Atheists Threaten to Sue Over Sign

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Why does it matter? It has been, and now these athiests are being petty and stupid about it, and are causing grief for people because of it.

Is it? They were firefighters employed by a municipality, not a church. They were heroes, not martyrs. Their faith (or lack of it) had nothing to do with their actions.

There's approximately 400 street and place names in the New York area renamed in honor of 9/11 that have largely avoided religious connotations.

I understand there's also a secular, popular culture connotation to the term "heaven." If that was indeed the naming intention, I don't think its bestows proper respect either.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by D to the iddy

This question came to mind while reading this thread and I don't know where else to ask it. What's the difference between a group of atheists who believe in the same thing (For example, the "American Atheists" mentioned in the article) and organized religion?

I'm not trying to cause an argument, I'm honestly curious.

Atheism isn't a belief. It's rejection of the concept of a deity.

If religion is a personal relationship between oneself and god, why are there churches, mosques and temples?

[photon]

If I was planning something to honour someone people that died protecting a bunch of people, I'd want to do it in a way that respectful to everyone that was being protected, not just a select group of those that happened to follow one specific of a few specific religions.

But that's just me.

[Resolute 14]

The rejection of a deity is a belief in itself.

One could be flippant and claim the difference between religion and athiesm is belief in something, and belief in nothing.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The rejection of a deity is a belief in itself.

One could be flippant and claim the difference between religion and athiesm is belief in something, and belief in nothing.

Agnosticism ftw!

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The rejection of a deity is a belief in itself.

Rejection of a diety is based on factual evidence, similar to rejecting the corporeal existence of any other fictional character.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The rejection of a deity is a belief in itself.

One could be flippant and claim the difference between religion and athiesm is belief in something, and belief in nothing.

Depends.. not all atheists reject the proposition of a deity, they just don't believe in one. There's a difference.

Plus the lack of belief or active rejection can vary depending on the god(s) in question. If there's specific claims made about the properties of a god(s) and those claims are demonstrated to be untrue, then that god proposition can be rejected, while at the same time a definition of god(s) that makes no claims or doesn't impact our universe at all shouldn't get the same level of rejection.

[Ark2]

Atheism is just as much a religion as Christianity, Islam or Judaism. Not sure why some people have such a hard time with that. If you want a non-religion, then just be agnostic. Otherwise, you are placing your faith in something.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Atheism is just as much a religion as Christianity, Islam or Judaism. Not sure why some people have such a hard time with that. If you want a non-religion, then just be agnostic. Otherwise, you are placing your faith in something.

Upon what definition of "religion" have you drawn such a conclusion?

As a Christian, I find it offensive to suggest that atheism is a "religion". It does not conform to any commonly accepted form of the term that I am aware of, at least insofar as it functions in our language.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Atheism is just as much a religion as Christianity, Islam or Judaism. Not sure why some people have such a hard time with that. If you want a non-religion, then just be agnostic. Otherwise, you are placing your faith in something.

You can be atheist and agnostic or theistic and agnostic, agnostic describes something different than atheism does.

Atheism doesn't place faith in anything, it simply is the lack of belief in the existence of god(s).

Theism doesn't place faith in anything either, it's simply belief in the existence of god(s).

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Upon what definition of "religion" have you drawn such a conclusion?

As a Christian, I find it offensive to suggest that atheism is a "religion". It does not conform to any commonly accepted form of the term that I am aware of, at least insofar as it functions in our language.

And I find it offensive that religion has a place in the formation of government, military decisions, and our education system, so I guess it is par for the course then.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by photon

You can be atheist and agnostic or theistic and agnostic, agnostic describes something different than atheism does.

Atheism doesn't place faith in anything, it simply is the lack of belief in the existence of god(s).

Theism doesn't place faith in anything either, it's simply belief in the existence of god(s).

Atheism places faith in the belief that there is no god or supreme being and that the universe's existence can be scientifically explained. Heck, most people who claim to be atheists know jack#$@! about other religions but they have faith that they are wrong and that they are right. That is placing faith in something. Not sure why atheists think they are above faith when it is something that is engrained in the very fabric of human nature. Atheism is a religion.

[Daradon]

The whole debate on what things are named or religious statues in public places has always bothered me. Or the word god in the anthem.

Even if you don't believe in these things, you can still respect the idea and thoughts or tradition behind them.

I've always been disappointed with the radicals on both sides of these types of arguments. I mean, what does it really matter in the bigger scheme of things?

