That is a common misconception, one that atheists have been trying to clear up for a while now.
"Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism...
Atheists do have beliefs, and one of the common beliefs that atheists share is to not have others misrepresent their position. The reaction you are getting out of people is due to you misrepresenting who they are. I think it is rather common reaction among humans to speak up when people are...
No, it isn't. Using the proper definition of words is just using the words.
What we are speaking to is the twisted logic of trying to define atheism as a religion. Simple dictionary definitions are enough to head this argument off at the pass. If we were really talking about the subtleties...
This is what I was responding to:
Are you saying that unless claims of precognition and telepathy have been demonstrated to be true, that precognition and telepathy are therefore impossible?
What you were describing is a false dichotomy. There is a third option where you dismiss the claims of...
The burden of proof lies with those who claim that precognition and telepathy are real. If those claims are not supported by demonstrable evidence, then people are justified in dismissing those claims. We don't need to demonstrate or even claim that such things are impossible. The lack of...
Using the words as defined is not an argument from semantics.
The point is that a-theism is without a belief in deities as compared to theism which is a belief in deities. The whole point is that atheism isn't a belief, but a lack of belief.
If your religion involves a personal God who created things, then you are a theist, by definition. You can call the religion whatever you want, but it is still theism.
theism: belief in the existence of a god or gods; specifically : belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world
Definition of THEISM
As far as the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution is concerned, they are equivalent statements with reference to legislation and government policy. As ruled in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), any statute must have a secular purpose, must not advance nor inhibit religion, and must not unduly entangle...
A simple yes/no would have worked.
I believe that chocolate ice cream is better than vanilla ice cream. Is that belief a religion?
More importantly, what is the purpose of calling beliefs a religion? What is the ultimate goal in that line of argumentation?
I am not limited by the dictionary, so I will define Christianity however I want. Also, relevance means "making pancakes" because I define it as so.
The point is that words mean things. If you base an argument on using different definitions of words then you don't have much of an argument.
This thread is yet another example of people trying to twist the burden of proof around so that it means the opposite of what it really means.
What some people want is a situation where they can claim that anything exists without any evidence that it exists, and then shift the burden of proof...