Can someone explain why many act like Atheism is a Religion?

It would be helpful if you would name some of the offending atheists.

Not really having followed you interactions, Thalion, I can't say whether there might be specific individuals or posts to which you refer, but I'll weigh in with my own take, here ... just as timber, nothing official ... purely subjective and personal, mind you. I don't sense religionists are so much "attacked", or that any effort is made to "convert" them to atheism or agnosticism at all. From my own not infrequent forays into the Spirituality and Religion discussions, I gather that many, if not most, of the religionists here react badly to those who do not embrace their proselytizing. Dispassionate, reasoned, logical, forensically valid, evidentiarily sound rebuttals to a religionist argument are neither attacks on the religionist nor attempts to convert the religionist. There is no denying that religionist arguments come in for quite a bit of ridicule, but that ridicule is based on the presentation and foundation of the arguments. Absurdity is generally met with ridicule. Now, I certainly wouldn't say the religionist position is absurd per se, but it most often here is presented and supported in most absurd fashion. There are competent and powerful apologists for the religionist position, confident, well informed, erudite, vigorous debaters ... but to my knowledge none of them ever have put in an appearance here. If one offers an assertion which is open to challenge, one should be unsurprised by, and prepared for, that challenge. The point of the exercize here on these boards is more exchange of ideas than triumph in debate, something lots of folks, not just religionists, frequently lose sight of, or even cannot grasp as a core concept. State your position, present your evidence, expand on your conclusions, develop your arguments ... exchange ideas, don't reject them simply because they are incongruent with your own. If one fails as a general rule to get one's point across, one has not done much of a job of making that point to the intended audience. To continue a demonstratedly ineffective course of action in expectation of improved results is thoroughly unproductive. Complianing that one's position is constantly rejected and ridiculed is pointless. Improve the manner in which that position is presented, would be my advice. Either be willing to exchange ideas and perceptions, or prepare yourself with the tools required to carry a debate, and be willing to accept defeat should your skills at such or resources to hand deny you victory.

I don't think I've encountered a proselyting athiest in this forum or elsewhere, but in fairness to Thalion, many athiests do make frequent and passionate statements denouncing, reviling, and/or ridiculing religion and the religious. Sometimes it feels like reverse evangelism: it isn't so much recruiting for athiesm as a repudiation of religious faith. Personally I find those wearing sandwich boards "Are you saved Brother?" and "God is dead" equally offensive. One infers I am not religious enough and the other infers I am a fool for being religious.

I don't know that Thalion is necessarily referring to individuals posting here--if so, then i can't think to whom Thalion refers. But, as a general proposition, i, too, have encountered the proselytizing "atheist," and those who make a religion of science or "rationality." I do not consider such individuals to be atheistic, certainly not in the sense of what it means to me. However, as i don't have a dog in the religion fight, i don't worry about it, and don't care that such people do so or what it is that they "preach." I would opine, purely on an anectdotal basis, that the majority of atheists do not "evangelize." My experience is that they don't discuss the subject at all, unless they feel certain they have an interested and unprejudiced listener.

reading along if that's ok.
TIA

I am an atheist, but on my way to being one I read various points of view of some theologians regarded at the time as edgy by the Catholic church. I might like to see posts by some of them, have them bat things back and forth. They were very bright. Hans Kung comes to mind as a name.

Perhaps I was a bit harsh there, Thalion, and even perhaps a bit over-generalistic. I've revisited some of the S&R threads, this time as an uninvolved observer, not as a participant. I have to say the proselytizing has not been entirely one way. There has been some mean-spiritedness that could well merit the appelation of attack, also. That too has been a bi-directional affair. Both camps have their embarrassments. Still, I have to say I see little evidence here, at least, of the sort of antagonism to which you allude. Obviously, your mileage varies. I think some folks have difficulty discening the difference between challenge and attack, and further, that some folks., whether or not cognizant of the difference, respond poorly to either. While that may be dismaying, it is a finding not at odds with the world outside this forum, either.

Had the friendly people in suits knock on my door on Saturday morning - all I know is that I don't go door to door promoting atheism.

True, Jer. We can be fairly stalwart in defense though..... although the most stalwart who comes to mind is a particularly feisty agnostic, godblesshim.

Thalion, to your question -
I can speak to the point that some of us who are atheists got here the hard way, through hills and valleys of belief, disbelief, long time questioning, and eventual disregard, or some sort of personal adjustment..

Some just didn't believe (fill in religion) in the first place.

Not all of us hate a religion, or all religions, though some do for good reasons for them..

Most of us, left to our own devices, after these question and answer periods with ourselves, are indifferent to religion.

but it keeps being thrust upon us.

Sometimes we respond. Mostly it
is your own belief you need to, or perhaps already do, understand.

Thalion,

I'll address your question too.

My point of view goes something like this...

It has been my experience that a large number of religious people don't question anything very much - what their parents tell/told them, what the police officer says, what the priest says, what the teacher says, or what the government says.

I have a hard time respecting someone's belief* when they don't have a reason for believing in something. Or their reason is because my parents were "fill in the blank". When they haven't thought "why do I believe in this?"