Look at many places of Europe. Long history of oppressive religion, religion in government etc. And large parts of it now are mostly secular. Yet you don't hear them having these arguments. They just enjoy all the lovely artwork and tradition around them while moving into the future with new thoughts.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Rejection of a diety is based on factual evidence, similar to rejecting the corporeal existence of any other fictional character.

Your factual evidence doesn't contradict my God in the slightest. I believe the facts point to a God.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Atheism is a religion.

Is "OFF" a television station?

Atheism is rejection of belief in a diety. Only.

It says nothing at all about a person's beliefs, morals, values or political leanings.

A Christian does not fear Krishna, Allah, Mithras, the Guatemalan Corn God, Poseidon or Zeus.

Being a non-Mithran says nothing of a person's beliefs, morals, values or political leanings.

Atheist reject one more god than theists.

"Atheism as a religion" is a sophic, manufactured wedge issue that actually dumbs down the very argument it makes.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Is "OFF" a television station?

Atheism is rejection of belief in a diety. Only.

It says nothing at all about a person's beliefs, morals, values or political leanings.

A Christian does not fear Krishna, Allah, Mithras, the Guatemalan Corn God, Poseidon or Zeus.

Being a non-Mithran says nothing of a person's beliefs, morals, values or political leanings.

Atheist reject one more god than theists.

"Atheism as a religion" is a sophic, manufactured wedge issue that actually dumbs down the very argument it makes.

Nah, it's a religion because it is based on faith. I get why you don't like that though. Get's in the way of being a smug know-it-all. Your position is no less faith based than any other religion however, and using clumsy analogies that don't actually work doesn't change anything. Sorry.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Atheism places faith in the belief that there is no god or supreme being and that the universe's existence can be scientifically explained.

Atheism is just the absence of belief. Someone can live without ever contemplating a higher power and be an atheist. You can't say he believes in atheism because the thought never enters his head.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

"Atheism as a religion" is a sophic, manufactured wedge issue that actually dumbs down the very argument it makes.

Your non-belief in certain cliches is a religion unto itself. Clicheism.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Nah, it's a religion because it is based on faith. I get why you don't like that though. Get's in the way of being a smug know-it-all. Your position is no less faith based than any other religion however, and using clumsy analogies that don't actually work doesn't change anything. Sorry.

No, Reg is right. It's something those that do have belief in God have cooked up as an incorrect definition in the argument. The way in which the person is using the word 'faith' is very different in both examples. To substitute it back and forth is incorrect.

Atheism is NOT based on faith. At the best you can say, 'I have faith that there is no god.' But that is a very different way to use the word than is used in religious faith or faith in a god that cannot be proven. Not to mention, most atheists don't describe it or look at it that way anyway.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Atheism places faith in the belief that there is no god or supreme being

This makes no sense. Is your lack of belief in Santa Clause a religion? Of course not.

Do you believe that Wotan exists? If you say "There is no Wotan", what religion is that?

Atheism is as much a religion as not having a mustache is a religion.

Atheism is the lack of something hence the "a" prefix on the "thesim" suffix.

Answer Textcritic's question, by what definition of religion is atheism a religion?

Originally Posted by Ark2

and that the universe's existence can be scientifically explained.

You're conflating two different things together. Just because one doesn't believe there is a god doesn't mean that they think the universe's existence can be scientifically explained. It's also a false dichotomy, implying a specific god or natural process are the only two possible explanations.

Originally Posted by Ark2

Heck, most people who claim to be atheists know jack#$@! about other religions but they have faith that they are wrong and that they are right.

I don't know what definition of faith you are using that can make this sentence make sense. Faith how I use it in context of religion is generally belief without evidence, unless I'm referring to the category of religion itself (i.e. Christian faith).

Originally Posted by Ark2

That is placing faith in something.

Saying "I don't believe in god(s)" doesn't involve faith, it involves the lack of it. Saying "I believe there are no god(s)" may involve faith depending on how the person arrived at their belief.

Originally Posted by Ark2

Not sure why atheists think they are above faith when it is something that is engrained in the very fabric of human nature.

Atheism doesn't speak to being above faith, since it's a position about belief.

I agree that faith is something that is deeply programmed into the mind, that's why things like science and skepticism are important, to overcome the default behaviour of the brain that can be harmful.

Originally Posted by Ark2

Atheism is a religion.

Only if not believing in Wotan and Santa are religions too.