hmm...that really isn't research, just a dude making jokes!
Yes, and the joke is on those who claim atheism is a religion.
You might think so, but why are you evangelizing for your beliefs? (Err, lack of)
It's perfectly obvious your self proclaimed mandate to convert as many believers to Atheism as you can.
Why, the hell else, would you bother posting as you do?
What beliefs? (Err, lack of)
Have I ever asked, pleaded, bargained, demanded, commanded or bludgeoned you or anyone else to convert to Atheism or stop believing in your god?
Like most atheists here or anywhere else, they don't care what you believe as long as it's kept behind closed doors and not out in the public or in their face. Simple really.
I saw that episode on Friday night and I totally thought of these boards during that last new rule lol.
One definition of 'Religion' - a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects.
Because it cannot be proven conclusively that God does or does not exist, Atheism is a belief just like any other religion. So, in the context of the above definition, Atheism is a religion.
I apologize, but I chose not to watch the clip provided. I am not a Bill Maher fan. I don't say that as an uppity Christian, but more as a comedy snob. I much prefer John Stewart over Bill Maher for social and political commentary. Stewart is genuinely funny, Maher is a hack. His jokes are often the easiest and most obvious, and his delivery is just plain bad.
You conveniently left off the definition of the particular beliefs defined by religion; the strong belief in a supernatural power that controls human destinies.
Atheism does not contain a belief, strong or otherwise in any supernatural powers that control human destinies. In fact, it does not contain any beliefs at all.
Then, you didn't see how Maher explains that atheism is not a religion.
Typical, the believer attacks the person rather than what they say, even when they admit to not even hearing or refusing to hear what they said.
"Typical, the believer attacks the person rather than what they say, even when they admit to not even hearing or refusing to hear what they said."
Me being a believer is irrelevant in this case. Bill Maher is just not a good comedian, and though I've given him many chances considering he has an HBO gig, he's yet to have anything to say that could be remotely considered enlightening. I also choose not to smell poop if I can help it.
"Then, you didn't see how Maher explains that atheism is not a religion."
I believe the dictionary over Bill Maher.
"Atheism does not contain a belief, strong or otherwise in any supernatural powers that control human destinies. In fact, it does not contain any beliefs at all."
Belief that God does not exist is still a belief. Atheists don't 'know' any better than anyone else and cannot prove their views. Belief is considering something as fact that cannot be proven. Therefore, atheism is a belief, unless you have proof. If so, please share, because I don't think anyone wants to be a sucker.
"You conveniently left off the definition of the particular beliefs defined by religion; the strong belief in a supernatural power that controls human destinies."
I would have included that if that's what the dictionary said. I merely cut/pasted. So, if anyone 'conveniently' left off anything, it's the dictionary.
But, you didn't comment on what he said about atheism but instead had the nerve to attack him personally.
No, you are conveniently and dishonestly leaving out the definition in the dictionary.
No, it is a lack of belief in supernatural powers that control human destinies.
There were no views to be proven from Maher, but a simple explanation of the misinformed.
Here is the definition of "belief" in the dictionary in regards to religious beliefs: "A strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny."
Ignoring the dictionary on your part is proof enough.
"You conveniently left off the definition of the particular beliefs defined by religion; the strong belief in a supernatural power that controls human destinies."
Now, I know you are simply being dishonest.
"But, you didn't comment on what he said about atheism but instead had the nerve to attack him personally."
Yes, and will continue to do so. I'll wear a t-shirt and proclaim it from the roof tops. BILL MAHER IS A HORRIBLE COMEDIAN. BILL MAHER IS OVERRATED. BILL MAHER IS A HACK TAKING UP SPACE ON A SHOW THAT WOULD BE MUCH BETTER IF IT HAD A BETTER HOST.
"No, you are conveniently and dishonestly leaving out the definition in the dictionary."
Again, I literally cut and pasted that definition from a dictionary. Here's the link ... http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion. It's #2. Yes there were other definitions for that same word, which is why I clearly stated "One definition of 'Religion'" and "So, in the context of the above definition...."
"No, it is a lack of belief in supernatural powers that control human destinies."
Right, it is still a belief. You have no proof to confirm, yet believe it to be fact. You can gift wrap it any way you like, but the fact still remains, Atheism is a belief.
"There were no views to be proven from Maher, but a simple explanation of the misinformed."
The quote you chose to name this thread with is all I needed to understand the point being made. I caught a wiff of poo, and therefore chose not to stick my nose in it.
"Here is the definition of "belief" in the dictionary in regards to religious beliefs: "A strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny.""
Here's another one - 'something believed; an opinion or conviction.'
And another one - 'confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof'
"Ignoring the dictionary on your part is proof enough."
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, but you're mistaken. I'm not ignoring the dictionary, I'm quoting it directly. I'm ignoring Bill Maher.
