To the idiots who say "atheism is a religion" you DO realize we're all laughing at you right?

Question

I mean even mentally challenged 4 year olds can learn that atheism is made up of two words; A (meaning without) and theism (the belief in a supernatural power). So Atheism is the rejection of the incorrect and totally asinine belief in a supernatural being.
Does this clear things up for you? Or do you need someone to read it to you very, very slowly before you understand?

Gee coragryph, first answer and already we have the winner of today's "moron of the day award".
Let me set you straight for once in your life. Atheists don't have to BELIEVE that there is no god, because there IS no god. See the difference?
Since your magic sky-pixie does not and cannot exist, we don't have to believe in it's non-existence.
You on the other hand, having NO proof of it's existence, must therefore believe.
Now, get someone to re-read this to you slowly until you understand.

chapelism,
OOHHH the supreme court said atheism is a "religon" huh? Well I guess that must be true. After all, these are the same morons that said that Terri Schiavo was still "alive" right?
It's people like you that makes ALL americans look bad. Too stupid to think for yourself, and too lazy to look into what you don't understand.
You have my pity.

theoneandonlymoron,
Tell you what sparky, give me ONE single credible shred of evidence or proof that your magic sky pixie exists, and we'll talk. Until then you can STFU.
Deal?

Answer 1

Atheism is NOT a Religion


"Atheism is religion." When you hear a statement like this, it often comes form a person who has actually done little research or thinking about either Atheism or religion. Most people rarely study or investigate their own religious beliefs, assuming they have any. If they are born in a predominately Christian, or Muslim, or Hindu, or Jewish culture, they will probably reflect the religious beliefs of that society.

Nearly every dictionary will define religion as "belief in a divine or superhuman power or powers to be obeyed a worshipped as the creator(s) and ruler(s) of the universe. The definition of all other terms linked to religion employ much the same language -- church, monastery, priest. They are all part of a religious-language universe or "game" that has little to do with Atheism.

There cannot be an Atheist "Church", or an Atheist "priest" anymore than there could be an Atheist "god."

Answer 2

rather everyone has a distinctive opinion on what's appealing or grotesque. working example, some people might say that great eyes are appealing. yet others might say that they make you seem as though an alien. So there won't be a "rule" to comprehend while you're warm or no longer. What makes you extra alluring is self assurance. so which you should continuously have that, various people see that as appealing. And if a guy says he's long previous farther it does not rather propose you're warm. some adult men basically say that so they might seem warm. they do no longer prefer to look as though they might't get any female they want.

Answer 3

I agree. I think the people that say these are the same ones that say "it is just a theory" because they don't understand anything about it. They think we get together to talk about not having a god or that we made up some other ******** story like creationism for the origins of life.

It seems the guy right above me doesn't realize the difference between a DISbelief and a belief. Believe it or not religious folks, there could be an atheist that doesn't believe in evolution; I know such thing is rare to ever happen, but it is entirely possible. Therefore, atheism being a religion is ridiculous.

Answer 4

Perhaps you're confusing agnosticism with atheism.

Agnosticism is a philosophical position. Atheism is a religion.

The agnostic essentially asserts that he doesn't know, thus the word.

The atheist 'believes' there is no God. It is an unproven and unprovable supposition.

You may not consider yourself to be "religious" in the conventional sense of the word, but you have a religion, and that religion is the belief system known as atheism.

Your breakdown of the word atheism is contrived. The prefix indeed does mean "not" or "no", but the next word is theos, not theism. You would have to assert you are an atheismist to make it how you present it.

An "atheist" quite literally means someone who believes "no God".

Answer 5

And you apparently do not understand the etymology of the word "religion," otherwise you would not have asked such an inane question.

Religion comes from the Latin word religāre, which means to tie, fasten (re- re- + ligāre to bind, tie; cf. ligament). Therefore, anything that ties a group of people together in a belief system, even one without a deity, is a religion.

Further, the U.S. Supreme Court, in an opinion, wrote that humanism is a religious system; and the 7th U.S. court of Appeals added that atheism is a religion.

Yoda, apparently you either can't read, or ignored the beginning of my post. The etymology (word origin) of religion should have been sufficient. I added the rest because so many atheists use the Supreme Court as an authority, say in separation of church/state issues. And FYI, the Supreme Court REJECTED the Shiavo argument. You seem to engage in picking and choosing portions of arguments and the spouting of half-truths. And you called me stupid!

Answer 6

Believe or not believe. Either one of these is right or the other. You don't believe these people when they say there is a god. Cool, but that is still believe. There is no proof one way or the other. You can not give me a mathematical sentence showing that in a lab, or even in theory, there is no god. That just isn't the way it is.

Agnostic may not be a religion but it is most certainly part of or the basis of a set of beliefs. Maybe your god is science. Whatever, you don't have to believe in god to believe in something. Everyone believes in something even if it's themselves.

