I believe. And I don't wear a crucifix upon my neck.
And I do not ever, force that belief upon anybody else's neck either.
I never have, have I?
Religion is a very personal thing. It exists, or does not, in every individual's mindset.
I happen to be a believer. The glory of the whole christian belief system was instilled into me as a child, and I am not sorry that it was.
I have watched many many documentaries about christian faith and many others as well.
They all present valid points for their existence.
And every one of them believe they are right.
Even agnostics can put up a valid argument why they believe in nothing.

I happen to believe that there WAS and is a divine creator.
Simple evolutionary theory just does not cut it for me.
The simple chemical reactions that make us survive are far too complex for us to have 'walked out of the swamp' you see.
Have you ever studied the chemical makeup of a human being? I have. It did not happen by accident.
Was it by Christ? Or perhaps alien seeding? I do not confess to know that.
I have my suspicions, but until I can prove them, I shall remain silent on that one.
And, as has been supposed by many a man far greater than I am, only death shall reveal that last clue to me.

IF your beliefs and mine collide, it's probably simply due to some miscommunication.
I will never diss you for what your beliefs are, so I would ask that you respect me and do not diss mine either.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

That in itself is a belief/faith.

No belief. Which word do you have more difficulty in understanding?

It makes no sense to compare sensible people at all on an imaginary scale. But of course I suppose you can be described as an a-tooth-fairyist and an a-santa-clausist? And btw, just prove now, that the Universe is not governed by a huge, invisible teapot.

I don't think people who believe in a certain thing are non-sensible any more than people who don't believe it. I'm just saying atheism is a belief or faith and that puts it in a religious category.

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

Mark you say you don't push your beliefs onto others , Sorry that's total crap America does push your version of Christianity onto others . You may not actually do so (but I suspect it does show it's face) however being part of the group that is pushing there religion onto others makes you no less guilty of it .
The whole Trump camp is doing exactly that with denial of same sex marriage banning of Muslims backing Israel and it corrupts every policy that has come out of the Trump camp so far.

I can't stand so called Born again Christians why asking for donations to help the poor and then spending it on a 1 billion dollar theme park is just a con or building a Glass church to the tune of 1 billion dollars is Evil to say the least .

Even advocating private healthcare is not Christian but simply greed witch is not looked good on by God or Jesus or have you forgotten what Jesus did to all the merchants doing business inside the church , did he not kick them all out and please "quote " what he also said after about that .....

mate you and your Christian friends should really have a good look in the mirror

---

I'm just saying atheism - -

Nonsense won't become true, however much you harp on.

Maybe there should be a new word coined to describe an atheist, because for me, it's a very polarizing term that indicates someone believes something is not true, and that falls into faith/religion.

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

I do not believe in a god or an afterlife, but I can't rule it out, either. My point in all this diversion of the Op's thread is to say I don't understand how anyone can be sure of anything. An atheist to me is someone is who is 100% sure that all the other religions are wrong. That's how fundamental religious groups see their beliefs, too. SETI is itself a faith based endeavor. Why waste time and money holding out hope there is an ET out there somewhere if you don't believe in the unknown?

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

You won't have long to answer the Big Question Gordon read my new thread you will find it interesting , Funny as a atheist or it will completely offend your belief's in Jesus and the Church and what you all have been taught at Sunday school or Bible studies and there is also a very BIG WARNING at the End of it . To bad it has already been put into motion

---

I do not believe in a god or an afterlife, but I can't rule it out, either. My point in all this diversion of the Op's thread is to say I don't understand how anyone can be sure of anything. An atheist to me is someone is who is 100% sure that all the other religions are wrong. That's how fundamental religious groups see their beliefs, too. SETI is itself a faith based endeavor. Why waste time and money holding out hope there is an ET out there somewhere if you don't believe in the unknown?

