Religion and Atheism

[ImmortalFlame]

..probably better to end this 'discussion'. Clarification and terminological analysis was my goal here. Heated divisions over opinions and 'he said, she said!' bickerings do not aid in that goal.

This was also entirely my intention when I posted dictionary definitions of atheism after you claimed to use the dictionary definition, and in response you made a bunch of unfounded insinuations about my position on things I'd never even said, and blatantly lied about my posts. Why did you do that? It's not a matter of "he said, she said", both of our words are right there in this thread. You blatantly and objectively LIED about what I had written.

And I'm awaiting the retraction and apology.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Hardly. That is just a belief. What evidence do you have for 'no God?' Indoctrination? Wishful thinking?

I'm making no claim. I am extrapolating that a
a belief in 'no God' is a religio/philosophical opinion, regarding the nature of the universe. It is, in actual reality, a religious belief, and the intense hostility from some atheists for being included in a 'religious belief!' implies that the term has become pejorative. Since atheists use the term to demean theists, it is only fair to point out that their beliefs are also inherently religious.

You can define and juggle the words however you want. But the bottom line is that atheism, a BELIEF in 'no gods', is a religio/philosophical opinion, nothing more. Denial and insults does not change this reality.

ROFL!!
So, you wish to reserve 'religious!', as a smear term for theists only, and bristle if anyone points out that YOUR beliefs are inherently religious, as well? Then spice up your denial with a few more pointed insults, since 'religious!' doesn't have enough bite?


You seem offended that anyone would dare suggest that YOUR beliefs are just like everyone else's.. a religio/philosophical opinion about the nature of the universe.

The pejoratve, 'religious!', should be reserved EXCLUSIVELY for 'smug, religious hypocrites!!' ..lol!

There is already a term for uncertainty, regarding belief in God. Why try to mix them?

Levels of conviction are not really the issue, and people can add qualifiers for any base position.

But regarding God, there are 3 basic positions/beliefs:
Theism
Atheism
Agnosticism

One could be a dogmatic/strong, or a weak/leaning, in any opinion. They can add the qualifiers, if that is important to them, but it is not essential in describing a basic belief.

I suspect your goal in life was not to become a beacon for enlightenment. I know this may be difficult for you to understand, but Atheism is NOT an affirmative belief that NO GODS EXISTS(not a belief in no god). Nor does it answer any other questions about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there is a God(s). In other words, if you ask an Atheist if he believes in a God(s), his answer will be no. Period. If you ask him why, he will tell you that there is no evidence to suggest that a God exists. Period. Where do you think the burden of proof now lies? I know you need to misrepresent the atheist's view, by claiming that Atheists hate God, reject God, believe in "no Gods"(affirmation), just to save face for presenting any argument that attempts to rationalize a faith-based belief. Is it wishful thinking or indoctrination, that if you starve yourself for a month, or drink a quart of gasoline, or jump off of a tall building, that you will die? THIS IS CALLED A CERTAINTY. Science explains with certainty all natural phenomena, without any need to interject Deities. If an outside entity did interact with our reality, there would exist some detectable evidence of that interaction.

What evidence do YOU have that a God exists? Indoctrination? Or, just wishful thinking? If you are trying to imply that evidence is NOT the reason Atheists do not believe in God, then just present the evidence to convince them. Present one provable miracle. One verifiable prophecy fulfilled. One example of the supernatural or the paranormal. Just one verifiable example of the "power of prayer". Even one example of a fallacy-free argument that has not already been debunked(Occam's razor, Design argument, Ontological argument, First Cause argument, Cosmological argument, Consciousness argument(dualism), etc.). Maybe you can then explain the 7 great Biblical paradoxes and other bible inconsistencies? Can you cite just one example where the laws of physic have ever been suspended, or violated? How about an example of the dead being resurrected, or where Heaven is?

Unfortunately, objective evidence can't compete with blind faith and presupposition bias. I would rather be indoctrinated into knowing that something is true and can explain it with evidence, than be indoctrinated into believing that something is true, and must attack others because there IS no evidence. Since there is no logical reason to believe that a God(s) exists, and every reason to believe that a God(s) does not exist, how do you know that a God exist? Also, why do you think Atheists do not believe in a God(s)? In fact, the only way one can not be an Atheist, is to believe in God(s). Is non-belief in God also a type of belief in God, in your world? Is your disdain for Atheists, just a latent cry for approval?

