Atheism Is Not A Religion!!!

[PratchettFan]

....

You asked for sources and I gave some to you. That they were not from this thread does not mean they don't exist. So my point stands. If people treat Atheism as a religion, then it becomes a religion.

...and as shown above, people treat Atheism as a religion. Some are just too dense to concede.

Then those people are treating atheism incorrectly. It is not a religion, and it's ridiculous to say that it is.

They are not treating Atheism correctly? You mean they don't follow doctrine?

There is no doctrine.

If there is no doctrine, how can Atheism be treated incorrectly?

You don't need a "doctrine" to misdefine something. There's plenty of it going on right here, no "doctrine" required.

If there is no doctrine, how can atheism be a religion?
And why do you keep capitalizing it?
Y'all are reaaaally stretching this to try to make it work -- same question: why do you need atheism to be a "religion"?

How does one treat Atheism correctly? What are the standards to be applied? What are the rules? You can't have it both ways. You can't say there are no rules but those people over there are breaking them.

I capitalize Atheism for the same reason I capitalize Christianity, Hinduism and Libertarianism.

I don't need it to be a religion. I am simply pointing out that it is being treated as a religion. Why do you need your beliefs to be called non-beliefs?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Progressives want to make atheism America's National Religion

 

[Pogo]

No, you don't "know" that -- you believe it. We won't get into the flaws undermining that belief, we'll just leave it at the definition.
What this is getting at is the attitude that "I know what's best for you", which is I'm afraid the sort of arrogance that comes from egocentric proselytizing. That's a different question though from theism versus atheism so we won't go further down that road; suffice to say that your beliefs/opinions are no better or worse than anyone else's, and that each of us still has individual choice.

Well if I agreed with all of your contentions and conclusions then we surely would have little to disagree about. But I do not. Sorry to startle you, but ‘yes’ I do know that God is absolutely real, absolutely the One and Only, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I know this by evidence, empirical evidence, and all the reason that flows from that. So perhaps that explains my joy and also my “egocentric proselytizing” as you would have it.

"Empirical evidence" isn't evidence. It's opinion. So as I said -- no proof.
"Egocentric" means the attitude that whatever "I" believe of that empirical evidence is necessarily "all that", and that there is no possibility that "I" could be wrong or don't have enough information, and that everybody who doesn't believe what "I" believe, is wrong. That's what I mean by arrogance.

What puzzles me is how easily offended unbelievers get when they hear Christians publicly preaching or sounding so sure of themselves. As though me having to listen to an atheist or agnostic scoff at them, even ridicule them, bothers me in the least. It surely does not. As though I get unnerved to hear some Muslim make just as bold claims and ridicule Christianity. Does not bother me at all. They have no legs to stand on and a civil discussion would bear that out.

Good for you, but that's not the topic here. The topic is what atheism is.

So for you to say my beliefs are no better than your beliefs, I ask, how so? Maybe no better in that both of us are free to give our opinions and the listener or reader is free to choose what he wants to listen to or ignore. Sure, in that sense, no better or worse. But for you to suggest my beliefs are no better than yours because I have no more solid evidence to base them on than hearsay, or what others (unbelievers) may base theirs on --- that I call grand folly. You simply have no idea what you are claiming.

-- and that's a demonstration of the egocentrism. Your vision of your own opinion as superior to everyone else's.

Do you not understand what a strawman is? Nobody here made any such point. You brought it in to knock it down. It has no advocate. It's a logical fallacy. I'm afraid "any number of" unseen imaginary speakers doesn't count.

Oh, please. That idea has been aired countless times. Just because not on this thread does not mean I cannot raise the issue because it is very much related to the topic. And frankly, I do not care if they say it or not. Does not bother me, but I not going to hesitate to point out the folly of it. In fact, I cannot think of anything a pagan or unbeliever might bring up or even rage against that would cause me the slightest discomfort.

Whatever -- again it's not the topic. We're not here to debate whether God exists. That would be a very long and unending thread, whirled without end, amen. We're just here to debunk the myth that want to make atheism into a "religion".

