Godless Wonder

Most agnostics are atheists. Consider how rare it is to find someone who claims to be an agnostic theist. (I've seen perhaps two such people posting here in the last year.) That means the rest of the agnostics are atheists.

dado

"there is no evidence for G-d" -> skepticism
"i don't believe G-d exists" -> skepticism

"there is no G-d" -> religion

Gooch's dad

OTTR:

All adults stop believing in Santa Claus, right? They aren't agnostic about Santa Claus, they're quite sure that no such guy is living at the North Pole, flying around in a magic sleigh.

So in addition to their religion of Christianity, Judaism, or whatever, does everybody you know also have an additional religion called "Santa Doesn't Exist"?

And in case you didn't realize it, the dictionary definitions after the 1st, and maybe 2nd, are the least used and least applicable definitions. Dictionaries aren't prescriptive, they describe how language is commonly used. And people aren't using the word "religion" to mean "a view held with ardor". You have no argument.

I think this is actually a logical fallacy, one I've seen called argumentum ad lexicon

LittleGuy

I admit that our "fundamental principle" would be the position that there are no god(s), but that merely qualifies us as "principlied people".

On the other count however:

On the exact contrary, we do no place absolute trust or confidence in anything. Of course, as human beings, we put trust & confidence in friends, family, computers etc.
Unless you put "logic" as that thing we put confidence in.
Some atheists are also humanists, but most atheists do not put absolute trust or confidence in any one thing.

On point #2, I could easily define Atheists as a group of people with NO common tenets whatsoever except for the one thing which qualifies us as atheists: belief in no gods/ lack of belief in gods

On point #3, I am simply going to claim the negative again.

All this really boils down to is that where you claim us to "positively hold" a belief, I can as easily say that we do not "positively hold" such beliefs.
Is it all not just a word game?

GermanHeretic

"there is no evidence for G-d" -> skepticism
"god is not needed to explain this universe" <- science

"there is no G-d" -> conclusion (not religion)

GermanHeretic

<irony>
Because our religion is pure evil, authored by Satan himself, and bad guys don't get benefits from the state.
</irony>

OnTheThirdRail

I am not trying to prove that God exists nor am I asking you to prove that God doesn't exist. Would you not define faith as a belief in something that can't be proven? (i.e. God)

Is the problem lack of evidence or the presuppositions on which we define classify and give weight to the evidence?

There is plenty of evidence surrounding the death of JFK and yet people still can't agree on who killed him.

Some people have a belief that God exists... some people have a belief that God doesn't exist. A disbelief in theism is a belief in something opposite of theism.

Ok so you can be a person who believes that there can be no proof of God and yet believe that there is no God because there is no proof. Seems like circular reasoning to me!

As far as churches... you have the ACLU and moveon.org... the problem is you won't admit that they are churches.

OnTheThirdRail

I agree that #1 doesn't seem to apply but lets look at the others...

Beliefs:
1 : a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing
2 : something believed; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group
3 : conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

#2 do atheists believe that there is no God?

#3 conviction of the truth of some statement.... especially when based on examination of evidence (don't get tripped up by the 'or')

Would you say that #3 is true?

As far as it being a language problem.... perhaps but language has been powerfully used to radically change this nation - so it can't be ignored.

TySixtus

First, atheism is not a religion. We can argue semantics all day long, but the bottom line is that atheists don't believe a higher power (god) exists. By your definition, football, baking, and serial killing can all be religions. So, no dice.

Second, we (atheists) don't need to prove a damn thing. You are making the claim that a magical sky man exists. Prove it.
Let me elaborate. I think if 'god' were to show up tomorrow, and prove to all the atheists that visit this site that he existed, many of us would change our thought patterns. See, our belief is based on LACK of evidence. Your belief is DESPITE the evidence to the contrary. To continue the analogy, god can't 'not showup' to disprove your belief in him, as he hasn't shown up yet, or given any credible evidence to his existence. In other words, your position is safe and comfy, because it is based in non-reality, which can never be challenged. Enter: Faith.*

Ty

*Also known as 'horse shit' or 'lies'.

Gooch's dad

OTTR:

You completely ignored my post. Please address it. Tell me why the belief "no gods exist" somehow constitutes a religion, if the belief "Santa Claus doesn't exist" does not constitute a religion.

Patiently awaiting your reply...

Kelly