No one cares what you want to believe in. That is your right. What we care about is the arguments you use to defend your beliefs. It is this twisted convoluted logic that intrudes into my life, and into the education of my children. Why must my Government placate those still believing in fairy tales and superstitions. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

..probably better to end this 'discussion'. Clarification and terminological analysis was my goal here. Heated divisions over opinions and 'he said, she said!' bickerings do not aid in that goal.

I'm still expecting an apology and retraction for the lies you told about me in this thread. Will one be forthcoming?

 

[usfan]

I'm still expecting an apology and retraction for the lies you told about me in this thread. Will one be forthcoming?

I have no desire to bicker about accusations, and just promote the phony 'Atheists vs Christians!', flsme war. I gave my perspective, and you've called me names. Pretending to be the injured party and pounding an ad hominem narrative about me, personally just deflects from the topic. I owe you nothing, and will not be bullied by anyone. Good bye.

 

[usfan]

I suspect your goal in life was not to become a beacon for enlightenment.

and you know my goals in life?

I know this may be difficult for you to understand,

No need to preface everything you say with some disparaging remark.. that is a fallacy.

Is your disdain for Atheists, just a latent cry for approval?

Seriously? False accusation and psychobabble analysis in the same sentence?

No one cares what you want to believe in

nor you, i am sure

It is this twisted convoluted logic that intrudes into my life, and into the education of my children. Why must my Government placate those still believing in fairy tales and superstitions.

The very existence of 'Christians!' seems very threatening, to you. You are making them into quite the boogie man..

You imply that the govt should eliminate these 'bad!' people, instead of placating them. Allowing them to exist is a placation?

I've just examined the evolution of a term. I have not expressed 'hatred!', nor 'disdain!' for anyone. That is your projection, since you seem to think the govt should stop placating the evil xtians, and outlaw them, or something. But don't project your biases on me. I've been a strong supporter of the 1st amendment, and the concept of freedom of conscience and religion, which includes atheism. I believe it is the duty of our govt to protect and defend the right to believe in any religious opinion, including atheism.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I have no desire to bicker about accusations, and just promote the phony 'Atheists vs Christians!', flsme war. I gave my perspective, and you've called me names. Pretending to be the injured party and pounding an ad hominem narrative about me, personally just deflects from the topic. I owe you nothing, and will not be bullied by anyone. Good bye.

This truly speaks to your character. You are not interested in honest debate - you lie and mis-characterize other posters, and when they prove this and hold you to account for your dishonesty, you cry ad hominem and pretend to leave with your head held high.

It's obvious that you'll never apologize for lying about me, obtaining an apology was never really what I expected, but I'm happy that I've exposed your dishonesty and the fact that you are only able to debate these subjects in bad faith. I can rest assured that you know you had to lie and run away in order to feel superior to me, and even if this is never acknowledged on these forums by you, I know that there will always be that part of you that knows you had to resort to dishonesty and playing the victim in order to avoid admitting that you were wrong, and maybe someday you will put those internal barriers down and allow your mind to change (and, maybe, you could actually learn what an ad hominem is).

I wish you all the best in that effort.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

and you know my goals in life?

No need to preface everything you say with some disparaging remark.. that is a fallacy.

Seriously? False accusation and psychobabble analysis in the same sentence?
nor you, i am sure


The very existence of 'Christians!' seems very threatening, to you. You are making them into quite the boogie man..

You imply that the govt should eliminate these 'bad!' people, instead of placating them. Allowing them to exist is a placation?

I've just examined the evolution of a term. I have not expressed 'hatred!', nor 'disdain!' for anyone. That is your projection, since you seem to think the govt should stop placating the evil xtians, and outlaw them, or something. But don't project your biases on me. I've been a strong supporter of the 1st amendment, and the concept of freedom of conscience and religion, which includes atheism. I believe it is the duty of our govt to protect and defend the right to believe in any religious opinion, including atheism.