Best be careful and concise in you definitions. IIRC many of the GUT attempts today prove that there is no god by showing the universe causes itself. Weird, but mathematically provable. At least in these GUT's god can't exist. But you could say that you must believe in math. That seems a lot more obvious than fairy tales in the sky.

In any case we have wandered away from Rump care into an explanation to alternative realities.

---

When you have a man born from a Jewish family feed lie's all his life and then believes he is right and can't clearly see why his Health care reforms will do nothing but allow premature death and actually go's against what his religion states because it has been corrupted and when his agenda is in fact religion based then it's fair enough to bring it up here in this thread I think

---

Seven ways Australia is heaps better than the U.S. :-D
Cheers.

All religion is fanatical.

Atheism is sort of a religious faith in and of itself.

The word Atheist originates from "not a theist", meaning lack of religious belief. It was a word to describe no faith at all. It seems to be a modern twisting of meaning to ascribe atheism as a religion in an attempt to subvert those who claim they have no religious belief.

I consider myself as agnostic because it's not complete belief or disbelief. I don't see how anyone can be sure of anything.

One can only be unsure of the existence of a god for so long before they're considered not a theist. In it's most simplest form, you either believe there's a god or you don't believe there's a god. Note no one is saying you have to be sure. Being sure denotes fact. Belief in god denotes faith, so no certainty or fact is required.

I don't think people who believe in a certain thing are non-sensible any more than people who don't believe it. I'm just saying atheism is a belief or faith and that puts it in a religious category.

In informal logic, this is known as False Equivalence Fallacy.
I can clarify it by making up a clearly ridiculous "supreme being". I'll pick a random color: blue. A random food: broccoli. A random shape: cube. A random name: Oasdojhsekjf (yes I really randomly typed some giberish for that)

I propose that the universe and everything in it was created by a gigantic blue cube of sentient broccoli named Oasdojhsekjf. All hail Oasdojhsekjf!

Of course, seeing that I just made it up now (as opposed to an acceptable, mainstream supreme being made of pasta) you may retort that this is ridiculous, and Oasdojhsekjf couldn't have made anything as there is obviously no evidence for Oasdojhsekjf so it does not exist.

Now, using my false equivalence, I would reply:

Your absolute disbelief and denial of Oasdojhsekjf and my absolute belief in Oasdojhsekjf are both beliefs! Therefore, there is no way of telling the two apart! Therefore, (to also introduce Pascal's Wager) to be safe, you had best accept Oasdojhsekjf! All hail Oasdojhsekjf!

To put it more succinctly:

What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
-- Christopher Hitchens

---

I don't think people who believe in a certain thing are non-sensible any more than people who don't believe it. I'm just saying atheism is a belief or faith and that puts it in a religious category.

In formal logic, this is known as False Equivalence Fallacy.
I can clarify it by making up a clearly ridiculous "supreme being". I'll pick a random color: blue. A random food: broccoli. A random shape: cube. A random name: Oasdojhsekjf (yes I really randomly typed some giberish for that)

I propose that the universe and everything in it was created by a gigantic blue cube of sentient broccoli named Oasdojhsekjf. All hail Oasdojhsekjf!

Of course, seeing that I just made it up now (as opposed to an acceptable, mainstream supreme being made of pasta) you may retort that this is ridiculous, and Oasdojhsekjf couldn't have made anything as there is obviously no evidence for Oasdojhsekjf so it does not exist.

Now, using my false equivalence, I would reply:

Your absolute disbelief and denial of Oasdojhsekjf and my absolute belief in Oasdojhsekjf are both beliefs! Therefore, there is no way of telling the two apart! Therefore, (to also introduce Pascal's Wager) to be safe, you had best accept Oasdojhsekjf! All hail Oasdojhsekjf!

To put it more succinctly:

What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
-- Christopher Hitchens

Mr.Kevvy,

Your quote from Hitchens cuts both ways.

As you correctly point out, the existence of a Supreme Being cannot be proven using any sort of Logic or Reason.

However, the lack of existence of a Supreme Being cannot be proven using any sort of Logic or Reason either.

