Atheism & Theism: Menaces to Society

Premise: The ongoing hostility between atheists and theists and the infiltration of academia, politics and mass-media with their antagonistic agenda is messing up our beautiful world.

The perpetrators are never the moderate (=friendly) but the "explicit atheists", militant atheists and the religiously fanatic, the fundamentalist bigot. Both present a very real danger to common sense, ethical values, spirituality and humanities progress. Both begin as infantile and divisive rants at lectures and now on internet-forums and build momentum to cause hatred, destruction and stupidity on societal levels.

1. Atheism: Menace to Society

* Militant atheists focus on the very worst in Religion in order to "prove" their point. However, belief in a Supreme Creative Force does not automatically entail being a jihadist, suicide bomber, bigot or even having a religious dogma. The atmosphere has become so charged that when one questions the atheist agenda one is dismissed as a "religious nutcase". This is blatantly false. Putting the spiritually minded person in the same category as a suicide bomber (for example) is a distortion of reality, perpetrated by those who would like to consider themselves "critical thinkers".

* A-theism has nothing to do with "free thought" as it is re-active rather than pro-active. The scope is narrowed to being anti-something rather than visionary. So without theism there would be no a-theism. A-theism is nothing more than a by-product of theism.

* Psychologically, the fruits of atheism are moral relativism, apathy, non-accountability. Every religion has elements of accountability. In Hinduism its called Karma. In Christianity one is accountable to God. Without accountability it does not matter whether you go on a killing spree or not. The most atheistic country in the world is North Korea. The results of their atheist "Juche Ideology" are poverty, mass-starvation and blandness. This is no surprise at all. When you take away spiritual values and the idea of a meaningful existence that is not based on chance and coincidence but upon a higher force, what is left is apathy. Of course atheism now uses the ideal of "ethics" as a cop-out, but without accountability there are no natural consequences of careless behavior.

* Militant atheists try to piggyback on science and the great things it has given to society. But it is not atheists such as Karl Marx who have made our world a better place, its science. Most of the great names of science...Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, Einstein, DaVinci, Max Planck, Edison, C.G. Jung, Freud were deeply religious and spiritual people. Since 10-20 years academia has been somewhat infiltrated by atheism, which is why the amount of great scientists universities bring forth has plummeted. Greatness and Creativity nowadays mostly comes from business-people, most of which are religious or spiritual themselves (e.g. Bill Gates). Greatness cannot come from a mind poised to defeat someone rather than be creative.

* Atheists have tried to polarize "Evolution vs. Creationism", which is a false dichotomy. Even the dim-witted recognize that they are not mutually exclusive but can easily be one and the same. Evolution can easily be a tool of Creation for example. The endless discussion on "this or that?" is partially promoted by the atheists.

* The mind of the atheist is infantile in that it makes conclusive statements about the nature of reality from the perspective of being a tiny body-mind in an outrageously vast universe. The sheer idiocy and arrogance of this is awesome. Neither is the attitude of "what we perceive is real, what we do not perceive is unreal" supported by science.

* The mind of the activist-atheist is infantile in that it thinks that when it likes the color red it has to decry the color blue. Rather than simply saying "I dont believe in God" and allowing others to believe whatever they want, he has to go out and shove his agenda down others throats. The menace to soiety begins when this agenda is fed to schoolchildren, universities and mass-media in the guise of "critical thinking" and endorsed by wildly popular "scientists" such as Richard Dawkins (author of the book "The God Delusion").

Left to its own, without being exposed, humanity will embrace atheism as the friendly savior from religious-fanaticism, thereby spilling the baby with the bathwater. And if "religious" fanatics are the only ones opposing them, their case will be strengthened. Militant and expansionist atheism needs to be countered with reason and logic, not bible verses.

Anyone in awe of the gift of life and the beauty of the Universe, anyone who knows there is more to life than the senses see, rejects atheism.

2. Religion: Menace to Society

* The problem with religion has been obvious to many religious and anti-religious people for a long time. Just like the extreme atheist, many a theist seems incapable of "Liking blue without badmouthing red". It is possible to honor ones own religion without attacking and wronging others. But the very nature of many religious texts themselves foster the "us vs. them", the "we are right, they are wrong". The result? Endless warfare and bloodshed. The solution would be a basic understanding of what it means to respect others, respect their belief-systems and honor them has the humans that they are.