I said I suspect what your goal isn't, not that I KNOW what your goal is. Please read carefully, and respond only to what I actually say, not what you want me to say. What is the fallacy of expressing an observation that is disparaging? None exists, except within its pathos. Maybe you should learn the difference between, "disparaging" and "derogatory". Misrepresenting what others say is clearly an important part of your method of discourse for defending your beliefs. That is, along with sarcasm, elitism, arrogance, and latent insecurities.

I have no problem with what fairy tales adults want to believe as being real. As long as they keep their beliefs to themselves. In spite of the sad straw man argument you create, it is not the people that I object to, it is their beliefs encroaching into my life, directly and indirectly. You should know the difference between the two. So, when I express my concerns about my Government placating the BELIEFS(giving them credibility) of "Christian" fairy tales, this is not the same as the mischaracterizing of Christians as "bad people", or the "boogeyman". Or the lie that I want to eliminate them. Equivocation and false conclusion fallacies. Clearly, there are many examples of how religious beliefs are encroaching into every aspect of the lives of those that are not religious. This means that their encroachment concerns are justified and not imaginary. Unlike what you would have others believe, by your demonizing, ridiculing, and mischaracterizing Atheists, and your total insensitivity to their real concerns. What you, and others like you don't understand, is that Government not only protects the rights of those that choose to believe in fairy tales, but that it also protects the rights of those that choose not to believe in fairy tales.

Your statements alone clearly demonstrate your distain, insecurity, and anxiety towards Atheists in your words alone. Such as, "indoctrination" and "wishful thinking". Calling Atheist's views "religious opinions", "religious bigotry and elitism", Stating that Atheists use, "misrepresentations, distortions, and revisions from progressive indoctrinates.", or that they use the term "religion" to demean Theists. The claim that Atheists use redefined terms from the "snowflake effect"(whatever that means). Also the claim that Atheists are in "hostile denial", or wants to "elevate themselves to some higher plane of existence", are just baseless assertions to enrage, demean, and provoke Atheists. All this is used as a distraction, to avoid addressing the total lack of objective evidence you can deposit to support your belief in fairy tales and superstitions. Just because you don't directly say the words, does not mean that your actions are exempt from being defined/described by the words.

There is already a term for uncertainty, regarding belief in God. Why try to mix them?

Exactly what is this term for uncertainty called, regarding a belief in the existence of God? And, what term exactly am I mixing uncertainty with? Never mind, just more religious "huff and puff" and "smoke and mirrors", that tries desperately to give religious belief the perception of substance. But in the end just more obfuscations, insults, arrogance, logical fallacies, and more confirmation biases.

The mark of true intellect is the ability to admit when you are wrong. The mark of true insecurity is to hide behind Divine Air, clever Semantics, or self-serving denials. At least politicians will try to spin their denials, but God beliefs are only supported by blind faith assertions. Fairy tales and superstitions are not real in the reality I live in. If you are a strong proponent of the 1st amendments rights, then you would not want to impose your beliefs onto others that disagree with you. Clearly this is not your intention. You want everyone to have a belief in a fairy tales, so that your belief in fairy tales won't seem so obvious, immature, and ludicrous. It is what I call, "diluted absurdity".

 

[usfan]

The topic is not, 'how hateful and stupid is usfan?!?!' it is, 'Religion and Atheism.'

I will summarize the evidence, as i see it, for considering atheism a religious opinion/belief:

1. National constitutions and court decisions. Atheism is rightly considered a protected belief, and is defined, legally, as inherently a religious opinion.
2. Polls. Gallup has a religious poll often, for many decades, and 'atheism' is always an option, for a belief descriptor.
3. This forum. 'Religious forums' has a high percentage of atheists, here, expressing, defending, and promoting their beliefs.
4. Common parlance and historical usage. Most dictionaries have the concepts and beliefs in atheism as a 'religious' opinion, in the list of definitions.
5. Hostile denial from logophobians. 'Religious!' has devolved into a smear term, for some, and they cannot or will not face the inherently religious nature of their own beliefs, but insist the term is an exclusive pejorative for 'Christians!', or some demonized groupthink enemy.

These are a few of the reasons why i see the term, 'religious', applying equally toward atheistic, and even agnostic beliefs. I am not offended, if some disagree, or insist on their own definitions. People can define terms however they want, or spell them how they wish.

