You quoted only a part of wikipedias definition Wes.

As you go down, you find the following,

Religious belief usually relates to the existence, nature and worship of a deity or deities and divine involvement in the universe and human life

Relates to… saying that there is no existence of a deity.  That could be considered relating to the existence of it, would you disagree?

Keep in mind, I never stated that Atheism is a Religion, I said it could be.  Depending on the definition.

-James’

If it isn’t religion…

what word would you use to describe a stance, or belief, or set of beliefs regarding the supernatural/Divine?

-James’

GBC: It is a set of beliefs or a stance regarding the supernatural.  Not necessarily belief in the supernatural, but in regards to the supernatural.

That’s my take on it, people need to have a view on the supernatural in order for rituals and beliefs to have any psychological foundation

GBC: In defending a single comment, you have backed this discussion into a corner where nothing can be defined… I’m right no matter what because I didn’t give an absolute claim, I said it could.

It doesn’t mean you are absolutely right, just possibly right if your theory is indeed possible. If your theory is possible and you say maybe it’s true then you are certainly aren’t provable as wrong with the information given

Regarding definitions of terms for categories, I think there needs to be more terms in order to accomodate everyone because not everyone seems to fit as is (regarding perspective within a category), I guess anyone is free to create their own classification

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

The above link gives an even broader definition of Religion.  And Wes, I guess you could consider Agnosticism a religion if you look at it as making the absolute statement that the question of existence of God/divine/supernatural etc..  can not be known.
So I change my stance on Agnosticism, it very well could be a Religion.

So… once again, it could be a religion(Atheism)

Do you disagree?

-James’

GBC responds again…

To put it briefly,
It is a set of beliefs or a stance regarding the supernatural.  Not necessarily belief in the supernatural, but in regards to the supernatural.

It’s a stance, sure, but having a stance on something doesn’t make it a religion. Agnosticism is also a stance, but that doesn’t make it a religion either.

I certainly say that the peer reviewed Wikipedia is more reliable than your definition.  If they are biased to the many authors, than your one definition is biased.

All definitions are biased. What’s your point?

You have made another absolute statement regarding this issue.  You say it “does not qualify.” If you believe that the definition of Atheism and Religion are unclear, than you can’t disagree with my statement(Atheism could be a Religion) or hold to yours(that it isn’t/doesn’t qualify.)

Not sure who you’re addressing here, but atheism does not qualify as a religion based on the most common definitions of religion.

In defending a single comment, you have backed this discussion into a corner where nothing can be defined… I’m right no matter what because I didn’t give an absolute claim, I said it could.

And you are wrong based on the most common definitions of religion.

Wes, I’ll give you a chance to read the posts I wrote after that one, I wrote that one before I read your comment.  There were comments made while it was being written.  It was a response to another comment.

-James’

http://www.onelook.com/?w=Religion&ls=a

There you go, all online dictionary definitions of Religions.  Many of them include my definition, possibly most, I haven’t read them all yet.

-James’

OH and Encarta, how’s that for “The most current definition”

Sorry, you said most “common”

-James’

It’s a stance, sure, but having a stance on something doesn’t make it a religion. Agnosticism is also a stance, but that doesn’t make it a religion either.

So I propose a distinction to settle the issue:
Belief vs Stance
I will try to avoid using the term ‘religion’ when I can be more specific.
And to further specify ‘Belief’:
Current Logic-based Theory vs Current Unfounded Theory

Double dipping…

You quoted only a part of wikipedias definition Wes.

My name is Les. Wes is my brother. Try not to screw it up.

Relates to… saying that there is no existence of a deity.  That could be considered relating to the existence of it, would you disagree?

Yes, I would disagree. The quote you’re attempting to mine quite clearly equates religion with a positive belief whereas atheism is a negative belief at best or the absence of belief altogether. Therefore atheism != religion. Not to mention that atheism has none of the trappings of religion.

Keep in mind, I never stated that Atheism is a Religion, I said it could be.  Depending on the definition.

