usartist

Good argument!
Off hand, I can claim the theists. But, that fails for our arguement. So, I need to find an atheist. May be tough.

EverLastingGodStopper

Which theists? Link me to the book on Amazon.

Mat Wilder

I think that will be very tough. I have never heard anyone but a theist say that everyone has a religion. Certainly I've never heard another atheist say that committment to possessions is a religion.

Hyndis

Of all this blather about atheists secretly having a religion...

Err, you can call me religous if you want to. Fine. But I'm not religous. Doesn't mean that you're not allowed to call me that if you really want to, but its still a little strange.

Kind of like the verbal equivilent of forcing a square peg in a round hole.

mongrel

You don't seem to understand just where the burden of proof lies. You could've just as easily have been arguing with Mat Wilder over whether Mat has invisible leprechauns in his garden, and had said to you, "I have no invisible leprechauns in my garden", but how could he prove that? You are the one making the positive claims about wordly possessions equalling a religion(and in the process redefining that word, along with "secular"), as you go on to say in the very next paragragh:

To use your own reasoning, your argument fails, because you have yet to prove your claims that to have no religion, one must abandon all worldly possessions.

Also, does this mean you do not own a computer? Do you get internet access donated to you, or do you have to pay for it(using money you must, obviously, first possess)?

And this raises the question, what would you think if, next time you are debating a Christian about the existence of god or whatnot, that Christian says, "When you take Jesus into your heart as your lord and saviour, then I will appreciate your argument"? Will you agree with their point and either concede defeat or convert?

BTW, how does one think with no food in one's stomach? Perhaps that's donated, too?

Whereas I think what they're doing is reinforcing their religion. Oh wait, their commitment to god and Jesus is their religion...

Well, most of us don't have imaginary ideology...

Hehe, I've seen it work, when hit with a big enough hammer...

EverLastingGodStopper

I think we should use the accepted, established definitions of words. That's what I meant when I said that "secular" already has a meaning. One's point is rendered invalid when one creates magical new definitions of existing words.

usartist

Okay, I am not the pure secular that I am seem to have implied. I am homeless, I have a minimal of possessions including a laptop. Currently I am financed by a small inheritance.

The minimal conditions of commitment to anyone or anything aproaches the original derivation of the word "secular." That can be confirmed by the Oxford dictionary and etymology.

"Commitment" is not religion. It is the practice of maintaining the commitment that is a "religion." It is the behavior and thought patterns of commitment that constitutes religion.

Eudaimonist

Fine. What does that have to do with atheism?

usartist

I am not trying to change the definition of "Secular." I am merely trying to explain that although you claim to be secular, I do not believe that to be true.

Your claim is that because you have no belief in the existence of gods you have no religion. This is because the contemporary definiton of 'religion' requires "belief and worship." That is not what is 'religion.'

I claim that the ideology of atheism is the principle doctrine of your religion. You suport that doctrine with ideologies such as materialism, and a morality system such as natural law. And, you have developed a dogma of denial of having a religion.

And this "denial ideology" that atheists perpetuate (Caused by the definition of religion), is the reason why atheist organization is so pathetic.

Religion is not the belief and worship of supernatural. That definition is an intellectual occupation of the word and its true concept to reinforce the ideology of "Theism."

Religion is a behavioral training program that vehicles commitments to relationships with persons and possessions, and in the case of theists, imaginary deities.

usartist

I maintain a commitment of confidence that there is no god(s). From there I make decisions as to how I proceed my life.

Where as a theist should always consider the "Way of God," when directing his life.

The more important aspect that the understanding of religion in the realm of Atheism, is the organization of atheist organizations.

As it is atheist organizations are pathetic. Here in New York, less than 20 people attend the once a month meetings. This is because of several reasons steming from the failure to recognize the organization as a religion.

First, the membership is very diverse. Most of the atheists who do attend are seeking approval and support, by going into their long boring monologues of trying to define themselves and what they believe atheism to be. Basically what they are trying to do is inspire a following, but they don't want to call it a "Religion."

Second, because the membership is so sparse and diverse the leaders cannot develop the ideology of the organization. As it is, there are at least two distinct ideologies that make up atheists; materialists and spiritualists. these two ideological personalities cannot agree on anything specific. This disagreement deteriorates the sparse community. Creating apathy, because specific issues are not settled to the satisfaction of anyone.

Third, because atheists-at-large harbor animosity to organized theist religions they carry that animosity over to their perception of atheist organization. And, their perception is confirmed if they do attend an atheist meeting, because organized atheist meetings tend to be of little benifit. The meetings do not inspire anything, its just a bull session. And the failure of planned activities attest to that.