It is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word. ~Andrew Jackson

 

[usfan]

Your statements alone clearly demonstrate your distain, insecurity, and anxiety towards Atheists

You want everyone to have a belief in a fairy tales

Misrepresenting what others say is clearly an important part of your method of discourse for defending your beliefs. That is, along with sarcasm, elitism, arrogance, and latent insecurities.

I have no desire to bicker about accusations, and promote the phony 'Atheists vs Christians!', flame war. I gave my perspective, and you've called me names. Pretending to be the injured party and pounding an ad hominem narrative about me, personally just deflects from the topic. I owe you nothing, and will not be bullied by anyone. Good bye.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The topic is not, 'how hateful and stupid is usfan?!?!' it is, 'Religion and Atheism.'

I will summarize the evidence, as i see it, for considering atheism a religious opinion/belief:

1. National constitutions and court decisions. Atheism is rightly considered a protected belief, and is defined, legally, as inherently a religious opinion.

Could you provide an extract from the constitution or court record which states that atheism is legally defined as a religious opinion? I just wish to get their exact wordage and definitions for context purposes.

2. Polls. Gallup has a religious poll often, for many decades, and 'atheism' is always an option, for a belief descriptor.

Irrelevant. If I asked someone what their favourite meat was and they answered "I'm a vegetarian", does that make "vegetarian" meat? Atheism does not fit the classical definition of a religion, though it can be - and often is - considered a position related to religion, in much the same way that vegetarianism can be considered a position related to the consumption of meat.

3. This forum. 'Religious forums' has a high percentage of atheists, here, expressing, defending, and promoting their beliefs.

The forum includes a section for atheists because atheists can discuss religious beliefs, and atheism is regarded as a position related to religion, as said above.

4. Common parlance and historical usage. Most dictionaries have the concepts and beliefs in atheism as a 'religious' opinion, in the list of definitions.

Could you provide some of these dictionary definitions?

5. Hostile denial from logophobians. 'Religious!' has devolved into a smear term, for some, and they cannot or will not face the inherently religious nature of their own beliefs, but insist the term is an exclusive pejorative for 'Christians!', or some demonized groupthink enemy.

This doesn't really indicate anything with regards to whether or not atheism can be considered a "religious opinion".

These are a few of the reasons why i see the term, 'religious', applying equally toward atheistic, and even agnostic beliefs. I am not offended, if some disagree, or insist on their own definitions. People can define terms however they want, or spell them how they wish.

It is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word. ~Andrew Jackson

I just wish to clarify something in the hopes of preventing further misunderstanding.

What I agree with:
1) The term "religious" should not, in and of itself, be considered derisory.
2) The notion of atheism being regarded as a "religious opinion/belief" is justified in so far as it is a position that is commonly regarded as being related to religion, and nothing more.
3) As a simple, semantic shorthand, I am comfortable with labelling atheism a "religious opinion/belief", as long as it is understood that it only indicates what is specified in point 2.

What I disagree with:
1) Any potential insinuation that atheism could therefore be considered "a religion" or "equal or equatable to any religious position".
2) Any attempt to interpret resistance to atheism being labelled "religious" as in any way indicating any form of phobia on the part of atheists more than it is a very real issue with atheists and atheistic positions often been lumped into the same boat as religious thinkers - an argument that is often used by religious groups to create what is felt to be the illusion of a level playing field and dismiss any alternative positions or beliefs as automatically being equal to their own, and therefore undeserving of serious critical analysis or response.

So, as long as that is clear:

Yes, atheism CAN be considered a religious opinion/belief in that it is a position that, colloquially and culturally speaking, is related to common religious thought.

No, atheism CAN NOT be considered a religious opinion/belief in the sense that it IS a religion or of necessarily equal value/justification as any specific religious opinion/belief.

Are we in agreement?

 

[Trailblazer]

What is the fallacy of expressing an observation that is disparaging? None exists, except within its pathos. Maybe you should learn the difference between, "disparaging" and "derogatory". Misrepresenting what others say is clearly an important part of your method of discourse for defending your beliefs. That is, along with sarcasm, elitism, arrogance, and latent insecurities..