If you’re going to put the disclaimer “depending on the definition” behind everything you say then you might be a wankel rotary engine, depending on which definition of wankel rotary engine you happen to use. Somehow I doubt you’re a wankel rotary engine, though. It’s an idiotic disclaimer to make because it leaves open the possibility that X could be anything depending on how you define Y.

f it isn’t religion…

what word would you use to describe a stance, or belief, or set of beliefs regarding the supernatural/Divine?

How about the words: Stance. Belief. Set of Beliefs? Gee, that wasn’t hard at all.

Not all Stances, Beliefs, or Sets of Beliefs constitute a religion. Don’t be such a dumb ass about this.

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

The above link gives an even broader definition of Religion.

None of which makes atheism into a religion.

And Wes

It’s Les, you stupid fuck. My name is on every one of my posts and it’s also listed in the side bar. You’d have to be a complete fucking moron not to get it right.

I guess you could consider Agnosticism a religion if you look at it as making the absolute statement that the question of existence of God/divine/supernatural etc..  can not be known.

Only in your twisted little world. Agnosticism isn’t a religion. Neither is atheism.

So I change my stance on Agnosticism, it very well could be a Religion.

So… once again, it could be a religion(Atheism)

Do you disagree?

Yes, I disagree. You can’t even get my fucking name right so why should I accept anything else you say as being close to reality?

Les, arguing with you is like arguing with Bill Oreilly.  You’re almost as open minded as him!!  I’ll give you some time to catch up.  I’m sorry I got the wrong name, my bad.

-James’

Obviously GBC didn’t bother to read the rest of the article on Atheism I linked to as it deals with the whole “atheism is a religion” argument he’s attempting to make:

“OK, you may think there’s a philosophical justification for atheism, but isn’t it still a religious belief?”

One of the most common pastimes in philosophical discussion is “the redefinition game.” The cynical view of this game is as follows:

Person A begins by making a contentious statement. When person B points out that it can’t be true, person A gradually re-defines the words he used in the statement until he arrives at something person B is prepared to accept. He then records the statement, along with the fact that person B has agreed to it, and continues. Eventually A uses the statement as an “agreed fact,” but uses his original definitions of all the words in it rather than the obscure redefinitions originally needed to get B to agree to it. Rather than be seen to be apparently inconsistent, B will tend to play along.

The point of this digression is that the answer to the question “Isn’t atheism a religious belief?” depends crucially upon what is meant by “religious.” “Religion” is generally characterized by belief in a superhuman controlling power—especially in some sort of God—and by faith and worship.

(It’s worth pointing out in passing that some varieties of Buddhism are not “religion” according to such a definition.)

Atheism is certainly not a belief in any sort of superhuman power, nor is it categorized by worship in any meaningful sense. Widening the definition of “religious” to encompass atheism tends to result in many other aspects of human behavior suddenly becoming classed as “religious” as well—such as science, politics, and watching TV.

As I said, GBC’s disclaimer is idiotic as it allows you to say X is anything depending on the definition of Y.

GBC, simply because I don’t agree with you that doesn’t make me closed minded. I’ve pointed out the obvious flaw in your argument yet you continue to think you’re saying something intelligent.

Encarta: people’s beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life

Encarta: unbelief in God or deities: disbelief in the existence of God or deities

Wikipedia: Atheism is commonly defined as the positive belief that deities do not exist, or as the deliberate rejection of theism

Oxford: noun the belief that God does not exist.

Merriam-Webster: the doctrine that there is no deity

Come on Les, give it up.

-James’

He’s just trying to belittle you, Les, by calling you by another name: It’s condescension. He got it right earlier so he knows your name.

He’s doing the same by insisting atheism could be a religion. In his little world he’s a member of a superior religion and he wants everyone to know he thinks so.

TheGreatBongChicken was forgettable the first time around. Soon he will be again.

Les: Not to mention that atheism has none of the trappings of religion.

I guess belief is the consequence of stance

I think I’ll stay clear of the term ‘religion’ in this thread

The first definition in my last post was for Religion.

