the billions of years it took to arrive where we are today. That doesn't mean God didn't make it happen....and I don't care at all whether you get that or not. I never did, you big dummy.

Thank you for agreeing with me that many theists like Kirk Cameron are stupid and wrong when they deny evolution.

Way Of The Master Evolution - Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort - YouTube

You're welcome. I think anyone that claims the earth is only 6000 years old is either extremely unaware of the science of nature and geological time or is incorrectly taking the Bible literally. Many Christians and Jews have come to accept that Genesis cannot be taken literally in terms of our definition of a day. The term "day" is a human construct and did not exist until man became aware of the periodic going and coming of sunlight. The term cannot logically be applied to the "days" before the sun was created.

Glad to see that we agree on something. I suspect there are other things that fall in that category.

 

[sealybobo]

Yep. Some do. That's been addressed. If you want to point to some atheist groups, and show how they are operating as religions, go for it. I might agree with you. But that doesn't mean that the general concept of atheism represents a religion.

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

I don't see it as the same sort of religion as the others you mention. There is no god for them, there is no need for prayer, or worship services, albeit their mentors certainly have their attention...and the church jester, Bill Maher swells them with pride using his corny jokes and simplistic analogies (just as does his "Pope"). Those that are practicing "religiously" are the ones that continuously parrot the idiotic Dawkins and attack other religions as if they are destroying the world. The doctrine of their religion appears to include ATTACK, RIDICULE and SCORN anyone that disagrees with the denial of the existence of deities. They proselytize just like most theistic churches do, yet they claim to have no common goals and no directives from the hierarchy that leads them to believe as they do. I suppose they figure if they can deny God, they can deny everything and claim to be acting alone in every regard. This too is horse shit disguised as food for thought.

There is no motivation in my claiming it's a religion. I'm simply disagreeing with the claim that it is not a religion. I think there has been ample evidence shown in this thread that Atheism is a religion. I would repeat the bullet item post I made several pages back, but I have tired of the childish comebacks and denial of known FACTS about Atheism, the courts and established Atheist Churches.

The modern day Atheists have turned Atheism into a religion, with human idols and an agenda juxtaposed to long established religions. But you do make a good point. I suppose it does have some attributes of a cult.

Nice how you tried to slip this in right at the end. Again, atheism is not a religion YET anyways. I would love it if there was a atheist church near me. I'd love to get together with those people and see what we can do about theists.

For example, I was watching Religion TV yesterday and this Chaldean Christian was bashing Barrack Hussain Obama, questioning the birth certificate and his alliance with terrorists. This guy kept bringing up god but it was clearly political with him. I would love to become a "religion" just like that guy and get a tv show on that channel so at least we can present our side of the issues.

No fair religion gets those local channels and no atheist shows even get a half hour once a week? I'm going to look into it. I think we should get some free air time too. If it takes becoming a "religion" to get the tax breaks, I'm all for it.

 

[dblack]

Yep. Some do. That's been addressed. If you want to point to some atheist groups, and show how they are operating as religions, go for it. I might agree with you. But that doesn't mean that the general concept of atheism represents a religion.

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

I don't see it as the same sort of religion as the others you mention. There is no god for them, there is no need for prayer, or worship services, albeit their mentors certainly have their attention...and the church jester, Bill Maher swells them with pride using his corny jokes and simplistic analogies (just as does his "Pope"). Those that are practicing "religiously" are the ones that continuously parrot the idiotic Dawkins and attack other religions as if they are destroying the world. The doctrine of their religion appears to include ATTACK, RIDICULE and SCORN anyone that disagrees with the denial of the existence of deities. They proselytize just like most theistic churches do, yet they claim to have no common goals and no directives from the hierarchy that leads them to believe as they do. I suppose they figure if they can deny God, they can deny everything and claim to be acting alone in every regard. This too is horse shit disguised as food for thought.

There is no motivation in my claiming it's a religion. I'm simply disagreeing with the claim that it is not a religion. I think there has been ample evidence shown in this thread that Atheism is a religion. I would repeat the bullet item post I made several pages back, but I have tired of the childish comebacks and denial of known FACTS about Atheism, the courts and established Atheist Churches.

I can't know your true intentions, but calling atheism a religion is clearly a philosophical hack. It's a game to conflate definitions and blur boundaries deliberately. I suspect that part of the motive is to intimidate people, to promote the idea that not believing in god is the equivalent of joining a cult.

Hey, I didn't start this thread. I do not care who does or does not believe in God. I am a live-and-let-live person. Just don't try to push your beliefs on me with no factual evidence to support them...and don't belittle me for having whatever beliefs I do. I don't push my beliefs on others except maybe in scientific matters where I try to teach them proven facts about science, nature or how to craft physical things from steel shapes, wood, building materials and hardware. When it comes to believing in God, not believing in God or believing that God does not exist, you are totally on your on. The modern day Atheists have turned Atheism into a religion, with human idols and an agenda juxtaposed to long established religions. But you do make a good point. I suppose it does have some attributes of a cult.