Everything you accuse this poster of doing is what you are doing.
That is called projection.
It incorporates blame shifting.

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.
Psychological projection - Wikipedia​

Maybe you should learn to stop insulting other posters.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

I have no desire to bicker about accusations, and promote the phony 'Atheists vs Christians!', flame war. I gave my perspective, and you've called me names. Pretending to be the injured party and pounding an ad hominem narrative about me, personally just deflects from the topic. I owe you nothing, and will not be bullied by anyone. Good bye.

My criticisms were only based on the words you used. This seems to have exposed some hidden agenda about this topic. Your perspective was to assert that Atheism was just another religious perspective, and therefore another religion. Another God perspective if you will. Then you selectively pick some obscure word in one of the definitions of Atheism, and used it to support and justify your perspective. Since you don't know the difference between intensional definitions(specific meaning), and extensional definitions(extended meanings), it just becomes another dishonest game of semantics that even a child can see through. You, like other God-believers, always define Atheism as a half-truth. Or, in the context of its syntax and grammar. For example, Atheists do not believe that a God(s) exists(1st half), because there is no objective evidence to justify such a belief(2nd half). Why do you think believers leave out the second half? Because both statements are mutually inclusive. To argue against this position would require one of the Billions of Theists to produce objective evidence supporting their claim, or to construct an argument that is logically consistent and fallacy-free. Neither is possible since both would be unfalsifiable. Also, when describing Atheists as being "very religious" in their position/opinion, or in accepting their position "religiously", this in no way equate to Atheism as a religion. You are either being intellectually dishonest with yourself, or is an example of why a little knowledge can truly be a dangerous thing.

I totally agree with @ImmortalFlame, and would only add that Atheism is related to only ONE aspect of all religious tenets. That is, the assertion of any supernatural claims, or any violation of the physical laws. It is not a disbelief in religion per se. So, just provide the evidence, or your only perspective will be, that you are in denial. If you don't want your perspective to be challenged by Atheists, then don't step outside the choir.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You demeaned people for using a dictionary definition of atheism while claiming to base your position on the dictionary, then denied that its worth demeaning somebody for their position and claimed that people are free to pick and choose their definitions. This makes you a hypocrite. You picked and chose your definition, then demeaned others for doing the same.

What has he posted that wasn't in the service of hoping to provoke others while simultaneously pretending to be a good guy trying to have a serious conversation with unreasonable indoctrinees and snowflakes.

Of course he's a hypocrite. He's guilty of that of which he accuses others

It is very clear to me that atheism, a belief in 'no gods', is a religious opinion. And that the believers in atheism hold to it as a religion. I see that this perception enrages some atheists, which imo, is the 'snowflake effect'

As you might have just read, it is my opinion that you are here to irritate atheists, because you disapprove of them considering religious a pejorative. That makes you the snowflake..

just old fashioned elitism and religious bigotry, pretending THEIR 'beliefs', are absolute, wise, and true, while everyone else is superstitious and stupid.

Religious beliefs are superstitious. Does that word offend you as well?

I'm not saying that my ideas are absolute, wise, and true. I'm saying that yours are of no value to me.

Regarding stupid, how smart is somebody who bases his life on the teachings of people that didn't know where the rain came from? What if the Neanderthals had had writing and left a holy book? Would you consider it wise to base one's life on that? It would be even more ancient and irrelevant to modern life, so it would have that going for it. There would probably be scriptures on starting fire, psalms worshiping the Neantherthal god Ugaboo, and epistles on spear hunting

I'm quite used to the misrepresentations, distortions, and revisionism from progressive indoctrinees.

This is further evidence of your purpose here. You simply want to let atheists know just how much you dislike the way they think of religions and the religious, and hope to offend a few and get a rise. Everything you post works to that end. Then you play coy as if you are here to discuss matters with unbelievers.

Far be it from me to demean what people believe

It's about all you do.

Since atheists use the term to demean theists, it is only fair to point out that their beliefs are also inherently religious.

That's a confession. If atheists are going to consider the term religious pejorative, you will call atheists religious however tortured your argument is that atheism is a religion just to return the insult if you can, and repeat it often.

