Another day when there is no God

That's not true, some atheists have a nasty habit of assuming non religious people are automatically atheists. They're not.



https://www.thelocal.se/20150413/swedes-least-religious-in-western-world

While the content of what Hinge posted may be questionable, he's not the author, so lashing out a him with a sneering remark about atheists is not warranted. Nevertheless, it would be reasonable to say that more than 80% of Swedes are not theists . . .

From Wikipedia:

Despite that, religion in Sweden plays a limited role compared to the European average, and even many church members participate in religious activities for only cultural reasons, and do not believe in Christianity. Atheism and agnosticism are widespread in Swedish society. In a Eurobarometer Poll in 2010, just 18% of Swedish citizens responded that "they believe there is a god", although a further 45% answered that "they believe there is some sort of spirit or life force". In a 2009 Gallup poll, 17% answered yes to the question "Is religion an important part of your daily life?". A survey found that only 15% of Church of Sweden members actually believe in Jesus, while another 15% identified as atheists, and a quarter as agnostic. Less than 4% of the Church of Sweden membership attends public worship during an average week; about 2% are regular attendees. Some scholars consider the nation to be a place where religion is regarded with “benign indifference”

No it wouldn't, 'not religious' means exactly that, despite what evangelical atheists want to believe.

Look at Britain.



https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/12/uk-one-of-worlds-least-religious-countries-survey-finds

There's a big difference, enough to comfortably win an election, between 13% and 53%. Most non religious people I know find atheists every bit as tedious and annoying as godsquad.

I'm intrigued by the idea that 'not religious' isn't the same as atheist.

Clearly that's my frame of reference - but this has echoes of Max's 'I'm not a feminist, but don't treat my daughter like ****'.

Can you tell me where I'm getting this wrong Iz? What is 'non religious' but not atheist? Is it just definitional or is something else at play?

or is it that 'strong atheist/weak atheist/agnostic' trichotomy that I've seen somewhere on A2K before?

Atheism is to all intents and purposes a religion with very strict views on life and the hereafter. Non religious people don't bother with it, or give it too much thought, they just get on with their lives.

There's even The Sunday Assembly an organisation for atheists who miss all the "good bits" of going to church where they can sing "awesome" pop songs. Personally, I don't think there are any good bits about going to church, and listening to a bunch of middle class, middle aged, people singing We Are The Champions, is anything but "awesome." The best thing about not being religious is not having to go to church or the Sunday Assembly for that matter.

Holy **** - your interpretation of atheism is nothing like mine. But I am getting on with my life and not adhering to anyone's interpretation of atheism.

Do that, and when people say they're not religious take them at their word, don't try to twist it into something else.

Mine either, but that was part of what the never ever ending argument with Frank was all about, some centuries old definition of what atheism is. Probably a French philosopher..

I take it from the latin, always have, and the latin means 'sans theism', aka 'without theism'. I made it a tag on some thread that I've probably down thumbed by now.

Like amyotropic....
comes from the greek in this link, but the usage is the same in latin. It's used in a lot of medical words.
https://www.alsa.org/about-als/what-is-als.html

And yes, that was what strong atheist and weak atheists was about in those old discussions, discussions being the polite word.

I'm a fifty year atheist and I ain't about to change my idea of myself because people argue differently.

The difference is that when Hingehead defines himself as an atheist I respect that. When I define myself as not religious, atheists say, "No you're not you're an atheist." In Britain 40% chose to define themselves as not religious or no religion. They could have defined themselves as agnostic or atheist but they didn't, and that should be respected. Nobody has the right to impose their religious definitions on anyone else.

I never would say that oh no you're not thing, since I don't think that way. I'm not alone among atheists. I think you and I talked about it early on and didn't argue at all. I've not even read Dawkins or Harris - I'm not interested; those are the hard headed boys.. or so I hear.

I had long ago closed off this thread with a thumb, but opened it this morning in a look-see at what all those thumbed down threads in a row were... I'll go away again soon enough.

I think the big difference between one who is an atheist and one who is without religion, is the motivation with which one opposes theism. Would they be better labelled Antitheists?

No. People who define themselves as having no religion are doing just that. They're not doing anything else, whether or not you get it is irrelevant. It's not being done for your benefit.

I'm not saying all atheists are the same, that would be ridiculous. But the person who designed the meme Hingehead posted certainly is.

In Britain 40% of respondents described themselves as having no religion, they did not describe themselves as atheists. That needs to be respected, not dismissed or deliberately misrepresented.

Sorry Izzy, no offence intended, I wasn't suggesting the irreligious were motivated to oppose theism, rather some who consider themselves atheist.

So, do you believe in God or gods?

Do you believe in some sort of spirit or life force?

People have all sorts of motivations, but they should still be allowed to define themselves.

It's like football, some people have no interest in it. It doesn't mean they're all closet Man U supporters.

Talking of which Southampton held Hapoel Be'er-Sheeva to a draw last night earning a valuable point and staying top of the group.

And if that doesn't interest you, you must support Pompey!

None of your business. I keep my beliefs or lack of them to myself, I'm not trying to convert anyone.

Ok.

I wouldn't take a divulgence of your beliefs as an attempt to convert anyone. Why do you conflate the two?

I'm not, but I'm a very strong believer in keeping one's own beliefs to oneself. I've found that those who are very eager to tell you what they believe in tend to think you should believe it too, and that's a quality I really dislike.