Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Michael Goff, Sep 11, 2014.
War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.
yes a quality institution. really it is a institution for mentally challenged Christians and needs locks on the doors. more great thigns from the mouth of a crazy
Rick Santorum makes me shake my head in disappointment just about every time I hear about his views and public initiatives.
To get away from the depressing initiative and discuss the broader, general idea, I would agree that atheism is technically a religion. Religion defines faith and worship; while there is no worship involved in atheism, there is a faith. The religious have faith without solid proof that God (or gods) exist; the atheists, by definition, have faith without solid proof that God (or gods) does not exist. If they felt differently then they would not be atheists, but agnostics.
Because, you know, the bible is the one and only alternative to atheism.
So enforced observation of religion is banned from school, and he wants lack of religion to be considered a religion as well. What would that even mean? How do you ban both a thing and the absence of it? Would people simply cease to exist if the begin saying reli*poof*
Pretty sure I've been calling it the anti-religion religion. You guys are just as obnoxious as the people you complain about.
Atheists dont accept the concept of God as a default position just like Catholics dont really acknowledge the existence of Zeus or Odin. We demand proof of the existence of supernatural phenomenon. We dont rely of faith. Faith is belief without proof. Not having proof of something or taking a default position on a zero sum is not faith. Atheism assumes a null position - we dont make an assertive statement. Theism does and therefore requires something to exist (without proof) - therefore faith. Faith cannot exist in a null system.
How is lack of a religion considered a religion? That's like saying that of you choose to be of no political affiliation, that's a political affiliation in itself. It's not. And atheism is not a religion. Religion is a choice, atheism is the default we're born with.
I always find it amusing when the concept of "having a religion" is so deeply implanted into the minds of people that they cannot comprehend that there are people who do extremely well with a complete lack of any "religion" whatsoever. On the other hand, it is not really THAT amusing when those people take their "god" that serious that they expect everyone else to live by the rules of their "mythological beliefs" (aka "moral compass" lol).
Are you saying that "religious" people are obnoxious?
Catholics feel that God is the only one, true God; by default, Zeus and Odin are just stories, because only God exists. That is the belief. Atheism, by definition, means that you do not believe in the existence of God or gods. You have no proof that they do not exist, but you take the position that they do not exist.
If you are open to the idea that they might or might not exist, then you are an agnostic. The point is that both theism and atheism are linked by the thread of a firm belief, neither of which has any concrete evidence behind the claim.
Due to human curiosity, I'd venture that agnosticism is more likely to be the default that we're born with.
Athiest do not assert a position that is not falsfiable. Heck, athiests don't relly have a belief since it's defines as an absense of belief. Christinatiy by defiault has a belief system that unfalseafiable. You liteally cannot prove God's existance since it doesn't exist in a scientific context. Athiests don't assert anything. We don't have faith becasue we aren't stating something exists. We are taking a position of null.
Should God be shown to exist, athiesm wouldn't be able to exist any longer at all. It's philosopy wouldn't be valid just like heleocentrism.
Athiests do not clain any existstant of supernatural beings. It's not faith since we are not making an unprovable belief premise. Null is not a premise. It is not a religion.
Some atheists vehemently assert that no god exists. Other atheists simply do not believe in any superbeing and do not much give a leap. And most agnostics are by definition atheists because, by not having any given belief, they do not believe in a deity.
So, no, for the majority of atheists, who spend almost no part of their life pondering the matter at all, their is no asserted belief, just a lack of belief, often total indifference. It is a false equivalency.
High Priest of St. Apathy
A couple years ago I was chatting with my classmates after an exam. One classmate of mine told me her mother was down from Seattle for the Atheist convention. There were seminars on how to debate with the religious, how to get involved in fighting religious influence virtually anywhere etc.
She just chuckled about it and said that told her mom: "For someone who is so anti-religion, I don't understand why you belong to one"
I thought that one was funny.
My atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in any God. It is not a positive claim of belief - it is, in fact the absence of belief.
Does this make me an agnostic? No, because we're talking about belief, not knowledge.
If you wish to talk about knowledge, then we are all agnostics, believers and nonbelievers alike.
Zen and the Art of Irreligiosity...
There's oh so many ways to avoid religion. I can't decide. I think I'll try them all out...
Irreligion (adjective form: non-religious or irreligious) is the absence of religion, an indifference towards religion, a rejection of religion, or hostility towards religion.
When characterized as the rejection of religious belief, it includes explicit atheism, religious dissidence, and secular humanism. When characterized as hostility towards religion, it includes anticlericalism, antireligion, and antitheism. When characterized as indifference to religion, it includes apatheism. When characterized as the absence of religious belief, it may also include implicit atheism, agnosticism, ignosticism, nontheism, religious skepticism, and freethought. Irreligion may include forms of theism, depending on the religious context it is defined against.
None of which include the particular denomination of irreligion you yourself have said you subscribe to.
Well I'm still hoping Absurdism will be officially recognized as a religion so I can retire and move to Colorado and establish the 1st Absurdist Church of Waiting for Godot and start offering hemp prayer cloths hand embroidered with "Abandon all hope..." in exchange for tax deductible love donations.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster will take you in its noodleness and welcome all.
Hence the reason, that I'm Agnostic. I don't have enough faith to be an Atheist.
You must have some faith in the Biblical Diety if you can't step back and see that...
1) every single religion on the planet has just as much faith in their supernational whosamajig, and thus faith alone can prove absolutely nothing.
2) we have historical evidence showing how belief in the Judeo-Christian God evolved from an earlier polytheistic system. So even if somehow there is a God, its not the one most people on this planet worship; its existence would be completely coincidental.
Then all religions are religions of the other religions?
Christians are religious about their "faith without solid proof that their God exist", and also have "faith without solid proof that the other gods do not exist"?
No. Call it a lack of belief, a conviction, but what I think is not a religion.
Sounds good in theory and I'll fight for your right to believe it. But personally, I don't know and don't care. Hence the designation, Agnostic.
Belief in scientific evidence over religious texts written over a millennia ago by various different people is not a religion. It is believing that continued discovery and study will aid us in answering life's unanswered questions rather than just accepting the words of them who lived in days of lesser intelligence and organized controlling of the masses.