U.S. Supreme Court Ruling: ATHEISM IS RELIGION

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Alter2Ego, Nov 23, 2019.

  1. william kurps

    william kurps Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2019
    Messages:
    5,041
    Likes Received:
    1,872
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Thanks for the laugh ( on your side in this one)
     
  2. pitbull

    pitbull Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    6,149
    Likes Received:
    2,857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nope, I reject this!
     
  3. trevorw2539

    trevorw2539 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    8,215
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Only within a nation. No National court can declare another nations form of marriage right or wrong. It is within the nation. Because another nations 'marriage' does not conform to, say the US form of marriage, the US court does not have the right to declare it invalid or not a 'marriage'.
     
  4. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,472
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I hope you are not being dishonest but only mistaken about Torcaso v. Watkins that struck down a religious test to hold office and Kaufman v. McCaughtry which allowed an inmate "free thought" group which took a position on religion. Neither made atheism a religion.
    I find it curious why the religious want to label atheism a religion. Maybe it is unclear to them what a religion is.
    Perhaps you could define what a religion is and this could be cleared up?
     
  5. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why?
     
  6. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Actually it does, insofar as within our own country goes. Especially for those immigrating. We can declare that a poly marriage that is legal in another country is not valid here. Ultimately, a court cannot declare my poly marriage not a marriage, but they can declare that for legal purposes it is not. Similarly while a court cannot declare atheism a religion, it can declare that for legal purposes, it is to be treated the same as religion is treated legally.
     
  7. pitbull

    pitbull Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    6,149
    Likes Received:
    2,857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Atheism is the opposite of belief in God. It contradicts simple logic if "X" and "not X" are to be conceptually the same.

    An atheist who says "I don't believe in God" does not say "I believe in no God". These are two different statements. He does not believe, thus it cannot be a Religion.
     
  8. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What happens when an America citizen is married is pretty clear cut - states get to decide who they will and won't marry, and any organization (such as religions) can consider people as married regardless of whther the state recognizes the marriage. So, the LDS church can marry dead people, etc.

    The constitution says that a state marriage must be recotnized by all other states.

    I'm really curious about how this all works for immigration.

    Other countries can marry anyone they want - we have nothing to say about that, obviously.

    Does our federal government actually investigate the marriages of applicants to determine if America is going to reject the marriage of the applicant? What marriage requirements would the federal government use? After all, the federal government doesn't marry people. They wouldn't have need of marriage requirements for any other purpose than to judge the marriages of other countries - which sounds weird to me.

    Do we just accept whatever decision every other country has made? That seems unlikely, too.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2019
  9. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am not going to go into the belief or lack thereof of atheists. That is a whole other matter and thread. But when it comes down to it, chosing atheism is still a religious based choice in that one chooses not to be part of any religion. Remember choosing not to choose is still a choice. And as far as how the law deals with the religious and the non religious, atheism, for legal practical purposes, needs to be view the same as religion. Did you see my comparison on the legal vs real definition of incest?
     
  10. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's a decision about religion. Suggesting that makes one religious is just plain nonsense.

    And no, such a decision is not necessarily "religious based". You have no idea what the basis for the decision might be.

    If I choose not to accept the notion that there are ghosts, it doesn't make me paranormalist.

    If I choose not to accept religion, it doesn't make me religious.

    Let's be serious.
     
  11. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,386
    Likes Received:
    1,704
    Trophy Points:
    113

     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2019
  12. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My post answered the question.
     
  13. pitbull

    pitbull Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    6,149
    Likes Received:
    2,857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    He doesn't have to choose this since atheism is the natural state of a free human being. Only through social contact can someone be "poisoned" with belief in God.

    Also, not every religion has one or more gods. There are godless religions like Buddhism or Scientology. So someone can be an atheist and still be attached to a religion.

    Strictly speaking, atheism is the absence of the belief in God(s). This implies that an atheist is allowed to believe in anything (for example in 6-foot tall rabbits) but gods, to remain an atheist.

    I don't know any of these definitions, but I can well imagine that there are several of them.
     
    yardmeat likes this.
  14. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,472
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I hope you are not being dishonest but only mistaken about Torcaso v. Watkins that struck down a religious test to hold office and Kaufman v. McCaughtry which allowed an inmate "free thought" group which took a position on religion. Neither made atheism a religion.
    I find it curious why the religious want to label atheism a religion. Maybe it is unclear to them what a religion is.
    Perhaps you could define what a religion is and this could be cleared up?
     
    Kokomojojo likes this.
  15. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The moment that a person gains knowledge of a given religion,they must then make a choice on it. They can believe it is true, or that it is not true, which is indeed the same as saying they don't believe it's true. Even believe that it is possibly true, but you don't see enough evidence yet, is a choice and is also based upon belief (not all belief is religious in nature).

    The only thing I have been out out is that the choice to not be a part of any religion is a protected choice (and face it, some religious people don't want you to have that choice, legally speaking), and as such atheism need to be treated, in the aspect of law only, as a religion. I would never call atheism a religion in a real sense, and while it is indeed belief based, it is not a belief system.

    In reality incest is only about sex between blood related people of a certain close distance. In law, many states include those who are only legally related, but not blood related, such as steps or adopted. There are times when setting something up with a different definition legally than is used in the real world is necessary. We can even show that with marriage since there are so many different definitions per religions and cultures across time as well as the world.
     
  16. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
     
  17. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is nothing definitive in the link. You need to note what specifically it is about the definitions that support your points. The link would be to support you are using the correct definitions.
     
    Kokomojojo likes this.
  18. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My link has the definition of religion. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods. It is by definition, not a religion.
     
  19. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Seems atheists could still fall under this definition of religion
    Which is why it is important to note what specific definition(s) you are referring to.
     
    Kokomojojo likes this.
  20. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I did. Atheism means the lack of belief in a god or gods. That by definition is not a religion.
     
  21. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,608
    Likes Received:
    11,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When atheists take active steps to proselytize, it is a religion.

    Where I live, there are actually two different atheist churches. (One is officially a church, the other is an "Assembly of atheists". The two groups are not affiliated.)
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
    Kokomojojo likes this.
  22. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then talk to them. I don’t do that. I simply lack belief in a god or gods.
     
  23. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Seems your fellow atheists don't agree with you.

    Regardless, the definition I provided from your own link did not require a belief in a deity. So even by that, religion can be attached to an atheist.
     
    Kokomojojo likes this.
  24. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    i don’t care what anyone else believes.



    ive shown you that it is not. Just like not playing baseball is not a sport, by definition.
     
  25. Alter2Ego

    Alter2Ego Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2012
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Female
    edna kawabata:

    I am neither being dishonest nor am I mistaken about the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, in which the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed that the U.S. Constitution prohibits the Federal Government and all States from requiring religious tests for public office. Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare his belief in God. As a result, he was denied a commission despite his being appointed a Notary Public by the Governor of Maryland. Torcaso claimed that this requirement (to declare belief in God) violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. He then turned around and sued. He lost in the lower court, and so he took his lawsuit the the Supreme Court. Notice a partial quotation below from the Supreme Court transcript:

    "Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public; but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission; but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing without need for implementing legislation and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally invades his freedom of belief and religion guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 489-496."
    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/367/488/

    Let me see if you get the significance of what those words (bolded in blue) are actually saying.


    I will address Kaufman v. McCaughtry after we finish discussing the Torcaso case.

    Alter2Ego
     

Share This Page