The rest for Atheism.

-James’

GBC, none of those make atheism into a religion no matter how much you wish it were so.

Les,

if,

Religion is,

Encarta: people’s beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life

And Atheism is,

Encarta: unbelief in God or deities: disbelief in the existence of God or deities

Wikipedia: Atheism is commonly defined as the positive belief that deities do not exist, or as the deliberate rejection of theism

Oxford: noun the belief that God does not exist.

Merriam-Webster: the doctrine that there is no deity

Explain to me how Atheism can’t be a Religion?

-James’

Like LJ, I skim long text strings so everyone please forgive me if someone else covered this, but here goes:

To add a “TradeMark” symbol to a bit of text, append the following characters on the end of the text, with no spaces in between them:
& trade ;
So if you type the words TrueBeliever and stick those three items on the end with no spaces, you get: TrueBeliever™

Now on to the interesting part.  People are atheists for lots of reasons, from having found naturalism to be a reliable source, to just not giving a damn.  For the most part the commonality in beliefs that atheists share is driven by naturalism, the observance and study of physical reality.  I am pondering why TrueBelievers™ are SO anxious to call atheism a religion, despite its lack of the trappings of religion like a body of dogma (it consists of one non-belief, similar in kind to lack of belief in Thor), ceremony (nothing resembling baptism), etc.

The answer, it seems to me, is that the TrueBeliever™ knows religion is basically unsupportable by observable fact.  As Mark Twain said; “Faith is believing in things you know ain’t so.” But “reason is a bully” that keeps pushing religion down into the sand again by solving one mystery after another.  How much easier it would be for religion if naturalism could be relegated to the domain of “things you believe in just because you want to, and not because they are true.”

When we say things like; “Give me some reason to believe in God” we’re really saying; “give me evidence that doesn’t require faith to believe”.  Put your cards on the table.  Can you reliably produce this god?  How do you know what He thinks about abortion, or predestination, or kittens?  How do you know He is outside of time and space, and that He can hear your thoughts? References to compilations of religious fantasies of half-starved herdsmen back in the days when people thought the sun went ‘round the flat Earth, won’t do.

So unless you are prepared to state your religion as “aThor-ism” you’re way out on a limb trying to say atheism is a religion.  Religions are complex systems of beliefs without supporting evidence.  Atheism is a lack of belief in something that lacks supporting evidence.  That’s pretty much it.

Is

the positive belief that deities do not exist

belief or opinion concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, or divine involvement in the universe and human life

Or how about

the doctrine that there is no deity

: |

-James’

For someone who bitched at me about only including a partial quote from Wikipedia you sure seem to like to quote mine definitions as much as possible to try and make it appear to fit your argument.

First you answer my question I posed earlier: Please explain to me what practices, rituals, mystic experiences and codified beliefs are involved in being an atheist?

If you’re not going to answer my direct queries I fail to see why I should be expected to answer yours.

I agree with Brock on psychological tactics -it’s not something I respect for an unprovoked offensive because it’s an asshat game; people who use these tactics need to be on the recieving end when vulnerable to appreciate what they can do to people, it’s therefore sometimes beneficial to the offender’s understanding that they come back, and Brock does this in the last line:

TheGreatBongChicken was forgettable the first time around. Soon he will be again.

GBC - In many people’s eyes psychological tactics like name-mocking will undermine validity, generally speaking when commenting I try to put it to one side and deal with things point by point because I know getting myself involved in the mud-slinging would undermine my validity in the eyes of the people I’m trying to bring round, I try to take each point as a serious proposed possibility, don’t let it get personal

Fair enough Les, i can understand that.

Here’s my answer,

if it is necessary for practices, rituals, mystic experiences and codified beliefs to be present in order for it to be a religion, then of course Atheism can not be a Religion.

Now, since not every dictionary says that is necessary, the bald/hair color analogy(while very funny) is still not adequate.

Now for my direct question.

: |

-James’