I think you're missing a word or two in your question, so its hard for me to understand what you're asking.
I'll assume that you're asking "why shouldn't there be any God?" I am an Atheist, but I don't base my disbelief in God on what I think should or shouldn't be. I based my disbelief on the fact that I don't think there is any evidence to indicate the existence of God.
2007-09-15 06:13:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Subconsciousless 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
the question of if there is or isn't can't be determined by any body becasue there are so many religions that no one really knows if there is a right one or not. being an athiest doesn't mean your good or bad and having a religion doesn't mean that either. we just have to live our lives to the fullest but if you dont believe in anything isn't your life is empty and without meaning.
2007-09-15 13:15:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by .reds 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you asking why athiests believe there isn't a god or why there shouldn't be a god which we already believe anyway.
2007-09-15 13:10:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by westfield47130 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
A few points if I may, Pretty:
First, of course, I feel compelled to acquaint you with the proper spelling of the word "atheist." Notice the posiion of the "e" and the "i." It may not seem important, but it does give an indication of the root of the word, the Greek "theos," meaning god, and this informs the meaning.
The issue is not whether God should or shouldn't be, but whether God actually is. Atheists believe that God does not exist.
2007-09-15 13:07:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
9⤊
0⤋
Excuse me, but what are you trying to ask? However, whether or not there should be a god is irrelevant and a matter for debate among insecure philosophers. The fact is there is no evidence of any kind for the existence of a god.
2007-09-15 13:10:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
There shouldn't be any God, because complex things come from simpler origins. It therefore seems unlikely that an omnipotent, omniscient, superintelligent being would be the first thing that pops into existence, dominating the universe ever after. Much more likely that the first thing, whatever it was, was utterly simple.
2007-09-15 13:14:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by cosmo 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
There should be a god, shouldn't there? That would be great. Unfortunately, reality isn't always so nice and pretty, and you don't have a supernatural magical man looking over you and protecting you. Sure, I would like that. But sadly, that's not how things work. It isn't about whether there should or shouldn't be a god, but about whether there is or isn't, and I don't think there is. It just doesn't stack up right.
2007-09-15 13:08:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Uliju 4
·
5⤊
0⤋
You should actually pose this question to theists: Why should there be a god?
If you want to ask atheists, it'd be something like Why don't you believe there is a god? or something.
2007-09-15 13:10:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Sam 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
I don't believe in a god, nor the killing of other ways of life (the Native Americans, my ancestors)
All-loving doesn't mean killing people just because they don't have the gold you searched for.
There isn't a god. Should Be is the wrong way to have said it.
2007-09-15 13:06:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Cold Fart 6
·
6⤊
0⤋
because religion tends to squander grammar and knowledge
you mean, why should there be a god?
or why should there not be a god?
I turn this on you.....why should you exist, and if a god does exist why then can it not be proven as your own existence can be?
2007-09-15 13:14:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by voice_of_reason 6
·
0⤊
0⤋