Neutral or negative ground?

Question

Consider the following and please give answers to the numbered questions:

I ask you if you believe in the existence of the Four-Eyed Flying Whip Toad. From Mars. You either laugh or explain that you consider the idea to be proposterous.

1) So far, are you in a neutral position or negative? You are in the opposing position but the burden of proof of the existence of the Flying Whip Toad should technically fall to me, not you to proove me wrong, am I right?

So then, I tell you that The Order of the Four-Eyed Flying Whip Toad from Mars is my religion and you are therefore a Atoadist.

2) Simply by not sharing my beliefs does your religion become 'Atoadist' by default?

What I'm obviously asking is:
3) Why does not accepting other peoples' beliefs seem to automatically set you up with "beliefs" of your own?

Please do not call the Flying Whip Toad a pixie - according to the Order's guidebook, it (not he) is 1/6th the size of Mars and has a wing span nearly twice its body size. Clearly not a pixie.

Also, feel free to blaspheme. The Flying Whip Toad is actually empowered by adversity as well as acceptance of its power. That's also in the guide book.

The Flying Whip Toad is not a god either.

Answer 1

i believe it is because, by saying you don't believe in certain things, most people assume that you then believe in the opposite.

i.e.- someone doesn't believe in God.
people assume they are an Atheist.
they could believe in many Gods and therefore, they aren't Atheists.

Answer 2

1. At the outset, I am in the negative position on the debate of the FEFWTfM. Knowing what I do of the condition of Mars, I would find such an assertion both funny and preposterous. The burden of proof, since you have introduced a new species for scrutiny, falls to you. You will have to provide some other witnesses or documents to back up your claim, and those witnesses/documents will also have to be tested. Your FEFWTfM claims could be put to rest, if you could simply provide a specimen for study (since you stated elsewhere that the Toad is not a god).

2. I'm not sure I would be considered an "Atoadist" by default. There are already toads on Earth, with only 2 eyes, although some develop more than 4 legs. I can believe in them, therefore I am not an "Atoadist". I could be considered a "sceptic" of your beliefs, however.

I could only be considered an "Atoadist" if I completely denied the existence of Toads, Terran or otherwise.

3. People like to label things and people in a variety of ways, that is why that happens. It helps us understand both the person and their mindset when dealing with them. You would be extremely shocked, I think, to find a Muslim or a Jew at a pork roast, for example. You already know they don't eat pork! Likewise, you would be EXTREMELY surprised to find a good Catholic family eating steaks on Fridays during Lent: it goes against their religion.

Everybody has their own thoughts about God, whether positive or negative. Those philosophies have been labeled for a LOOOOOOOOOOONG time! Labels are just part of life.

Answer 3

1) by laughing or explaining that you consider the idea proposterous, you could be negative, but you are only expressing your opinion, in that you did not say that it is proposterous... only you consider it to be. The burden of proof should be in the believer.

2)This is tricky. In the black and white of things... yes, by believing that it is proposterous you are an 'atoadist'...
however if you believe in a toad of some form, just maybe not the Four-Eyed Flying Whip Toad from Mars, mayby yours is from Saturn, you are not an 'atoadist'. You believe in a toad.

3) People only know what they experience, so someone who has only experienced the Mars Toad will not understand any other way. If you don't believe in the Mar's Toad, then you do not believe in what they believe. At that point, they conclude that you believe whatever the Order has told them through the propaganda that they disperse to keep them in line.

It is a difficult situation.

I am pagan, so as far as most Christians believe, i worship satan. They don't bother checking into the fact that most pagans don't even believe in satan and he is a christian deity. They came up with him in their pantheon, because they needed to make Yahweh a hero god . I have learnt to let it go and realized as long as I am true to my beliefs... I live by example. When i start flailing around trying to make everone else understand me, I start to sink in thier mess.

By the way, I am appearently and Atoadist.

Answer 4

You've got a point, people have no right to profile you, infact you not being a part of their beliefs gives them less right to profile you because they dont know you.

but if the term atoadist is just a way of saying people that dont believe in the Four-Eyed-Flying Whip Toad from mars, then its just a way if differenciating between them and the "Atoadists"

Answer 5

1. I have yet to see a reason to consider the existence of your toad pixie. I await evidence.

2. I continue to see no evidence to consider in pondering the toad pixie. I would ask why I should consider the toad that you worship.

3. The only beliefs I am left with are that assertions should be backed up with evidence. I may check into the toad pixie if it sounds interesting, but in this case no further info to make me believe it is worthy of further investigation was provided. I remain absent of belief in this deity. I do not necessarily believe it does not exist.

Answer 6

Wow...someone ate some good stuff this morning.Let's see..
1)I would neither laugh nor claim it to bepreposterous as I do not have sufficient information on this particular being(?) to draw any conclusions about it's existence. You would indeed bear the burden of proving it's existence, to some. Others would automatically allow you the right to believe in whatever you wanted so long as you did not willfully push that belief in their faces continously.
2)Simply not believing would not give anyone the right to placesuppositions as to the answerers or non believer's religious affiliation or lack thereof.

Answer 7

1. im in a neutral position. technically, you are right.

2. cant have a religion with just one member. unless there are many more members that believe in the FEFWT, what you have is a cult. being atoadist wouldnt necessarily be a religion, but just a belief. i guess you would be atoadist unless you already were a member of another religion.

3. some religions think they are superior and the only true and right religion. because of fear and ignorance, some members of those religions may see you as anti-"their religion". this doesnt make it true unless you, yourself acknowledge it.

Answer 8

"atoadist" is opposition to the specific belief of the martian toad. "Atheism" is oppostion to the possibility of any supreme being. Further I doubt anyone is so strenuously opposed to your toad that theyd make an issue of it.