That's not my point and you know it. And your dishonesty isn't appreciated. All you've succeeded in doing in this thread is to prove that some people treat atheism like a religion - something I don't think anyone here disagrees with. But instead of saying that atheism can be approached as a religion (as can just about any other belief), you've repeatedly claimed that atheism IS a religion, that calling yourself an atheist is the same as a membership in the Church of Atheism. And that is just a chickenshit lie that you've provided exactly no justification for.

 

[sealybobo]

I know why they want to lump us in together with all the other organized religions.

Notice liberal Christians don't mind when people of other faiths don't believe their bible stories? Why? They're basically saying the same thing us atheists are saying about their stories. Only difference is they believe their own fairy tales, we don't.

So for example, a Christian doesn't mind if a Muslim believes his own stories of god. Christians don't seem to mind Jews don't think Jesus was the Messiah either. Us atheists aren't alone on that. Traditional Christians don't care what Mormons think about their church being corrupt. They don't care what Jehova's say about only they go to heaven. Catholics don't care what born against say about having to be baptized as an adult to be saved.

So, they want to lump us in with all the other religions they just agree to disagree with.

Atheism is not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding any claim.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more.

Wrong, silly bozo. Atheism, by definition is a belief that goes does not exist. It's okay that you believe that (if you are indeed an Atheist. If you have no belief regarding the question of existence, you're nothing but an agnostic.

I really don't care anymore if you get it or not you big dummy. This weekend I rented "angels and demons :are we alone" and I wanted to see what possible compelling facts they would give to prove that angels and demons exist. They provide NOTHING. All they did was tell the Christian stories and they explained how other religions also believe.

They had people on explaining that if you see a dark mist then it's a Demon or a spirit... OMG I couldn't fucking take it. I watched for about a half hour and realized this dvd was meant for really stupid and superstitious people not me.

Mysteries of angels demons are we alone DVD video 2009 WorldCat.org

Then I was watching Jesus TV and they had Kirk Cameron explaining why Evolution is not true. I have to admit he made some compelling arguments if they are true. For example, he says most scientists agree Lucy was not a human she was a monkey or a human with a deformity. Is that true?

Thanks for posting something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I believe in evolution myself, and the billions of years it took to arrive where we are today. That doesn't mean God didn't make it happen....and I don't care at all whether you get that or not. I never did, you big dummy.

Thank you for agreeing with me that many theists like Kirk Cameron are stupid and wrong when they deny evolution.

Way Of The Master Evolution - Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort - YouTube

You're welcome. I think anyone that claims the earth is only 6000 years old is either extremely unaware of the science of nature and geological time or is incorrectly taking the Bible literally. Many Christians and Jews have come to accept that Genesis cannot be taken literally in terms of our definition of a day. The term "day" is a human construct and did not exist until man became aware of the periodic going and coming of sunlight. The term cannot logically be applied to the "days" before the sun was created.

Glad to see that we agree on something. I suspect there are other things that fall in that category.

Kirk Cameron was basically saying the "science" is flimbsy.

Do you also agree that the Adam & Eve, Moses, Noah & Jonah stories are all just allegories or do you believe in talking snakes, bushes, noah living 350 years or Jonah living inside a whale for 3 days?

 

[Carla_Danger]

Just be honest. It's ok for you to vilify Dawkins. As much as he is a vocal opponent of religious fear and superstition, he's also a proponent of the many science disciplines that support evilution. How fortunate for you, you can expand your horizons of hate.

Dawkins vilifies himself, I see no need to assist him.

Not at all. His basic premise is that claims to supernaturalism are absent verification. For you fundies, It’s a matter of disliking the individual because he is an outspoken and vocal critic of religious belief. What you fundies object to is being held to a consistent standard. Within the natural, rational world, there is no reason to acknowledge the existence of gods as supernatural agents. It's actually comical to see you fundies vilify science and its processes of discovery. You will want to hold science to a standard of demonstration while at the same time, requiring "belief" alone is the only standard for your claims to magic. From the fundie side, we're left with claims of the supernatural - for which there are none – as qualifying for consideration in the natural, rational world. What you’re hoping to accomplish is to avoid actually supporting your claims. Please identify for us why your religious beliefs are held to a standard that is different from the one placed on science.

Did everyone read that? Please everyone read what he just wrote to my response.

I called you a fucking coward who is afraid to say he believes anything.

Reread what I said. You are missing one word or you are the biggest idiot that ever was.

I'm going with biggest idiot...

 

[Carla_Danger]

Also by your own definition you would have to accept every single supernatural phenomenom ever described.

why?......are you incapable of making choices about what you believe?......

Interesting comment in terms of religious belief. It is almost exclusively a function of geography and familial circumstances. You christian fundies, had you been born in the Islamist Middle East, would be the suicide bombers and head choppers of ISIS. There is a certain personality type that is susceptible to mind control techniques that religions employ.

/shrugs.....and if you have been born in the ME you would already be dead.....be that as it may, we have examples in the form of frequent posters who have made choices, either for or against, the religion of their family......this merely proves that what you post is not true......we have to take it for granted that the things you post that we can't disprove are likewise untrue......