* Much of religion actually strips the human being from a spiritual lifestyle, rather than providing it. Why? Because "God" or higher realities are not portrayed as experiential, but as distant, aloof, judgmental, vengeful, someone to kneel down and worship rather than connect to as an inner reality.

* It is obvious to many that the murderous acts committed "in the name of God" dont actually have anything to do with the kindness, beauty and respect towards humankind taught by Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, etc. And it is obvious that movements such as atheism arose from the sheer insanity and crimes against humanity instigated by "religion". The Bible says things such as: "The angels of darkness will appear as the angels of light". This sets the paranoid tone to reject anything that looks, sounds, feels good and embrace the suffering supposedly necessary to be "a good christian".

* Another well-known result of religion is projecting "the good life" to heaven or the next life or some elsewhere. The result of this is a lack of care for worldly events and affairs. Some would not might armageddon to befall earth so that they can get away already. Others dont mind blowing up schools and hospitals because 72 virgins await them in heaven. Hindu fatalism has millions not caring about the state of the slums in India because "it will all be better in the next life".

_________________________________________________

Atheism and Theism are the two dominant agendas of current society. As mere systems of thought that need not expand and be forced upon others, they do not pose a problem. But as militant-expansionist belief-systems (atheist-communist and religious-fascist) they are directly responsible for almost all the suffering of mankind.

Very nicely stated, and i suppose that's what its all about, co-existence. Its a reflection of humanity itself, we can't live with each other, two contradicting ideologies cannot either. I would however beg to differ with your argument regarding theist approaches and political associations, but that's for another day.

People are just looking for the thing some call 'God' in all the wrong places.

Starred.

[edit on 3/8/2009 by serbsta]

Originally posted by serbsta
I would however beg to differ with your argument regarding theist approaches and political associations

Explain, so that all my learn your view.

Congratulations on another high-class post, starred and flagged!

People at some point must derive some kind of fulfillment from extending their 'conflict' between one or another set of perspectives; because otherwise, what could possibly blinding them to the futility of the contrived and sensationalized 'confrontation' between science and religion.

I find it somehow disturbing that atheists and deists could waste time on matters of pure choice.

It's like going to war over 'less filling, taste's great' or 'chocolate v. vanilla.'

But then, I suppose some will contend that the friction is manufactured and fostered for nefarious reasons - or social-engineering purposes.

It's like, if you have no enemy, it someone's job to create one for you (and the media is only too happy to assist!)

Originally posted by Maxmars
People at some point must derive some kind of fulfillment from extending their 'conflict' between one or another set of perspectives; because otherwise, what could possibly blinding them to the futility of the contrived and sensationalized 'confrontation' between science and religion.

...and reflective of society as a whole, the artificial conflict as infiltrated 5 Forums (!) of this website:

BTS: Theology
ATS: Psychology/Metaphysics
ATS: Origins
ATS: Conspiracy in Religion
ATS: Science & Technology

Sometimes I wish I could say: Take your pointless discussion elsewhere.

But then, I suppose some will contend that the friction is manufactured and fostered for nefarious reasons - or social-engineering purposes.

It's like, if you have no enemy, it someone's job to create one for you (and the media is only too happy to assist!)

Engineered for sure. Sensationalize. Demonize. Antagonize.

Is there a middle ground in this matter? Where do you stand Skyfloating?
Anyway, awesome post S&F.

Well said, flagged.

I've been thinking the same for a while.. I don't know any particularly religious people, but I know many staunch atheists, and some of them are some of the most horrible people I've ever met.

The most greedy, selfish, uncaring. No thoughts for others, and no care for the earth (which is something I'm passionate about.. hence I rarely mention it on here to avoid the exact arguments you've described skyfloating

but as with everything, all 'hardcore' atheists mustn't be tarred with this same brush.
I spent this weekend living in a squat in a large city in the UK. Not a nasty smackhead squat, one where people live like its a commune, many musicians and artists live there spending their time learning from each other.
They have many anti-religion motifs and slogans all around the house.. 'NO GODS, NO MANAGERS' etc, but are some of the kindest, politest, friendliest people I've ever met.

Just trying to look at both sides of the coin..

Originally posted by Negotium of Verum
Is there a middle ground in this matter? Where do you stand Skyfloating?

