breathilizer

Exactly, and specifically as they are defined TODAY, in modern language. Usartist tries to revert back to an archaic definition of religion.

I'm hard pressed to believe he isn't a wolf in sheep's clothing.

usartist

The U.S. Government is not a religion, because of the absolute postulate of the establishment clause. But, yes, every other organization is basically a religion. Its nothing to worry about, because they are better defined.

usartist

Thus, the description of "apologia."

Im not trying to redefine religion so much as reclaim it from the theist intellectual occupation of the word.

The "Belief and worship," definition reinforces theism, and confuses atheists.

usartist

No, my apologia is to reclaim religion from the theist intelectual occupation.

usartist

[QUOTE=HyndisAtheists are not trying to take over the world. [/quote]No, we are trying to take over the world. Atheism and theism cannot exist in harmony.

Your principle ideology is that there is no god. You support that ideology with other ideologies such as materialism and natural law.

This is ridiculous. You actually believe atheists cannot organize because they are confused by mythology and name-calling?

breathilizer

It seems to me that you are the only one that wants it back. I say let them keep it. You aren't going to change a damn thing by taking a word back when 99% of the population don't even realize that it used to mean something else. You're only going to make people think that atheists necessarily worship one thing or another.

Like I said, if you don't like the modern definition of religion, don't use it. No one likes to hear people change the modern definition of a word to suit their revolutionary goals. By the modern definition of the word, atheist organizations are not religions. Get over it and move on.

Hyndis

Atheism and materialism tend to go together, as its quite difficult to have dualism without the divine. And natural law? You mean like the laws of physics?

You are missing the point.

Atheists are not trying to organize into any juggernaught of a group in order to bend governments to the every whim of the EAC, which is sort of like what the Roman Catholic church tries to do. Atheists are not some monolith trying to hatch an evil conspiracy to take over the world.

Religion or lack thereof isn't something that I spend a great deal of time pondering on a day to day basis. Most of my thoughts consist of planning out what I'm going to do, when my next set of exams for my classes are, and what I'm going to have for my next meal. And then what time I have in my day thats already scheduled and what time I'm free to do whatever I want, like go see that new movie Chronicles of Riddick, which looks like an awesome sci-fi B-movie with spiffy special effects.

The only purpose that atheist organizations have is to try to fight back against all of the stereotypes and poo flinging that have been going on throughout the ages. Most of this poo is flung from religious organizations, and they fling it against other rival religions as well. But as atheists aren't very well organized due to not standing for much of anything, these atheist organizations are defensive in nature. Atheist missionaries do not exist.

So in that very limited way, I guess an atheist organization could play a somewhat similar role as organized religion, if merely for that safety in numbers effect against the poo flinging.

usartist

And, I am going to more than likely agree with you. Except, there is a tremendous amount of argument to contend that materialism is not the entire make-up of atheist. There is a certain amount of the population that believes that atheists can believe in the supernatural.And, that is the basis of division.
You're in denial. Atheist are trying to influence government, as they should. There is nothing wrong with an interest group's activeparticipation in influencing the progression of government, that is how a republic-democracy is designed! :banghead:
And, keep in mind atheist sling a lot of "poo" at Christians.

Yahzi

No, it isn't.

I realize that in ancient times it was, but in ancient times there were no secular societies.

usartist

You are missing the point.
Atheists have dificulty organizing cohesive community, because they have a dogma inferred from the definition of 'religion,' that prevents them from organizing.

Don't give me this, "(I'M) missing the point," of your argument, excuse!

State your arguments in reasonable conjecture, and I will give you credit for such well thought assertions, as I have done in the past for others.

I'm trying to solve the problems of atheist organizations.