"Now, I know you are simply being dishonest."
Another belief with no basis in facts.
Since you wish to remain obtuse about this, I see no point in going on.
Belief - Mental acceptance of a claim as truth regardless of supporting empirical evidence. http://ninjawords.com/belief
Obtuse - Intellectually dull or dim-witted. http://ninjawords.com/obtuse
I hope you do see the point in going on. Not necessarily this back and forth with me, but to go on thinking this one out a bit more.
On the other hand, people who practice abstinence probably don't constantly post on sex position forums.
If Atheism is a religion then not playing football is a sport...
Well I've been married for 14 years and have three kids, so sex is a dim and distant memory.
Well ! I was Married for 4 years when I became a widow with two children; both in diapers.
That was forty years ago! A few years later I married a woman with two kids.
19 years later that ended. More of the fault for that ending was mine than I could have admitted to at the time!
AND THEN ??? ... i did it again. Eight years this time... She died:
I would tell Ya the rest of the story ... (7 years ago to end of story) but I won't; cause ... then the story starts geting sad.
But/And I want everybody to be happy!
So Good night every body!
I guess the real question is: who cares? Some people think that some atheists conduct themselves in ways that parallel religious thinking, so they think of atheism as a religion. Some people think of tomatoes as vegetables. Some people think of spiders as insects. Right or wrong, what difference does a a nuance of classification make anyway?
Actually, according to the Supreme Court, religion is a set of principles or concepts by which you live your daily life. Atheism is a religion. It is a set of principles or concepts by which an atheist lives their daily life.
Hey alright, there's even an established judicial view on the matter. I wonder if Bill Maher knows that.
Are socialism, communism, capitalism, veganism, humanism, secularism, and i'm sure someone can come up with more, religions?
Actually, that's a good point. According to the view of the Supreme Court as it was stated, I can see how those -isms could be included in that interpretation. I'm not sure the Supreme Court's view could be quite so cut and dry and not cause conflicts elsewhere. But what do I know, I'm not an attorney or a judge.
Let me put this in logical format. A(X) = belief in X. B = God. C is some other belief where C <--> ~B.
~A(B) = A(~B) = A(C)
That is, not believing in God is the same as believing in not God (or believing that God doesn't exist), or believing in something else that is true if an only if God doesn't exist. Any way you look at it, you believe something. Maybe atheism is a religion more like abstinence is a sexual preference.
But I'm sure Bill Maher discusses the topic in a very respectful and noninflammatory manner and I'd surely change my mind if I bothered to watch the video, which is evidently the final word on the subject.
Here's an example of a non-belief that would not follow your logic...
"A" states that God exists, but cannot show Gods existence in any way other than admitting it is a belief not based on evidence.
"B" states that the Earth will rotate once again and the Sun will rise tomorrow and although "B" could be wrong and a giant rogue asteroid takes us out tonight, "B" is basing this understanding on evidence, which include some of the laws that govern the universe.
"C" is listening to both claims and does not accept the claims from "A" simple because there is no evidence.
Neither "B" or "C" are holding or embracing beliefs.
But what you're missing is 'B' in your case can't be proven either.
For example, we've figured out that the entirety of the universe began as a singularity smaller than the smallest part of an atom, and exploded out into the universe we know now, though we still do not know the cause. You cannot take from that there is no God without some level of belief beyond proof because we still do not know the cause. There's no evidence to base anything on because there has only been one big bang that we can study the results of. There's nothing to compare it to and we cannot see beyond it because everything in existence now that we can study came from it.
Therefore your view is based on faith in your unproven belief that God does not exist. It is a faith-based view held by many people, which is how many define religion.
Uh, yes we can.
Completely unrelated gibberish.
More faith based declarations.
B = Atheist belief that God does not exist
Me - "But what you're missing is 'B' in your case can't be proven either."
You - "Uh, yes we can."
If that's the case, good. Please do so. Please put all of our minds at ease so we can give these forums a rest and do something else with our time. Please resolve this conflict that's dividing us so we can all finally move forward in harmony.
Because up to this point nobody from either side of the fence has answered any of these questions definitively. If they had there would be nothing to discuss. Nobody knows any better than anybody else. If we can't at least admit that first, we're not going to get anywhere. Then we're just arguing to argue, and that is not productive.
Let me get this straight, you're asking me to show that the Earth will rotate once more and the Sun will rise tomorrow? Seriously? Is this something you consider that can't be proven?
A Troubled Man. Unless you are an agnostic, you have a belief regarding the existence of God. When did proof or evidence even enter the equation? You either BELIEVE He exists or you BELIEVE He does not. Whether your BELIEF that He does not exist can be considered religious is, quite frankly, none of my business. I see it as not being quite the same, but there are undeniable parallels. In the end I see the whole thing as pointless quibbling over the minutiae of a definition of a word that really doesn't make or break anyone's life.
