Atheism is NOT a Religion, and I see no reason why to believe that it is. All that nonsense is, is Christian propaganda making people believe that Atheism is somehow AGAINST their religion or God. When in fact, that couldn't be further from the truth for most of the atheists I know anyways.

Most atheists are that way because of the atrocities that they have seen befallen on millions on innocent people in the name of Religion. And this is also a view that I share.

I'd have to say that technically atheism is not a religion, as it does not fit the definition of a religion.

Religion is defined as


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Religion

Now, to my knowledge, atheists do not have a set of religions rules/beliefs, etc. by which to adhere. Nor do they have a faith to ritually observe. Therefore, atheism isn't really a religion because it doesn't fit the basic description of: religion (which is essentially rules, beliefs, and rituals that one adheres to).

Really, the only solid belief that they could faithfully adhere to: 'God does not exist'. I don't think that qualifies atheism as a religion.

This post has been edited by KansukeKojima: May 16 2008, 03:17 AM

This doesn't hold. I'll show you why: "Theism is a lack of belief in no God or supernatural diety of any sort. Therefore theism isn't a religion." A lack of a certain belief proves nothing. And atheism does make up one's way of life. Who can they follow but a human (normally themselves)?


This never holds water. For atheists have been known to do the same thing and to a greater extent than any theist. Perhaps you should stop being an atheist then? Also, i don't think i haven't seen an atheist that didn't also take on this view of yours.


As mentioned before, it is unreasonable and biased to pick one definition over the other for the sake of calling something other than what it really is. Click on that very link you have provided and tell me what definitions are the only ones given that fit atheism. If you want to take things metaphorically and literally, then we shall. As i mentioned before, who can they follow but a human? (Literal.) They observe rituals: they are intrested in arguments and ways that attempt to eliminate the belief in a deity or deities, and may be found whole heartedly supporting these arguments. (Metaphoric and Literal.) Atheism has its own denominations (e.g. Darwinism, Neo-Darwinism, etc; some even go as far as to claim that Science is part of atheism). (Metaphoric and Literal.) I'm sure there's more, but i'm not going to go through all of them.

People are taking this thread seriously? Huh.

Ok, I don't want to make a fallacy of ambiguity here, so I'm going to ask what do you mean by that? Do you mean atheists make atrocities in the name of religion because that's what I'm reading and that doesn't make any sense to me.

This is true. However, at many times it is very pragmatic to do so, even though it'd be biased. Atheism defined as the lack of religion is a definition I'm sure many people would agree with. It is also unfair to ignore an argument that uses one definition because there are multiple definitions.

... and since when is Darwinism an atheist sect instead of a scientific argument? Or are we having another war of multiple meanings again?

this is the definition of religion and one of them has atheism as an antonym. so no atheism is not a religion it's the complete opisite but like a religion it's something that a group of people believe in.


putting it in such an unatractive manner is bazzar if you read into it and asked others that beleive you so would not see it that way.

What I mean by "it doesn't make up their entire lifestyle", is that not every single nitpick of your life is defined by "the nonexistence of a deity" if you are one, while if you really want to be a Christian, every single nitpick of your life should be determined by God. (Yes, every single nitpick. I remember the Bible saying somewhere, give yourself up entirely to God. I'll find a quote for you sometime.)

I also made the point that it could be called a "belief" by other people, to describe those steadfast atheists who actually have a firm implantation in their minds, not unlike that of extremely devout Christians, that there is no God. That would actually count as a belief, and those people are "religious" atheists.

[1:1]I do.
[1:2]Only because you don't see atheism as a religion. (See number 2 in the quote.)
[2]Everyone agreeing on it doesn't necessarily make it established in the same sense as that in a dictionary. Also, as we have so seen, to accept that kind of definition to the word "atheism" is to accept a definition that is contradictive to certain definitions of the word "religion," therefore making it unreasonable.
[3:1]Are you accusing me of this or speaking in general? If the former, could you point out which ones i did not address head on and why it is not head on so that i may address it head on?
[3:2]Is it perfectly fair and reasonable to exclude definitions from the word "religion" that is in complete contradiction to the belief in the inexistence of a deity or supreme being?
[4]In what way does Darwinism allow for the possibility of a deity? If life can form without a deity, how would it be reasonable to accept that their is a deity?


Just like many other words, so does the word "religion" contain more than one definition. Also, you mention that only one source has the word "atheism" marked as an antonym to the very definition that which you quoted. In what way does that not make sense? Shouldn't everyone be expecting that given the definition you have so picked? The definition which you limited the word "religion" to deals with a supernatural being. Of course the word "atheism" is going to be an antonym to it. Consider considering things as a whole.

[1]And that is similar to my argument.


[1]Every single nitpick for an atheist would exclude a deity, or else they wouldn't be called an atheist. Therefore they'd follow what they have set up for themselves; they are the judge of what they accept, not a deity. Atheism is the way of life for an atheist.
[2]Heh. How about the first commandment out of the two greatest commandments? I am one that studies the Bible, you need not go to the trouble of obtaining a verse. Albeit, a believer does not need a command, it would come naturally.
[3]Any atheist that doesn't have a firm belief, in the inexistence of a supreme being, would not be called an atheist. Therefore making all atheists "religious atheists."