Then you interpret the negative reaction to you as success, but you're misunderstanding the dynamics here. You are incorrect about why people disesteem you. It's not you calling others religious. It's your debating etiquette and your unconcealed hatred of atheists.

But regarding God, there are 3 basic positions/beliefs:
Theism
Atheism
Agnosticism

Your nomenclature is way out of date. We use the words differently. I call myself an agnostic atheist because that term precisely describes a person who says that there is insufficient evidence to support a god belief, he is an atheist, but who also says that there isn't enough evidence to rule the possibility of gods out, so he's also an agnostic. If your nomenclature doesn't reflect both of those facts, it's inadequate. If your nomenclature doesn't recognize that person with no god belief is an atheist, then it's useless except for apologetics purposes such as yours.

Nobody calls atheists religious except religious people that don't like atheists.

Clarification and terminological analysis was my goal here.

That's not credible.

I have no desire to bicker about accusations, and just promote the phony 'Atheists vs Christians!', flsme war. I gave my perspective, and you've called me names.

No, you just want to make accusations and try to prevent negative replies. Your "perspective" is that atheists are indoctrinees and snowflakes. You've provided no supporting evidence for either of those claims. Ironically, it is you that is the indoctrinee, indoctrinated into Christianity, it is you being offensive, and it is you who is the snowflake.

I owe you nothing, and will not be bullied by anyone.

More projection. Bullying is what you are here to do.

 

[wandering peacefully]

The topic is not, 'how hateful and stupid is usfan?!?!' it is, 'Religion and Atheism.'

I will summarize the evidence, as i see it, for considering atheism a religious opinion/belief:

1. National constitutions and court decisions. Atheism is rightly considered a protected belief, and is defined, legally, as inherently a religious opinion.
2. Polls. Gallup has a religious poll often, for many decades, and 'atheism' is always an option, for a belief descriptor.
3. This forum. 'Religious forums' has a high percentage of atheists, here, expressing, defending, and promoting their beliefs.
4. Common parlance and historical usage. Most dictionaries have the concepts and beliefs in atheism as a 'religious' opinion, in the list of definitions.
5. Hostile denial from logophobians. 'Religious!' has devolved into a smear term, for some, and they cannot or will not face the inherently religious nature of their own beliefs, but insist the term is an exclusive pejorative for 'Christians!', or some demonized groupthink enemy.

These are a few of the reasons why i see the term, 'religious', applying equally toward atheistic, and even agnostic beliefs. I am not offended, if some disagree, or insist on their own definitions. People can define terms however they want, or spell them how they wish.

It is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word. ~Andrew Jackson

You certainly do have a lot of negative attitudes towards religion. That is the biggest rant against being religious I've seen in a long time here.

 

[Willamena]

These are a few of the reasons why i see the term, 'religious', applying equally toward atheistic, and even agnostic beliefs.

Yes. They are certain 'religious' in the sense that religion is the topic they address.

But they are not 'a religion.'

 

[lukethethird]

The topic is not, 'how hateful and stupid is usfan?!?!' it is, 'Religion and Atheism.'

I will summarize the evidence, as i see it, for considering atheism a religious opinion/belief:

1. National constitutions and court decisions. Atheism is rightly considered a protected belief, and is defined, legally, as inherently a religious opinion.
2. Polls. Gallup has a religious poll often, for many decades, and 'atheism' is always an option, for a belief descriptor.
3. This forum. 'Religious forums' has a high percentage of atheists, here, expressing, defending, and promoting their beliefs.
4. Common parlance and historical usage. Most dictionaries have the concepts and beliefs in atheism as a 'religious' opinion, in the list of definitions.
5. Hostile denial from logophobians. 'Religious!' has devolved into a smear term, for some, and they cannot or will not face the inherently religious nature of their own beliefs, but insist the term is an exclusive pejorative for 'Christians!', or some demonized groupthink enemy.

These are a few of the reasons why i see the term, 'religious', applying equally toward atheistic, and even agnostic beliefs. I am not offended, if some disagree, or insist on their own definitions. People can define terms however they want, or spell them how they wish.

It is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word. ~Andrew Jackson

If atheism is a religion then you can count me out as of now.