And --- Sorry, I do not know how to use that "Quote" button option? So I have to copy your whole message multiple times and then delete the excess.

Looks like you did just fine.

 

[PratchettFan]

....

You asked for sources and I gave some to you. That they were not from this thread does not mean they don't exist. So my point stands. If people treat Atheism as a religion, then it becomes a religion.

...and as shown above, people treat Atheism as a religion. Some are just too dense to concede.

Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."

The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.

What is Atheism American Atheists

It is this claim of a lack of beliefs which does you in. It is bullshit. You do not lack beliefs. If you actually did lack beliefs you would be entirely neutral on the question. Any conclusion arrived at in the absence of evidence is a belief. You have said you think there probably is no god, what evidence do you have to think that? If the answer is none, then it is a belief. You cannot have a belief and lack beliefs at the same time.

For the majority of non-believers I know, there is no specific "lack of belief" as there is a conclusion that the Christian gods or any other gods simply don't exist.

Promoting a position generally commences with premises that must first be shown to likely be true, and at least have some measure of testable support. Only then can you use logic to reason from those premises to a conclusion.

The only premises that religions (plural) provide are a litany of claims that only an apologist would even consider accepting. You cannot apply reason to a premise that requires belief in the supernatural to reach conclusions from. That’s ridiculous because you have assumed your entire desired conclusion based upon an assumed supernatural premise.

The claims of ALL religions requiring supernatural belief are merely repetitions of particular sectarian dogma, with no connection to supported reasoning. They are carelessly asserted and the adherents assume that others must take their word for it. Or, even more absurd that, they are requiring us to take someone else's word for it.

I don’t see that accepting reason as the criteria for perception is stripping away anything. Human emotions have their source in natural instincts we see every day in the common animal kingdom. We simply have added a vast array of texture to emotions that simpler animals do not.

I will accept as a given that there is absolutely no evidence to support the position there are gods. However, at the same time there is absolutely no evidence to support the position there are no gods. You have stated, for you at least, there is a conclusion gods simply don't exist. Given your position has no more factual support than the position that gods do exist, how is it anything more than believing A rather than B?

Mind you, I do not object to your belief in the least. Your beliefs are certainly as valid as my own since neither of us has a clue about the subject.

 

[Pogo]

If there is no doctrine, how can Atheism be treated incorrectly?

You don't need a "doctrine" to misdefine something. There's plenty of it going on right here, no "doctrine" required.

If there is no doctrine, how can atheism be a religion?
And why do you keep capitalizing it?
Y'all are reaaaally stretching this to try to make it work -- same question: why do you need atheism to be a "religion"?

How does one treat Atheism correctly? What are the standards to be applied? What are the rules? You can't have it both ways. You can't say there are no rules but those people over there are breaking them.

.
Once again, faulty definitions are not "rules". Nor are they "doctrine", "dogma", "credo", "liturgy" or anything else. They're faulty definitions of a simple logical-philosophical term. That's all they are.

Do you believe in the Easter Bunny?
Assuming no, does that "no" answer constitute a religion? The church of "Abunnyism"?
Same thing.

[I capitalize Atheism for the same reason I capitalize Christianity, Hinduism and Libertarianism.

In other words you're trying to morph a definition by clicking your heels three times and muttering "there's no place like home".

I don't need it to be a religion. I am simply pointing out that it is being treated as a religion. Why do you need your beliefs to be called non-beliefs?

Not my beliefs personally but you cannot have a "belief" in a nonentity. Theism is a belief (in a deity). It refers to a concept, however imaginary. All atheism does is reject that belief. That's it. The fact that it's being "treated as a religion" (by you capitalizing it) does not revisionist history make.

You still haven't told us why you're doing that.

Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position." -- atheists.org
​

 

[asaratis]

And --- Sorry, I do not know how to use that "Quote" button option? So I have to copy your whole message multiple times and then delete the excess.

In this system it's no longer "quote" -- it's "reply". Try it, it'll set you up.

It uses both multi-quote and reply. Don't confuse our friend, turzovka.

I don't believe in multi-quote. I have no evidence that it exists.

