Why do NeoAtheists deny the practice of atheism is a religion?<<MOD WARNING>>

They took a religious position pertaining to G/god, you can only counter one religious position with another.

agnostics are a 2 part position, yes its also a religious position, agnostics 'both' do not believe AND they do not disbelieve, they are neutral.

 

You cut my sentence in half, altering the meaning. This is gross dishonesty. I will ask my question again and see if you’re capable of meeting the demands of honesty you make on others; Can you admit the truths that there are people who simple lack a belief in any god or gods, that those people are often labelled as “atheists” (regardless of whether you think that label is accurate or not) and that this belief alone is not a religion?

You also didn’t address any of the other questions I raised which actually related to clarifying the point of your thread.

 

there are none, its not a truth, its a hypothesis, if you find one please bring them to the board.

 

Nobody is failing to read it, we just understand how definitions work. Not all definitions are active at once. For instance, orange is defined as follows:

"Definition of orange
1a: a globose berry with a yellowish to reddish-orange rind and a sweet edible pulpHe peeled an orange.
b: any of various small evergreen citrus trees (genus Citrus) with glossy ovate leaves, hard yellow wood, fragrant white flowers, and fruits that are oranges
2: any of several trees or fruits resembling the orange
3: any of a group of colors that are between red and yellow in hue"
​

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/orange

I can say "I would like to eat an orange". That means that I would like to eat the globose berry, not that I would want to eat the colour. I'm not failing to read the third line, I've simply constructed a sentence using the first one. The first line is the active definition. There is no need for every line of a definition to apply, as you seem to suggest.

 

I would agree with you on that. That loonacy derives from the definition you provided.

Quote who?

 

Christians are just short one God to disbelieving in all the same God's Atheists do

if Atheism is a religion then Christians believe in 99% of Atheism

 

Seriously? You accepted such people existed when you answered the partial question, you just said they were agnostics. You know there are people who can be labelled agnostic atheists because you’ve responded to them on this very forum – I’m one of them (though I dislike the labels). Again, just because you disagree with the definition of a label doesn’t mean other people won’t use it that way. You might even be… dare I suggest it… wrong!

 

That is nonsense. But...if you satisfy some need in you to insist atheism is a religion...go for it.

Atheism OFTEN is "belief." Nearly as I can see...it is never a religion.

You should not be defining "agnostic." If you want to say "agnostic is blah, blah, blah" in order to satisfy some need in you...go for it.

Agnosticism, as I see it, is never a religion.

 

Fake agnostics like to make up words and definitions, it is just a fact we have a few on the forum.
It is all about the burden of proof, they are well aware they cannot provide evidence for their god and that Atheists have no burden of proof since they make no claims. To cover their lack of evidence they lie and call themselves agnostics, denying their gods, but they think it enables them to attack atheists who they see as a challenge to their religion. Others claim to be atheists and hang around in atheist bars! (i kid you not). They are most funny when trying to argue about objective morality whilst ignoring the fact that if they are truly agnostic or atheist they have nothing other than what a genuine atheist or agnostic has base their morality on.
When not spewing forth their lies about atheism they inhabit the conspiracy forum, where again they ignore the general rules of burden of proof to push their "the GUBMIT did it rants.

 

Nope, most atheists do not counter religion, they simply ask for evidence. That is not taking a counter position, it is all that is ever needed when discussing religion with a theist.

 

I deny Flat Earther's beliefs because they are fantastic and without proof. Does that now make me a member of the Globalist religion or just a rational human being?

 

Or, we are in Nexus 6 with Zardoz and the incorrigibles.

 

BOOM^^^^^ Correct. This should help clarify the question. I also don't believe in smoking. What does that make me, a smoking agnostic or a smoking atheist? I do believe we're polluting the earth to death. What does that make me, an environmental prophet? I believe in the moon landing. What does that make me?

 

Nonsense.

Atheism is not a religion. "Atheism" is an almost useless descriptor...used by people who are not satisfied to give a verbal explanation of their position on this issue.

But some atheists occasionally go ape...and post rants like this one.

 

Actually, most atheists I have known or read...

...either claim there are no gods...

...or claim it is more likely there are no gods than that there is at least one.

 

Well done, I point out that atheism is not a religion, you cry nonsense and then...... agree with me!
Sorry you did not like my sarcastic rant when you have dealt with koko the clown a bit more you might understand it!

 

Nope, most atheists simply lack a belief in gods. Now if you want to debate gods offer some evidence the subject of the debate actually exists!

 

That’s only the atheists who have specifically spoken or written about atheism though. You’ll have met loads of other atheists without even realising that they don’t believe in any gods because it doesn’t play any kind of role in their day-to-day lives. I suspect there are atheists who don’t even know they’re atheists. In posting here, we’re all part of a small, weird minority.

 

We both agree that atheism is not a religion.

But if you think your post is not nonsense because of that...you are just wrong.

The rant was a rant. You are entitled to rant. I'm glad you did it the way you did. You made it easier for me to give it as little respect as I did.

 

MOST atheists I have known or read...

...either claim there are no gods...

...or claim it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one.

VERY, VERY, VERY few ever leave it at "I simply lack a belief in gods." Only the phony ones and liars seem to do that. Luckily, there are not many of them.

 

That is correct.

BUT...how many atheists do you know who use the word "atheist" as a descriptor or as part of a descriptor...

...who do not "believe" there are no gods or who do not "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods.

People who truly "just lack a 'belief' that there are gods"...ALSO lack a "belief" that there are bno gods...and call themselves agnostics if they must use a descriptor.

 

That's up to them.

I am not a moron...and I think your rant was a rant.

If you want to rant...rant.

 

Yes, I have met many atheists.

 

Humans are hard wired to believe in abstract constructs. Its one of the evolutionary traits that our enormous frontal lobes induces. Insofar as agnostics develope the same basic tool as they grow up from infancy, they believe too. Its all about the 'what',

 

Again I said myself it was a rant, a sarcastic one! Well spotted, you managed to spot a rant and confirm that the author claimed it to be a rant, genius!