Therefore both Theism and Atheism are equivalent belief systems. It is nonsense to argue one way or the other among ourselves (the sum total of Humanity).

The error is that BOTH the Theists and the Atheists insist that they are correct and the other side should be forced to change their own beliefs.

Do we not have the right to (each of us) believe as we wish on the subject? But we do not have the right to push our beliefs off onto another person.

Great wickedness has been committed by both various Theists and various Atheists down through history. Neither side truly has the moral high ground in this.

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

KWSN - MajorKong,

I will restate what you just stated but with my "supreme being" substituted:

As you correctly point out, the existence of Oasdojhsekjf cannot be proven using any sort of Logic or Reason.

However, the lack of existence of Oasdojhsekjf cannot be proven using any sort of Logic or Reason either.

Therefore both Oasdojhsekjfism and aOasdojhsekjfism are equivalent belief systems. It is nonsense to argue one way or the other among ourselves (the sum total of Humanity).

The error is that BOTH the Oasdojhsekjfists and the aOasdojhsekjfists insist that they are correct and the other side should be forced to change their own beliefs.

Works just as well with Oasdojhsekjf as with any other deity...

Also, the sad fact that others have tried to force others to believe or disbelieve does not validate or invalidate any belief or lack thereof. It only invalidates their humanity. I have never met a single "atheist" nor "agnostic" who argued for the forceful change of anyone. The reason is: they know that being the minority, and due to some religions' disdain for disbelievers, they would most likely be the ones forced! Rather, they are the biggest supporters of the First Amendment and equivalent religious liberties.

Edit:

I think that most of this is due to the popular misuse of the words "atheist" and "agnostic".

Atheism/theism is about belief. If the answer is "no" to the question "Do you believe that there exists one or more supernatural, supreme beings?" then the person is an atheist, no ifs, ands or buts. Most people in this situation won't use the term these days as it's been so vilified, but abusus non tollit usum.

Agnosticism/gnosticism (from the Greek gnosis meaning having knowledge) is about knowledge, whether one thinks it is possible to know something, in this case whether a supreme being exists.

Most atheists are agnostic atheists... "I don't know, but I don't believe" as Robert Ingersoll put it. People who are religious believers but don't claim knowledge (isn't that what faith is?) are agnostic theists.

---

Your quote from Hitchens cuts both ways.

As you correctly point out, the existence of a Supreme Being cannot be proven using any sort of Logic or Reason.

However, the lack of existence of a Supreme Being cannot be proven using any sort of Logic or Reason either.

Therefore both Theism and Atheism are equivalent belief systems. It is nonsense to argue one way or the other among ourselves (the sum total of Humanity).

The default position is non-belief. One must be taught to believe and indoctrinated into a religion. One does not need to be taught non-belief nor indoctrinated to not believe. Ergo, atheism is not a religion but a lack thereof. You falsely equate that because god cannot be proven to not exist, atheism requires a faith of sorts, which I think is the root of the falsehood of it being claimed as a religion. All one needs to do is reject the irrationality of religious dogma to not be a theist ("atheist"). That clearly isn't a religion but a lack of religion.

...The error is that BOTH the Theists and the Atheists insist that they are correct and the other side should be forced to change their own beliefs...

I don't see why this has to be true at all. I for one consider myself an atheist because I have no proof of existence of a higher power, however I hope I am wrong because I wouldn't mind consciously existing beyond my time here. All that said, I see no reason why anyone else needs to change their beliefs one way or another. As long as I am free to believe what I want, why shouldn't everyone else be free to do the same. As long as their beliefs don't drive them to interfere with the beliefs of others.

I neither insist that I am correct nor have I ever insisted someone else change their beliefs.

---

#resist

...The error is that BOTH the Theists and the Atheists insist that they are correct and the other side should be forced to change their own beliefs...