But serially, multi-quote is more complex. You don't need it for a single response. One step at a time.

If one replies to a post that includes quotes of others, you have the multi-quote mess to deal with anyway...might as well learn how to manipulate the quote commands.

For example:

asaratis is correct. Listen to what he says and learn from it. I command you!

 

[Pogo]

....

You asked for sources and I gave some to you. That they were not from this thread does not mean they don't exist. So my point stands. If people treat Atheism as a religion, then it becomes a religion.

...and as shown above, people treat Atheism as a religion. Some are just too dense to concede.

Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."

The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.

What is Atheism American Atheists

It is this claim of a lack of beliefs which does you in. It is bullshit. You do not lack beliefs. If you actually did lack beliefs you would be entirely neutral on the question. Any conclusion arrived at in the absence of evidence is a belief. You have said you think there probably is no god, what evidence do you have to think that? If the answer is none, then it is a belief. You cannot have a belief and lack beliefs at the same time.

For the majority of non-believers I know, there is no specific "lack of belief" as there is a conclusion that the Christian gods or any other gods simply don't exist.

Promoting a position generally commences with premises that must first be shown to likely be true, and at least have some measure of testable support. Only then can you use logic to reason from those premises to a conclusion.

The only premises that religions (plural) provide are a litany of claims that only an apologist would even consider accepting. You cannot apply reason to a premise that requires belief in the supernatural to reach conclusions from. That’s ridiculous because you have assumed your entire desired conclusion based upon an assumed supernatural premise.

The claims of ALL religions requiring supernatural belief are merely repetitions of particular sectarian dogma, with no connection to supported reasoning. They are carelessly asserted and the adherents assume that others must take their word for it. Or, even more absurd that, they are requiring us to take someone else's word for it.

I don’t see that accepting reason as the criteria for perception is stripping away anything. Human emotions have their source in natural instincts we see every day in the common animal kingdom. We simply have added a vast array of texture to emotions that simpler animals do not.

I will accept as a given that there is absolutely no evidence to support the position there are gods. However, at the same time there is absolutely no evidence to support the position there are no gods. You have stated, for you at least, there is a conclusion gods simply don't exist. Given your position has no more factual support than the position that gods do exist, how is it anything more than believing A rather than B?

Mind you, I do not object to your belief in the least. Your beliefs are certainly as valid as my own since neither of us has a clue about the subject.

No, I haven't stated that. I'm in no position to know. And actually I have evidence to the contrary.

We're not talking about personal beliefs here -- we're talking about what "is" is. So to speak.

 

[emilynghiem]

You asked for sources and I gave some to you. That they were not from this thread does not mean they don't exist. So my point stands. If people treat Atheism as a religion, then it becomes a religion.

yes, same with Buddhism, Christianity, Constitutionalism, even Hinduism has been described as NOT a religion but teaching about naturally existing laws of spirituality and not exclusive like a religion.

All these depend on how they are taught or treated, if they serve as religions or not.
and if they are perceived as such. Thank you.

I have friends who are nonreligious about their nontheist/atheist views as others are nonreligious with their spirituality through Christianity, Buddhism etc.

i have friends who are religious about their views/beliefs and depend on representation through groups in order to feel connection and standing as others do. So the same thing applies to any type of view individual or collective.
it can go either way, depending on the context!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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]

Almost as ridiculous as saying it isn't.

If atheism is not a religion, than your opinion is not protected by the Constitution. Fortunately for you, the rest of the world understands that the word religion involves more than a belief in a god, and uses that knowledge to defend your beliefs from the government.

 

[Carla_Danger]

....

You asked for sources and I gave some to you. That they were not from this thread does not mean they don't exist. So my point stands. If people treat Atheism as a religion, then it becomes a religion.

...and as shown above, people treat Atheism as a religion. Some are just too dense to concede.

Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."

The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.

What is Atheism American Atheists

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. If a frog had wings, he wouldn't bump his ass.

These make more sense than your lame retorts.


..and Bill Maher is nothing more than a pseudo-intellectual shock jock, cute but laughable.




Try to watch this and LISTEN to what is said....on both sides.