Sure there`s a middle position one could stand at. Or one could not stand at any position at all. That would mean the person is totally open and accepts all positions. Standing at one position is kind of limiting in that it narrows ones perception to a singular point from which all else is understood. Know what I mean?

Personally, I accept a Supreme Being and higher realities, but also science and mechanistic paradigms. There's no conflict between the two at all. They are just two different frames, two different realms of context.

[edit on 3-8-2009 by Skyfloating]

Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors." - Isaac Newton

Atheism is a disease of the soul before it becomes an error of understanding." - Plato

Originally posted by Skyfloating
The perpetrators are never the moderate (=friendly) but the "explicit atheists", militant atheists and the religiously fanatic, the fundamentalist bigot. Both present a very real danger to common sense, ethical values, spirituality and humanities progress. Both begin as infantile and divisive rants at lectures and now on internet-forums and build momentum to cause hatred, destruction and stupidity on societal levels.

Same could be said about any belief or non-belief. My last thread i commented on was about a father who refused medical aid for his dying daughter, choosing instead to pray. She died. This was lacking in common sense, spirituality and humanitarian progress.

This thread could apply to anyone, not just 'militant atheists'. I agree in the sense that some of my friends disbelieve in God just to be 'different', but with me this isn't the case. I have truly thought long and hard about the universe and have ultimately realised that a God does not exist. Too many fallen religions prove this.

* Militant atheists focus on the very worst in Religion in order to "prove" their point. However, belief in a Supreme Creative Force does not automatically entail being a jihadist, suicide bomber, bigot or even having a religious dogma. The atmosphere has become so charged that when one questions the atheist agenda one is dismissed as a "religious nutcase". This is blatantly false. Putting the spiritually minded person in the same category as a suicide bomber (for example) is a distortion of reality, perpetrated by those who would like to consider themselves "critical thinkers".

Agreed. But when a religious community refuses to seperate the black sheep from their midst then they will all get tarred with the same brush. This has occured many times amongst paedophile priests, radical muslims, etc etc etc.

Also bear in mind that many atheists may have been brought up in a heavily religious household, so they have had first hand experience of the wrongs and rights of religion.

You are also assuming that an atheist cannot be spiritual. Belief in a soul is completely different to a belief in God. Seperating the spiritually minded from the religious or non religious is itself a distortion of reality. It doesn't matter what your beliefs are, you can be a spiritual buddhist or a spiritual atheist.

* A-theism has nothing to do with "free thought" as it is re-active rather than pro-active. The scope is narrowed to being anti-something rather than visionary. So without theism there would be no a-theism. A-theism is nothing more than a by-product of theism.

So a re-active state of mind has no free thought? How on earth did you decide this? Seperating yourself from thousands of years of control and limitations does not mean you cannot think for yourself.

* Psychologically, the fruits of atheism are moral relativism, apathy, non-accountability. Every religion has elements of accountability. In Hinduism its called Karma. In Christianity one is accountable to God. Without accountability it does not matter whether you go on a killing spree or not. The most atheistic country in the world is North Korea. The results of their atheist "Juche Ideology" are poverty, mass-starvation and blandness.

A half sided arguement. One that doesn't include the politics of man. One of the most religious places on the planet is Sierra Leone and the results of such a place includes mass starvation, mass murder, terrorism, infanticide and poverty.

What about Africa? Egypt? Afghanistan? Iraq? All these places have devout believers and it doesn't take a genius to figure out the problems there.

Also the idea that losing a religion effectively removes accountability is nonsense. I don't follow any religion, yet i truly believe in the rights of everyone, i even believe in karma... Yet i openly speak out against religion or at least some of them. So far i have not (to my knowledge) engaged in a killing spree. Neither have many of my atheist friends.

Of course atheism now uses the ideal of "ethics" as a cop-out, but without accountability there are no natural consequences of careless behavior.

A very, very shallow judgment and does little to back up your point.

* Militant atheists try to piggyback on science and the great things it has given to society. But it is not atheists such as Karl Marx who have made our world a better place, its science. Most of the great names of science...Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, Einstein, DaVinci, Max Planck, Edison, C.G. Jung, Freud were deeply religious and spiritual people. Since 10-20 years academia has been somewhat infiltrated by atheism, which is why the amount of great scientists universities bring forth has plummeted. Greatness and Creativity nowadays mostly comes from business-people, most of which are religious or spiritual themselves (e.g. Bill Gates). Greatness cannot come from a mind poised to defeat someone rather than be creative.