I don't see why this has to be true at all. I for one consider myself an atheist because I have no proof of existence of a higher power, however I hope I am wrong because I wouldn't mind consciously existing beyond my time here. All that said, I see no reason why anyone else needs to change their beliefs one way or another. As long as I am free to believe what I want, why shouldn't everyone else be free to do the same. As long as their beliefs don't drive them to interfere with the beliefs of others.

I neither insist that I am correct nor have I ever insisted someone else change their beliefs.

Very well stated.

It has been my experience of all the monotheistic religions I've encountered, have as part of their belief system, an insistence that they are correct and true and all other possibilities are false and evil, and command their believers to convert anyone who does not believe. I have also noted that persons who believe in such a monotheistic religions appear to believe that any other system or lack thereof must also insist upon conversion to it and reject as false any suggestion that is not the case.

---

...The error is that BOTH the Theists and the Atheists insist that they are correct and the other side should be forced to change their own beliefs...

I don't see why this has to be true at all. I for one consider myself an atheist because I have no proof of existence of a higher power, however I hope I am wrong because I wouldn't mind consciously existing beyond my time here. All that said, I see no reason why anyone else needs to change their beliefs one way or another. As long as I am free to believe what I want, why shouldn't everyone else be free to do the same. As long as their beliefs don't drive them to interfere with the beliefs of others.

I neither insist that I am correct nor have I ever insisted someone else change their beliefs.

Conversations like this hurt my head a little bit, but I guess the bottom line is since I don't believe in god as religions define it but am open to the idea of the possibility of a god of some sort, I can classify myself as agnostic, right? Technically, I do believe in a possibility. I was raised Catholic, and just for the sake of that tradition and the fact my mother is Catholic, I'd like to fully embrace it, but I can't. I don't have that all important key ingredient - faith. Atheists don't have faith, either, so does that also make me an atheist? Somebody said they're an agnostic atheist. ~I like that.

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

I thought that this thread was about "Alternative Reality Health Care", not "religious beliefs", isn't there another thread for that stuff around here? :-(

Cheers.

I thought that this thread was about "Alternative Reality Health Care", not "religious beliefs", isn't there another thread for that stuff around here? :-(

Cheers.

You're right. Sorry Wiggo.

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

...The error is that BOTH the Theists and the Atheists insist that they are correct and the other side should be forced to change their own beliefs...

I don't see why this has to be true at all. I for one consider myself an atheist because I have no proof of existence of a higher power, however I hope I am wrong because I wouldn't mind consciously existing beyond my time here. All that said, I see no reason why anyone else needs to change their beliefs one way or another. As long as I am free to believe what I want, why shouldn't everyone else be free to do the same. As long as their beliefs don't drive them to interfere with the beliefs of others.

I neither insist that I am correct nor have I ever insisted someone else change their beliefs.

Conversations like this hurt my head a little bit, but I guess the bottom line is since I don't believe in god as religions define it but am open to the idea of the possibility of a god of some sort, I can classify myself as agnostic, right? Technically, I do believe in a possibility. I was raised Catholic, and just for the sake of that tradition and the fact my mother is Catholic, I'd like to fully embrace it, but I can't. I don't have that all important key ingredient - faith. Atheists don't have faith, either, so does that also make me an atheist? Somebody said they're an agnostic atheist. ~I like that.

With apologies to Wiggo -

Non-militant Atheists don't deny there's a possibility of the existence of a god or supreme being. Just as they don't deny the possibility of the existence of a red, seven winged swan. Rather, if something as important as the existence of a supreme being, where one is supposed to dedicate their entire life to this being (allegedly? We really don't know what it wants), there better be something more than faith to compel me to believe.

But to the original claim, to say that non-belief is a religion is what I particularly take exception with. Maybe we should re-open a new thread for this topic and I'd be more willing to hash it out again, but to say that atheism is a religion is to not really understand what atheism is.

BTW - I was raise Roman Catholic myself, and I still celebrate some of the holidays out of enjoyment of my childhood memories and the goodwill I see in those around me.