Naturally, Bill jokes his way out of being caught with illogical utterances and evokes laughter from his screened audience. I think he's just pissed at the world because God put his ears on upside down.

It's only 8 minutes 22 seconds long. I'm confident that you can muster more patience than Pogo has exhibited here.

Click on the bar at the top of the screen rather than the start arrow in the center.

Was there a point here that you're trying to make? I watched it....again. I watched it when it originally aired. I happen to agree with Bill Maher, for the most part. What does the video have to do with this thread?

 

[Pogo]

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]

Almost as ridiculous as saying it isn't.

If atheism is not a religion, than your opinion is not protected by the Constitution. Fortunately for you, the rest of the world understands that the word religion involves more than a belief in a god, and uses that knowledge to defend your beliefs from the government.

Bullshit. You don't need a religion for your opinion to be protected by the Constitution. On religion or on anything else.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear POGO : i tried to cite your post about if Atheism is a religion, then who FOUNDED it?
(but this website is posting ads and downloading cookies triggering my firewall program to block the page)

Can I answer this way by giving an example of how Hinduism is also considered
not a religion but an expression of spiritual teachings that were already in existence and just passed
down until they were written down and given a name:

"Hinduism is a collective term applied to the many philosophical and religious traditions native to India. Hinduism has neither a specific moment of origin nor a specific founder. Rather, the tradition understands itself to be timeless, having always existed." Hinduism Origins Hinduism History Hinduism Beliefs

Thus the view of "Hinduism as a religion" is mostly imposed from the outside.
Same with views of Atheism and Constitutionalism.

Who founded Constitutionalism? These came from natural laws, that no man invented.
They were debated and written down in books from Hobbes, Rousseau, Locke, etc etc.
and ended up as the influence that went into the Constitution and Amendments that WERE written down
by specific leaders. But still many will say these laws were Given by God and not made by man.

NOTE: As for not believing in God
Do you believe in Life or Love? Wisdom or Truth?
if you substitute that for God then you believe in THAT.
So what we are arguing about is the meaning or definition of God we do or do not believe in.

I just don't see any evidence that there is a God, so I don't live my life as if a God exists.

The above essentially says that you do not believe in God because you don't see any evidence that there is a God.

This is a logical fallacy. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

No, you just changed what she said by extending to "evidence of absence". That's beyond her scope. So I'm afraid the rest of your post is irrelevant. Everything is not black/white, belief/disbelief. The component you're leaving out as inconvenient is doubt. Skepticism.

To use an illustration from everyday life may help clarify the issue further and demonstrate how the argument when used in its reverse form, is most illogical. The assertion 'absence of evidence is evidence of absence' cannot be applied to any unknown discovery or else the following propositions would be true:

Since William Herschel discovered Uranus in 1781 it did not exist until then because evidence of its existence was absent.

Since Neptune was not discovered until September 23rd 1846 by Galle and Arrest it did not exist until then, since there was no real evidence.

Pluto didn't exist until 1930 when it was discovered by Clyde W. Tombaugh, since there was no evidence of its existence.

What does the phrase absence of evidence is not evidence of absence mean in relation to discoveries supporting the Bible

You have a problem with logic and comprehension.

I just don't see any evidence that there is a God, so I don't live my life as if a God exists.

I just don't see any evidence that there is a God <<<(absence of evidence)

so (therefore)

I don't live my life as if a God exists <<<(Poor Carla believes there is no God...she interprets the above absence of evidence as "evidence of absence")

 

[asaratis]

....

Was there a point here that you're trying to make? I watched it....again. I watched it when it originally aired. I happen to agree with Bill Maher, for the most part. What does the video have to do with this thread?

You brought Bill Maher into the conversation, claiming he'd come up with a catchy retort. I merely presented evidence of his incompetency when faced with an intelligent Christian.