But again, you are tarring all athiests who have a strong dislike of religion with the same brush and also ignoring the idea that religion was of a more common stance in the days of Copernicus, Galileo and even Newton.

Not all atheists 'follow' the ideas of Karl Marx. Even the strongest militant atheists has their own opinion. It's a little thing called individuality.

* Atheists have tried to polarize "Evolution vs. Creationism", which is a false dichotomy. Even the dim-witted recognize that they are not mutually exclusive but can easily be one and the same. Evolution can easily be a tool of Creation for example. The endless discussion on "this or that?" is partially promoted by the atheists.

And the other half of the arguement has the backing of the devoutly religious. Again this arguement is devoid of a true point simply due to you ignoring the other half.

* The mind of the atheist is infantile in that it makes conclusive statements about the nature of reality from the perspective of being a tiny body-mind in an outrageously vast universe. The sheer idiocy and arrogance of this is awesome. Neither is the attitude of "what we perceive is real, what we do not perceive is unreal" supported by science.

The sheer arrogance of that statement is unbelievable.

* The mind of the activist-atheist is infantile in that it thinks that when it likes the color red it has to decry the color blue. Rather than simply saying "I dont believe in God" and allowing others to believe whatever they want, he has to go out and shove his agenda down others throats.

Try and find ONE thread where i have done such a thing. I bet you'll come back with many quotes of my self saying: 'I really don't mind what people believe in, as long as they don't shove it down MY throat'

The menace to soiety begins when this agenda is fed to schoolchildren, universities and mass-media in the guise of "critical thinking" and endorsed by wildly popular "scientists" such as Richard Dawkins (author of the book "The God Delusion").

Exactly the same could be said about school children being force fed the bible, Koran or anything else from a young and manipulative age. I think your problem lies in the education system and not in fact the atheist 'agenda'. Immerse anyone in any kind of overwhelming belief system and you will find problems.

Left to its own, without being exposed, humanity will embrace atheism as the friendly savior from religious-fanaticism, thereby spilling the baby with the bathwater. And if "religious" fanatics are the only ones opposing them, their case will be strengthened. Militant and expansionist atheism needs to be countered with reason and logic, not bible verses.

Agreed. First sensible thing you've said. But you can apply that to the overtly religious too.

Anyone in awe of the gift of life and the beauty of the Universe, anyone who knows there is more to life than the senses see, rejects atheism.

Silliest thing you've said so far. Another fail.

I believe there a a billion undiscovered wonders of the universe. I ponder them on a daily basis and do you know what.... They are truly more magnificent to me, because i don't believe a higher being created them. I am truly in awe of life and i don't need a book to pretend or guess as to what has created the beautiful mountains or breath taking wonders of earth or the universe.

You seem to be of the belief that anyone who rejects the idea of god in the strongest possible way is somehow morally weak, shallow minded, unthinking and devoid of spirituality.

You seem to believe that being anti-religious is a bad thing.

Great Post Skyfloating. I want to talk about the results of a thread titled "What will it take for you to Stop Believing!? (Deity)" made by Republican08.

www.belowtopsecret.com...

While Republican08 had the idea for a GREAT thread he immediately, in his first post, went on a rampage against religion and took a VERY hard line Militant Atheist tone.

I was very interested in hearing some of the replies from those of a Religious belief involving a Deity.

The results were very scary. The majority of the 35 or so results that I tallied took the stand that "Absolutely NOTHING would change their belief". I also include in this the statement that "Finding out at Death" would change their mind.

I think this is the attitude of the Militant Atheist as well for in another thread someone started what was almost the complete opposite of Republican08's thread. It is titled "What will it take for you to Believe!? (God)" started by Melissa101.

www.belowtopsecret.com...

The ironic thing is that this poster ALSO went on a rampage against Atheism and took a VERY hard line Militant Religious tone in the first post.

The results were much different in this thread but again you could determine who was militant in their responses. The people who would say that "Absolutely NOTHING would convince them that God exists" were adamant in that belief. There were also some "Finding out at Death" statements made.

I think these two threads totally validate your thread OP. Being 100% in either direction of the spectrum where we cannot think outside the box causes us very large problems as a society.

