WNCAtheists

You seem to be missing your own point as stated in the last quote there.
You acknowledge a non-theist Buddhist as being non-theist (same as atheist, they don't believe in god(s))
Similarly, you acknowledge "non-supernatural Neopagans and Wiccans" (do these folks worship natural god(s))?
And conclude that they should not be included under the umbrella term of "atheist".

Why not ask them why they use the term?


And some atheists are religious, that doesn't make them theists.

I think that the owners of Secularity make membership clear.
Where do they claim that the site is "100% religious-free"?

I've seen various beliefs listed by those calling themselves atheists, but none listed through Secularity that believe in god(s).
Now, I have clicked on profiles of individuals listed as "friends" of someone listed through Secularity, and found an actual believer. Wow, if you read at the top of those profiles you'll find something like this:
My problem in a nutshell is any individual who through unfounded bigotry, sets up an artificial barrier between between those of the greater godless community. Such pettiness as that expressed in your disdane for non-believers who don't conform to your standards of non-belief serves no beneficial purpose for you or anyone else who uses the term atheist to describe themselves.

Darrell

Talking Rain

It is just annoying and odd that they call themselves atheists.

truthie

No, non-theism is not the same as atheism. Where the heck did you get that?
Have you been to GR or the Non-Abrahamic forum or better yet, looked at an encyclopedia?
Religions such as Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism are not atheistic, but non-theistic, many academics rather classify them as agnostic.
Plus, I did not miss the point, Buddhism is a religion, contradictory to the slogan.

Natural gods? What is that?
They fall more under traditional pantheism...all is god and god is all.
But they do see gods behind everything. It is not like in the World Pantheist Movement.
Few, use gods as metaphor, but it is sill religious, contradictory to the slogan.

Where did I wrote that?
The web site claims to be non-religious...the structures above are religious...contradiction.

I was a Wiccan and deconverted like three months ago. I know about this.

Where did I say the contrary?

Gee...you have been accusing me of being a bigot and dogmatic atheist, and now you come up with that question?

You must have reading comprehensive problems.

I said that what bothers me the most is that the site is contradictory and hypocritical.
It claims it is 100% religious free and atheist, sill, it involves religious people.

I do not care if they include religious people at all, but if they are going to do that, then their slogan should be clearer!
If you believe that a person who does not believe in the Christian god, but believes in angels, the devil, hell, heaven, and so on is still an atheist (which few people agree with because it is inconsistent) then that is your opinion. Fine.
But you have no right to accuse me of being a sort of dogmatic/bigot atheist only because I have been claiming that there is a contradiction between the slogan and the requisites, which there is.

I have not accused you for the reason that your atheism is quite flexible and can include Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Baha'i and other religious people so, why are you accusing me of bigotry? (You have become quite defensive.)
When countless of times I have written that the issue at stake is the contradiction between the slogan and again, the requisites…and others in the thread have also pointed the contradiction.

That is the reason I criticized the inclusion of pantheists, non-theist Buddhists, and non-supernatural Neopagans and now, Unitarians (liberal Christians can be included here)…because those structures are religious per se, and contradicts the slogan of the web site.

I think that AspenMama already offered her help, so someone from the site could come and clarify the issue.

And by the way…

From secularity.com

Also, I was not the first person in the thread to quote the statement above.

T.

truthie

Tell me about it, but oh well...the day that McAtheism is born, I will be ready for it.

T.

WNCAtheists

Before this debate goes any further, back up your claim.

You have asserted this claim repeatedly, but you have yet to provide any evidence in support of it.

I have searched the Secularity site, including FAQ, and even a trip back through registering, and this bit about them claiming to be "100% religion free eludes me"
I find no evidence that the owners have ever made such a claim.

Once you are ready to either supply the evidence or recant, I will be happy to continue the debate on who is and isn't an atheist, though the thread will probably get split off by the mods.

Darrell

truthie

No, I won't keep arguing with someone who for some reason does not want to think outside the box and has accused me of being a bigot for no relevant reason. I will leave you with the diatribe that you have created.

You can even look at the posts made by Theophonos, since he/she was the first one who presented the slogan and a similar critique, as well as others who have indirectly mentioned it and presented their disagreements.

Go to www.secularity.com
Under Atheist & Friendship services.

You will read Good-bye

T.

Arkus 02

Isn't it though? Can we as Atheists honestly say there positively cannot be any god? We atheists have yet to grock up a proof of nonexistance that gets around the "God wants his presence unknown"/"God works in mysterious ways" nonarguements.

I mean, naturally I assign god the same possibility of existing as talking Mongolian pegasuses (pegasi?), but isn't it awfully stupid to say that god is completely impossible?

God, by his very nature, is undisproveable. Atheism, IMHO, is the poisitive statement that mere undisproveability isn't good enough. By a long shot.

This is pretty duh stuff. Can you please explain what you meant by "No, non-theism is not the same as atheism."?

gracias.

truthie

Why can't some people read the posts?

WNCAtheists said He/she implied that non-theism=atheism, which is not true and I disagreed with that.
A non-theist can be an agnostic.

De nada.

T.

Shake

Well, you might be able to find some other local atheists this way. At least you'd have the advantage of having met them in person already.

Its Own Level

The confusion appears to be yours. Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. And I see no difference between atheism and non-theism; they would appear to be synonyms.

IOL (your local atheist agnostic Buddhist)