 

[Pogo]

Dear POGO : i tried to cite your post about if Atheism is a religion, then who FOUNDED it?
(but this website is posting ads and downloading cookies triggering my firewall program to block the page)

Can I answer this way by giving an example of how Hinduism is also considered
not a religion but an expression of spiritual teachings that were already in existence and just passed
down until they were written down and given a name:

"Hinduism is a collective term applied to the many philosophical and religious traditions native to India. Hinduism has neither a specific moment of origin nor a specific founder. Rather, the tradition understands itself to be timeless, having always existed." Hinduism Origins Hinduism History Hinduism Beliefs

Thus the view of "Hinduism as a religion" is mostly imposed from the outside.
Same with views of Atheism and Constitutionalism.

Who founded Constitutionalism? These came from natural laws, that no man invented.
They were debated and written down in books from Hobbes, Rousseau, Locke, etc etc.
and ended up as the influence that went into the Constitution and Amendments that WERE written down
by specific leaders. But still many will say these laws were Given by God and not made by man.

NOTE: As for not believing in God
Do you believe in Life or Love? Wisdom or Truth?
if you substitute that for God then you believe in THAT.
So what we are arguing about is the meaning or definition of God we do or do not believe in.

Hi Emily -- nice to see you here in the new playground. Forgive me if the post material I edited out below was relevant - it didn't look like it.

The question about "who founded it" was just a little test to see how the poster would handle it. I know a religion doesn't need a founder. I pointed out earlier that religion is not the same as theism, lest we conflate the two, indeed everybody in history has some sort of religion but not everybody has theism. Taoism is another example.

On Constitutionalism, it's probably going to be counterproductive to muddy these waters with political philosophies. We've already wandered more than once into the question of whether God(s) exist, which is not the topic. The thread is simply about the definition of "atheism", as a result of another thread where one poster here kept trying to make the case that it is a "religion".

And that's where we are.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Isn’t atheism a religion?
Sure. And not smoking is a habit.

The Thinking Atheist - FAQ

 

[Blackrook]

Why do atheists get so upset if you call their set of beliefs about God and the supernatural "religion."

I mean, what do they lose if atheism is considered a "religion"?

Why are they manning these ramparts so furiously?

 

[Pogo]

Isn’t atheism a religion?
Sure. And not smoking is a habit.

The Thinking Atheist - FAQ

Yeah, I'm afraid I'm guilty of that

And another thing... a confession:

"Hi everybody, my name is Pogo and I'm a non-alcoholic.

Every damn day I think, this is gonna be the day I take a drink. But I keep forgetting.
I've kept my job, still have friends, and now I'm stuck with a perfect driving record from never getting pulled over.
I keep coming home early, my family knows me.... I'm afraid I'm never going to get cirrhosis!
The damn bottle -- it's all I never think about."

 

[Pogo]

Why do atheists get so upset if you call their set of beliefs about God and the supernatural "religion."

I mean, what do they lose if atheism is considered a "religion"?

Why are they manning these ramparts so furiously?

Dunno --- what do y'all gain from pretending it IS a "religion"?

I have no idea.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Isn’t atheism a religion?
Sure. And not smoking is a habit.

The Thinking Atheist - FAQ

Yeah, I'm afraid I'm guilty of that

And another thing... a confession:

"Hi everybody, my name is Pogo and I'm a non-alcoholic.

Every damn day I think, this is gonna be the day I take a drink. But I keep forgetting.
I've kept my job, still have friends, and now I'm stuck with a perfect driving record from never getting pulled over.
I keep coming home early, my family knows me.... I'm afraid I'm never going to get cirrhosis!
The damn bottle -- it's all I never think about."

We need to get you signed up for a NAA meeting!

 

[Blackrook]

Why do atheists get so upset if you call their set of beliefs about God and the supernatural "religion."

I mean, what do they lose if atheism is considered a "religion"?

Why are they manning these ramparts so furiously?

Dunno --- what do y'all gain from pretending it IS a "religion"?

I have no idea.

I have no dog in this fight. I don't care if you call atheism a religion, or a philosophy, or the absence of a religion or philosophy.

But it does seem that many atheists, especially on the internet, share a common attitude: they carry a big chip on their shoulder and constantly challenge others to push it off.

Why the belligerence? Why are you trying so hard to "convert" people to your absence of religion?