Faith without doubt is fanaticism. Knowledge of ANY subject without allowing for a counter argument to be considered is a closed mind. When we say that there is absolutely no amount of evidence that will change our minds, religion or ANY subject, then are up ship creek without a paddle.






[edit on 3-8-2009 by TurkeyBurgers]

* Psychologically, the fruits of atheism are moral relativism, apathy, non-accountability. Every religion has elements of accountability. In Hinduism its called Karma. In Christianity one is accountable to God. Without accountability it does not matter whether you go on a killing spree or not. The most atheistic country in the world is North Korea. The results of their atheist "Juche Ideology" are poverty, mass-starvation and blandness.

Another country with high levels of atheism is Sweden. Almost 80% of the population i belive are atheist.

www.adherents.com...

dailyatheist.blogspot.com...

www.gadling.com...

So far i've not seen poverty, mass starvation and blandness in Sweden.

Your arguement has seriously been blown out of the water. Sorry.

reply to post by Skyfloating


In reply to those quotes I will give you one in return that might help to change the way that you think of Atheism as a word.

"In fact, "atheism" is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non-astrologer" or a "non-alchemist." We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs."
— Sam Harris , Letter to a Christian Nation

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours"

- Stephen Roberts

--

"And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence"

- Bertrand Russell

Atheists have tried to polarize "Evolution vs. Creationism", which is a false dichotomy. Even the dim-witted recognize that they are not mutually exclusive but can easily be one and the same. Evolution can easily be a tool of Creation for example. The endless discussion on "this or that?" is partially promoted by the atheists. -Skyfloating

I would also like to debate this statement. I would debate your statement because I think that Creationists like to think that if Creationism were proven to be a valid theory it would immediately provide evidence for the existence of the God that they believe.

In fact there is nothing further from the truth.

Creationism would do nothing of the sort. Creationism could be the result of MANY different things if it were to be proven valid. It could be an advanced Intelligent Species that created Life on Earth. It could end up being a intergalactic Virus and creation turned out to be it's waste byproduct. It could be that Zeus and Apollo and the Greek Gods were the ones who created everything. It could be that alternate dimensions exist and somehow The Earth and life on it was duplicated in some bizarre event that gave it the appearance of Creation.

The existence of God takes it's own Theory. We would need Proof and Evidence of God to provide proof for the Existence of God. NOT creationism as many Creationists like to believe.

Proving Evolution wrong also would not make Creationism RIGHT.

Creationism Versus Evolution is not an argument of God vs. Science. It is Science versus Science.





[edit on 3-8-2009 by TurkeyBurgers]

Discussion at last! May discussion be fruitful.

Originally posted by mr-lizard
a father who refused medical aid for his dying daughter, choosing instead to pray. She died. This was lacking in common sense, spirituality and humanitarian progress.

Yes. Denying science has nothing to do with a wholesome attitude, much less with a spiritual one. Neither are people like that representative of what a belief in a Supreme Being entails.

I have truly thought long and hard about the universe and have ultimately realised that a God does not exist.

In actuality, you do not know whether higher realities exist or not, so you cannot conclude that they dont exist.

paedophile priests, radical muslims...


Also bear in mind that many atheists may have been brought up in a heavily religious household, so they have had first hand experience of the wrongs and rights of religion.

Taking the insanity of religion as proof that a Supreme Being does not exist is an error in thinking. A belief in higher realities and spiritual accountability has nothing to do with pedophilia and terrorism...in fact, it forbids it.

You are also assuming that an atheist cannot be spiritual. you can be a spiritual buddhist or a spiritual atheist.

Not really. The term spiritual implies a higher reality of intelligent design, a spirit beyond the body. I dont know of any spiritual system that decries higher realms and supreme beings.

So a re-active state of mind has no free thought? How on earth did you decide this? Seperating yourself from thousands of years of control and limitations does not mean you cannot think for yourself.

Atheism is not free of theism but merely its opposite. In order to be free from it one would need to invest in something different entirely. In other words: Attack is not solved by attack.

A half sided arguement. One that doesn't include the politics of man. One of the most religious places on the planet is Sierra Leone and the results of such a place includes mass starvation, mass murder, terrorism, infanticide and poverty.

Correct. Hence naming religion as another menace to society.

Also the idea that losing a religion effectively removes accountability is nonsense. I don't follow any religion, yet i truly believe in the rights of everyone, i even believe in karma...