/shrugs.... how lucky I am that in the Infidel West, I'm protected from people like you.

This merely proves that you are a danger to yourselves and others. Society as a whole is protected by keeping you lovely cultists on a short choke collar.

lol.....people like me are the ones protecting you in the infidel west......

 

[sealybobo]

Agnostic is not sure either way. Too wishy washy for me. I'm an agnostic atheist.

does that make you a wishy-washy god-denier?.......

No. Agnostic only means I'm not a god myself and can't everything. You would have to be all knowing to say for sure 100% there is no god.

I'm an atheist when it comes to arguing with humans about if there is a god. A christian tells me I'm going to hell, I don't believe in that kind of god. A muslim tells me the same thing. I don't believe that person. A Jehova says only 150,000 people will make it to heaven. I don't believe them. A jew says what a jew says. I don't believe them. A mormom says what they say. I don't believe them.

There could be a generic god that created our universe that doesn't know you exist. That I'm agnostic atheist. As for Jesus I'm an atheist.

Still it is not a religion just because I don't believe in Jesus. You Christians give yourselves too much credit, power and prestige.

 

[asaratis]

I have said that Atheism is not in and of itself a religion. I have already indicated how some Atheists are treating Atheism as a religion is through the application of dogma. Without dogma, you don't have religion.

Of course, if someone wants to disagree with the attributes of religion I have used I am certainly open to that discussion. They just seem to be the three basics to me. However, without determining what those attributes are in advance you really can't determine if something is or is not religion.

For example, if I put an electric motor on a unicycle, is it an automobile? We can't answer that without first identifying what the attributes of an automobile are and comparing that to the unicycle. Does the number of wheels matter, does it require a particular power plant, does the method of steering matter, etc.? Simply stating that it isn't by definition without that comparison is not an investigation, it's dogma.

Agreed. And, from what I've seen in this thread, the only way to make the 'atheism is a religion' claim stick is to define one or both terms in deceptive ways. Like I said elsewhere, arguing over definitions is tedious. What matters is the ideas we're trying to communicate. Those who claim that atheism is a religion are trying to sell the idea that atheism is the same sort of thing as Christianity, Hinduism or Judaism, and it simply isn't.

The far more interesting topic, in my view, is the motivations behind the campaign to rebrand atheism as a religion.

I don't see it as the same sort of religion as the others you mention. There is no god for them, there is no need for prayer, or worship services, albeit their mentors certainly have their attention...and the church jester, Bill Maher swells them with pride using his corny jokes and simplistic analogies (just as does his "Pope"). Those that are practicing "religiously" are the ones that continuously parrot the idiotic Dawkins and attack other religions as if they are destroying the world. The doctrine of their religion appears to include ATTACK, RIDICULE and SCORN anyone that disagrees with the denial of the existence of deities. They proselytize just like most theistic churches do, yet they claim to have no common goals and no directives from the hierarchy that leads them to believe as they do. I suppose they figure if they can deny God, they can deny everything and claim to be acting alone in every regard. This too is horse shit disguised as food for thought.

There is no motivation in my claiming it's a religion. I'm simply disagreeing with the claim that it is not a religion. I think there has been ample evidence shown in this thread that Atheism is a religion. I would repeat the bullet item post I made several pages back, but I have tired of the childish comebacks and denial of known FACTS about Atheism, the courts and established Atheist Churches.

I can't know your true intentions, but calling atheism a religion is clearly a philosophical hack. It's a game to conflate definitions and blur boundaries deliberately. I suspect that part of the motive is to intimidate people, to promote the idea that not believing in god is the equivalent of joining a cult.

Hey, I didn't start this thread. I do not care who does or does not believe in God. I am a live-and-let-live person. Just don't try to push your beliefs on me with no factual evidence to support them...and don't belittle me for having whatever beliefs I do. I don't push my beliefs on others except maybe in scientific matters where I try to teach them proven facts about science, nature or how to craft physical things from steel shapes, wood, building materials and hardware. When it comes to believing in God, not believing in God or believing that God does not exist, you are totally on your on. The modern day Atheists have turned Atheism into a religion, with human idols and an agenda juxtaposed to long established religions. But you do make a good point. I suppose it does have some attributes of a cult.

That's not my point and you know it. And your dishonesty isn't appreciated. All you've succeeded in doing in this thread is to prove that some people treat atheism like a religion - something I don't think anyone here disagrees with. But instead of saying that atheism can be approached as a religion (as can just about any other belief), you've repeatedly claimed that atheism IS a religion, that calling yourself an atheist is the same as a membership in the Church of Atheism. And that is just a chickenshit lie that you've provided exactly no justification for.

You have misstated my claims. Just as Christians and Jews don't have to be members of churches, neither do Atheist. That doesn't mean that churches for them do not exist. That Atheism is a religion is a justified claim. That's why I made it. That calling yourself an atheist is the same as a membership in the Church of Atheism is not. That is why I haven't made the claim.