But you also can't dodge the question by claiming that disbelieving one of the two options somehow constitutes a complete lack of belief of any kind. I don't believe the sky is green, but that doesn't mean I have no belief about the color of the sky.
I'll preempt your reply by preconceding that the sky analogy isn't the greatest since there is evidence what color the sky actually is. As for your prior counter to my logic post, all you did was explain why. You believe. That God. Does not exist. So from my point of view you just proved my point.
Let me try one final angle and then I'm done.
A Troubled Man, do you NOT believe that God does NOT exist?
I understand the claims of believers have no basis in fact or reality, they are only beliefs. Does that help?
Let's say your color blind! Well you only know the sky is blue by believing what others tell you. You believe it's pink cause that is what you see. Well in your reality it might be pink, so you believe. There is no proof the sky is blue. So of course you're not going to believe cause all you see is pink. You can argue all day that is pink, and your opponent believe's it is blue. So it's your own truth, no one else's.
So believing in god is some kind of abnormally that make you not see the truth?
Then obviously, my eyes have a defect that does not allow me to see certain colors.
No, I wouldn't, I could actually understand why the sky is blue due to the science as opposed to just believing in what others tell me.
In other words, you don't understand why the sky is blue. Just say so, then, rather than trying to argue some childish, elementary nonsense.
You can't know that because you cannot know for certainty that God does not exist; you can only state that you do not believe he exists, which in itself is a statement of faith. Lack of belief in someone else's belief does not validate truth or falsity.
Well, that isn't quite true, i understand that someone can make a case around deism, personally i would not buy that because there is no good reason to do so, but theism can be tested under some solid logic, and many religious claims can be scientifically tested.
Lets take the christian god as example, there are three major characteristics attributed to this god and they are logically impossible to coexist, unless you are willing to admit that this is the most wicked, sadistic and inhuman god that as ever existed and just don't deserve any worship at all, as Epicurus puts it:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?"
If atheism is a religion then not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Nonsense. It has nothing to do whether I believe in this god or that god or another god over there, it all has to do with analyzing the scriptures of the various religious doctrines and the claims of believers as having any evidence.
It is not about belief, it is about understanding.
I know believers don't understand the concept of understanding, they only know how to believe something.
Nicely put...Bald can be a hair color. Ever see spray on hair? By definition, you are in error. Atheism is a belief system. You must believe something. You believe that if you cast your vote for "A" then "B" doesn't exist. Not good.
Well, what is being discussed is if atheism is a religion and it is not.
Atheism is more a lack of belief then a belief, also you can make a case on this because the strong atheism and the weak atheism, you can see the difference between "i believe that god does not exists" and "by the lack of evidence in favor of the existence of a god i have no good reason to have a belief in a god", also called positive/negative atheism respectively.
If atheism is a religion then unemployment is a job.
It can be. Belief system is religion. Not believing in God isn't a lack of a belief system. Animals have no belief system (Kinda true) Atheists, or at least SOME atheists, believe that if they don't brush their teeth they won't get that big raise. Everyone believes something by which they live their daily lives. Not holding your breath too long is such a belief.
That is a perfect example of not thinking, of not using the capacity of reason or logic in any way, of not being able to synthesize information and make rational conclusions. The entire process is completely foreign and overridden by indoctrinated blind faith.
O.K. Deodorant, then. "Don't believe what others say of me, for they have not seen me, nor do they know me." Jesus said that. The religion you call christianity is a false path which began in Judea. Jesus wasn't a christian, and they don't know him.
If atheism is a religion then not doing drugs means you're an addict.
by Mahaveer Sanglikar4 years ago
Is atheism becoming another religion? I am asking this question because many atheists are loudly talking against 'other' religions, like many of the the propagandists of religions do.I myself am an atheist, and I think...
by aka-dj5 years ago
bother posting AGAINST beliefs?If the Atheist can "convert" any believer to Atheism, then, they can be compared to evangelists who do it the other way.Any thought?
by James Q smith8 years ago
Just a question, but it would seem if there really were no God, then Atheists couldn't exist. Is Atheism a religion? They definitely seem to be unified by a common belief.
by augustine726 years ago
I have talked to many atheists and some say that atheists are people who do not believe in the concept of God. But in the past people said that atheists were people who believed that there was "no God". What...
by kirstenblog7 years ago
I was reading a different thread that got me thinking about the history or religion and that it goes far back into history with many incarnations in different societies. Atheism on the other hand does not seem to have...
by Cattleprod Media7 years ago
I find most people are clueless. They say they are atheist, but can't properly form an argument as to WHY, or they say they are agnostic, with zero clue as to WHAT that is.Ignorance, above all, is our weakness. Not...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.