If you believe in karma you are not an atheist. Karma is a hinduistic concept. There is no religion in the world that has more Gods and Deities than Hinduism.

Exactly the same could be said about school children being force fed the bible, Koran or anything else from a young and manipulative age. I think your problem lies in the education system and not in fact the atheist 'agenda'. Immerse anyone in any kind of overwhelming belief system and you will find problems.

The wrong of religions does not justify creating an atheist agenda that forbids mention of higher realities / a supreme deity.

I believe there a a billion undiscovered wonders of the universe. I ponder them on a daily basis and do you know what.... They are truly more magnificent to me, because i don't believe a higher being created them.

There is nothing inherently wrong with there possibly being more superior beings and some of the humility that goes along with pondering that. The idea "superior beings dont exist" as an absolute statement is questionable.

You seem to be of the belief that anyone who rejects the idea of god in the strongest possible way is somehow morally weak, shallow minded, unthinking and devoid of spirituality.

I think that does who state with certainty that there are no higher realities are deluded, morally weak and shallow minded, yes. If they were to state that as a possibility rather than a certainty I´d have more respect.

You seem to believe that being anti-religious is a bad thing.

...thats why I rant about religion being a menace to society?

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers


Thanks for those very relevant examples. Its because of shock at the absolute certainty with which these two sides muddy impressionable minds that I protest. The absolute certainty = fanaticism = all the ills of the world.

I would argue that we CAN find a middle ground.

The middle ground of not being militant, of not being fundamentalist.

We CAN each have our own opinion of what the evidence that we have seen means to us. We CAN be Atheist and Theist. What we CANNOT afford to be is Fundamentalist or Militant. BOTH sided have to be willing to say that there is the possibility that they are wrong and the other side is right, no matter how slim that possibility is we need to acknowledge that it does indeed exist.

Without recognizing that we may indeed be wrong in our beliefs there can never exist a meaningful dialog between Atheists and Theists.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Discussion at last! May discussion be fruitful.

Hurrah!

In actuality, you do not know whether higher realities exist or not, so you cannot conclude that they dont exist.

My conclusions are based upon my own thought. A religious man cannot conclude that heaven or reincarnation exists then....

Taking the insanity of religion as proof that a Supreme Being does not exist is an error in thinking. A belief in higher realities and spiritual accountability has nothing to do with pedophilia and terrorism...in fact, it forbids it.

No... re-read what i was talking about. Many people fear that revealing the faults in their own religion will somehow make it worse. I was not basing my own thought upon the faults of a few.

ot really. The term spiritual implies a higher reality of intelligent design, a spirit beyond the body. I dont know of any spiritual system that decries higher realms and supreme beings.

But... Not all Buddists believe in a supreme being. And why do you assume that only the religious can believe in other realms or dimensions?

Can the spirit be a harmonic state of being? This does not require the belief of any god. Only the belief in vibrations and atomic states.

Atheism is not free of theism but merely its opposite. In order to be free from it one would need to invest in something different entirely. In other words: Attack is not solved by attack.

No... And this is the mine field that Theists have created. Atheism was truly the very first belief (or lack of) system, if that makes sense. Since then mankind has made it impossible to get away from religion without comparison.

If you believe in karma you are not an atheist. Karma is a hinduistic concept. There is no religion in the world that has more Gods and Deities than Hinduism.

And Buddists believe in Karma. There is no religion/philosophy that has as few dieties and gods.

The wrong of religions does not justify creating an atheist agenda that forbids mention of higher realities / a supreme deity.

It does not justify it, nor did i state anything of the sort...? I LOVE reading about the myriad religions of the planet. But i don't believe in any of them.

There is nothing inherently wrong with there possibly being more superior beings and some of the humility that goes along with pondering that. The idea "superior beings dont exist" as an absolute statement is questionable.

I never said there was. But again there is nothing inherently wrong with having the opposite idea.

I think that does who state with certainty that there are no higher realities are deluded, morally weak and shallow minded, yes. If they were to state that as a possibility rather than a certainty I´d have more respect.

But there could be a thousand reasons someone has become an atheist. You are straying into the territory of the devout here.

Those who only believe in the possibility of God are called Agnostic. You could say that those who aren't sure ARE the one's who are morally weak and shallow minded, but again this would be wrong.