 

[Trailblazer]

Atheism is not a religion, according to the definition of the word religion, since atheists do not believe in any superhuman controlling power, or that any God or gods exist.

religion
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods:
https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search​

I hope I have settled the dispute on this thread now.

 

[usfan]

hoping to provoke others while simultaneously pretending to be a good guy trying to have a serious conversation with unreasonable indoctrinees and snowflakes.
Of course he's a hypocrite. He's guilty of that of which he accuses others

you are here to irritate atheists, because you disapprove of them considering religious a pejorative. That makes you the snowflake

Religious beliefs are superstitious. Does that word offend you as well?

Regarding stupid, how smart is somebody who bases his life on the teachings of people that didn't know where the rain came from?

your unconcealed hatred of atheists.

i can only point out the ad hom replies here. No arguments or topical debate, just a bash stream at me, personally, for having a different opinion.

Your nomenclature is way out of date. We use the words differently.

No problem. That is what i pointed out in my last reply:
" I am not offended, if some disagree, or insist on their own definitions. People can define terms however they want, or spell them how they wish."

Nobody calls atheists religious except religious people that don't like atheists.

Projection.

Bullying is what you are here to do.

projection

You certainly do have a lot of negative attitudes towards religion. That is the biggest rant against being religious I've seen in a long time here.

I am analyzing the term, and its evolution in modern parlance. How is this a 'rant!', against being religious?

If atheism is a religion then you can count me out as of now

Ah yes.. because it is a smear term, and you want no association with it.

So, your beliefs have no 'religious implications? Your opinions about the nature of man. God, and the universe lack any religio/philosophical speculation?

Atheism is not a religion, according to the definition of the word religion,

According to some definitions. The term has other dictionary definitions that clearly include 'religious!', and 'religion!' in an atheistic worldview.

Here's Merriam's:

religious adjective
re·li·gious | \ ri-ˈli-jəs \
Definition of religious (Entry 1 of 2)
1 : relating to or manifesting faithful devotion to an acknowledged ultimate reality or deity
a religious person
religious attitudes
2 : of, relating to, or devoted to religious beliefs or observances
joined a religious order
3a : scrupulously and conscientiously faithful
b : FERVENT, ZEALOUS

That's the adjective. I see many atheists express their beliefs, "relating to an acknowledged ultimate reality" ..and their zeal, fervency, and conscientious devotion to their beliefs are second to none. 'Religious', is not only accurate, but appropriate.

Now, the noun:

religious noun
plural religious
Definition of religious (Entry 2 of 2)
: a member of a religious order under monastic vows

..that excludes most people. Hardly anyone could be considered a "religious", under that definition, so why even use the term?

Now, the term 'religion':

religion noun
re·li·gion | \ ri-ˈli-jən \
Definition of religion
1a : the state of a religious
a nun in her 20th year of religion
b(1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural
(2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Depending on context, this term can also apply to the atheistic worldview. It is a 'Cause', for some, that they hold to with ardor. But intensity of devotion is not really the factor that includes atheism in a 'religious' descriptor. IMO, it is the speculative and belief nature, regarding what may be considered The Most Important Question in the universe: Why/how are we here? Is there a God/Creator?

That belief, regarding the Big Question, can only be considered a religio/philosophical opinion. No matter what stance you take, on the Big Question, it is inherently a religious opinion. The intensity or certainty with which it is held does not really contribute to the definition.

 

[usfan]

Seriously, i don't care if anyone insists on a narrower definition of these terms. The evolution of words and definitions intrigues me, and since it is bandied about so, and is the Title of this forum, an in depth analysis is not inappropriate. It is a bit disconcerting to see the passionate intensity over a simple word definition. But it is entertaining as well. Passionate debate can help clear the mind, and expose flaws in reasoning. ..but usually not.

Now, if it helps some feel better to attack me, personally, or psychoanalyze me, or demonize me as a 'hater!', or 'denier!', then i am happy to be a scapegoat for you, and play the role of the evil, demonized 'religious!' person, that, thankfully, you are not like.

But better yet, is to see us all together on this boat, trying to see through the Mist and the Darkness, and discover Where we are going.

 

[sooda]

If atheism is a religion then you can count me out as of now.

Religion is also defined as a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

"consumerism is the new religion"