That being said, I respect a number of people's faith because they can articulate clearly why they believe what they do. They may have investigated a number of different religions and chosen the one that is right for them - the one that best aligns with their personal beliefs.

Personally I have a hard time with organized worship and belief because it seems more likely to me that in the beginning there was an agenda behind those organizations that wasn't necessarily in the best interests of the people. Any time there is a hierarchy in a belief-system I question the motives.

I don't go about "promoting atheism" but I'm a big fan of independent thought - rather than referencing a set of rules to form my opinions. So I will encourage others to think independently about subjects rather than offering me someone else's opinion on a subject, or what may be written in the book.

So if someone tells me that being gay is bad, abortions are wrong, or drugs are bad - I'm going to ask why. And I don't want hear "because it says so." Because that implies that someone isn't thinking about it, rather they are reciting something they've read or heard.

At the end of the day I think a number of atheists feel as though their rights are being infringed upon by many of the religious groups (see gays and abortion). I think that is probably the biggest reason you see non-believers taking believers to task for their beliefs. I can't speak for anyone else here - but I agree with the basic principles of most religions - I just don't need to believe in a god to understand why they are right.

If we all believed in good we'd have nothing to fight about

*note when I say "respecting someone's belief", I'm referring to a respect for their point of view in a debate situation, not a respect for the person or for their right to hold whatever belief they want - everyone is entitled to that so long as they don't infringe on my rights.

Atheism is the belief that there is no god. It is a belief, just like any religion. Even, for that matter, agnostism is a belief - a belief that we don't know the answer. Although IMO agnostism is a bit more factual - we know that we don't know the answers, as opposed to believing that we do know the answer - it is still a belief.

At least, that's how I see it.

Osso- Agree- I have said here before, if religion were not thrown in my face, if politicians were not attempting to mold the law to suit their own religious tenets, I would probably never bring up the subject.

I too, had my time of questioning and deciding on a path of life for myself. I would say that this process evolved over a ten year period. And it happened many, many years ago.

When I first found my way in life, I WAS a "true believer", and tended to proselytize. I know now that I did this because I was young, immature, and needed the appproval of other people to give me confirmation.

I had not needed to present my case for non-belief for many decades. In fact, there are only two reasons that I even discuss religion now. One is that I am on a forum where people discuss these ideas.

Most of the members are younger than me. I think that many of them are where I was when I was in my teens and twenties, and would benefit from hearing about the experiences and views of someone who has gone down the path of questioning. The other is because I believe that non-believers are being dismissed and that religion is being insinuated into areas of public life where it does not belong.

"It is just as difficult to prove that there is no god as it is to prove that there is one." -Clarence Darrow.

Anyone who tries to sell me on God subtly claims to know the will of God. I reject that in any but the Godlike. Any who tries to sell me on the non-existance of God is likewise suspect.

That's why I'm a Unitarian. We believe that the answers are unknowable, but we've got plenty of questions...

I feel compelled to speak out as an atheist because the more rabid members of some religions cause me to feel my rights as such may be threatened. Aside from that I feel that "live and let live" is a good policy.

This is the sort of convenient view of atheism which Frank bullyrags like a bulldog with a chew toy. Atheism is a statement that there is no proof of the existence of any god. The atheist is not the equivalent but polar opposite of the religionist. The religionist says this is so, but you must believe absent any demonstrable evidence; the atheist says no thank you.

Characterizing atheism as a belief, equivalent to religious belief or agnostic uncertainty only derives from religionists and agnostic who need to state the case thus in order to argue against it.

As an atheist, my belief is that meatloaf sammiches would make a fine lunch . . .

Setanta- With a dollop of Grey Poupon!

Re: Can someone explain why many act like Atheism is a Relig

Might you be overplaying your hand here? My own experience seems to contradict your claim. At least in America,

- I have never seen an atheist stand in public places, preaching about how his disbelief in god has changed his life for the better.

- I have never seen a witness in court swear his oath on a copy of the Communist Manifesto and finish it by saying "So help me Marx".

- I have never seen atheists spread glurge about religious people who finally saw the light of atheism on their death beds.

- I have never seen atheists recite atheist literature before meals, or before going to bed.

- I have never heard atheistic majority leaders in Congress pledge that they want to promote a more godless world view. If I am not mistaken, Tom DeLay was the one who pledged to promote a more biblical world view, and who blamed the Columbine massacre on the teaching of evolution.

The list goes on, but you get the idea.

Main Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY
1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith


Main Entry: be·lief
Pronunciation: b&-'lEf
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English beleave, probably alteration of Old English gelEafa, from ge-, associative prefix + lEafa; akin to Old English lyfan
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
synonyms BELIEF, FAITH, CREDENCE, CREDIT mean assent to the truth of something offered for acceptance. BELIEF may or may not imply certitude in the believer <my belief that I had caught all the errors>. FAITH almost always implies certitude even where there is no evidence or proof <an unshakable faith in God>. CREDENCE suggests intellectual assent without implying anything about grounds for assent <a theory now given credence by scientists>. CREDIT may imply assent on grounds other than direct proof <gave full credit to the statement of a reputable witness>. synonym see in addition OPINION