You are being as close minded and hypocritical as the people you are accusing.

You don't have to be abusive. You give atheists a bad name. Why don't you get religion. The atheists will be lucky to be rid of you.

Answer 7

Atheist make statements about God--"There is no God." That is inherently religious statemen because it is a statement about God. Now, you say that "a" means "without", and "thaeism" belief in the supernatural power, then using the same etymology, it would be "without belief in a supernatural power". One could rephrase that and say "belief in the absence of a supernatural power". That says nothing about nonreligion, but everything about a supernatural power. It is a claim about a supernatural power, so by its very nature, the word atheism is a religious term. Now, you are not going to find atheism in a scientific journal, nor are you going to find atheism talked about in biology or physics. Atheism is not science. Where you will find atheism talked about is on places that study religion, such as the "Religion and Spirituality" section in Yahoo Answers. By virtue that atheism deals with God, or the lack thereof makes it religious in nature. If atheism isn't religious, then your question is miscategorized.

Likewise, it is a fallacy to shift the burden of proof. Atheism goes something like this:

God does not exist
There is no evidence for the existence of God
So we conclude that God does not exist until proven otherwise

The same goes for theists:

God Exists
There is no evidence for his non-existence
So we conclude that God exists until proven otherwise.

Both arguments bite the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. If you want to make the claim that God doesn't exist, then provide argumentation against his existence rather than citing the lack of evidence for his existence.

Your comment, "Give me ONE single credible shred of evidence or proof that your magic sky pixie exists, and we'll talk." does exactly what I am talking about: shifting the burden or proof. So far, you have done nothing to bolster the claim that God doesn't exist. But sense you asked for it, I will give you arguments for God's existence.

First, there is the question of origin. Where did everything come from? If the universe always existed, then it would have dissipated into heat an eternity ago according to the 2nd Law of thermo dynamics. We know that it hasn't because we are all still here and matter exists in the form of atoms, not in the form of heat. One could say that the universe is always expanding and contracting, but where is the proof for it? There isn't any evidence to support the hypothesis, so we can not make a conclusion on the hypothesis, and we are left back where we started. The only other alternative is that the universe had an origin. The first law of thermodynamics says that matter can neither be created nor destroyed by natural processes, so it couldn't have just one day appeared. It requires a creator, who by definition is God.

Also, concerning origins, if humanity came to existence as without the work of a creator, then we are purely the product of a cosmological accident. The very things that we hold dear then have no real intrinsic value apart from the matter and energy that comprise them. If love is just a chemical reaction in the brain, then I could whip out a machine gun and mow down a preschool and nobody would think twice about it being out of the ordinary. Human beings know intuitively that killing children is wrong, so the chemical processes and the acts must have some sort of intrinsic value outside the natural realm. That value had to have its origin somewhere. There has to be an extra-natural (aka supernatural) cause for such things to exist, which by definition is God.

If this wasn't enough, the probability of such emotions and beings happening randomly is slim to none. Likewise, there are structures and processes inside life that cannot be simplified more than they already are. The probability of such structures just appearing is so astronomical, most people find it easier to believe that a creator created them rather than leaving them to chance. This doesn't guarantee that a creator created them, it just means that it is a more like (thus better) explanation than a purely natural explanation.

Building on top of that, the very processes of life seem to exert purpose. All species have an inherent desire to reproduce, and in doing so are in competition with other species. These types of behaviors beg the question, "why?" If such processes are purely natural, then it seems that species (including humans) would rather just pass into oblivion rather tan reproduce, but the opposite is true. So if nature has purpose, then it it must be leading to some sort of conclusion or end. Now, I can only speculate what that end is, but that's not important. The important fact is that there is an end. This fits more in line with theistic worldviews than it would a naturalistic worldview, which can't account for such things.

These are just a four arguments for the existence of God and you asked for 1. Now, if you want, I am willing to discuss such things. If you choose not to engage in such discussion, then perhaps you should withdraw your question and remain quiet as you have told me to do. So far, you haven't provided any proof for God's non-existence, but rather made a claim, and when somebody comes along and critiques it, you call them a "moron." That does very little for your cause and credibility and really shows weakness, because you are fearful that somebody might undermine your beliefs.

Answer 8

Yeah.. i'm not a theist, but I gotta say that you're wrong. Atheism is a religion. Just not a Theistic one.

Dictionary.com:

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices

something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience

But most people think supernatural when they say religion... so I guess in a public consciousness sense, you're right. Just not technically right.

Answer 9

A religion is a set of beliefs regarding the existence of god or gods.

By that definition, the affirmative disbelief in god easily counts as a particular set of beliefs regarding whether god exists.

So, while you may laugh, next time try reading a dictionary.

Answer 10

YES someone finally gets it i've been saying that for months and heres a definition:


athiest: a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

thiest: belief in the existence of a god or gods