Why I'm not an Atheist

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


i used the word 'gave up' in context of giving up search of 'is there a God?'
If thats not the case then i will take back my words.
I never intended to show you as a loser etc
It was a natural conclusion from your statements that you dont bother about questions of existence and purpose rather just try to live this life.
You rejecting christianity as ff said to correct me is not synonymous to rejecting God.
Someone who rejects christianity doesnt automatically become atheist.
To become atheist you had to give up believing in existence of God.
I am confused as to why my words got such an intense response.

So if i understand the OP properly. It is pretty much saying.. when someone confronts you and belittle you for not believing in their god or any god...

You should just shut up walk away?

I think atheists probably doing that for 4.000-5,000 years, and nothing seems to come out of it.

This century is probably the first when Atheist are talking back. and It seems appalling because religious had the monopoly on their stance for thousands of years. so when there is an opposite opinion, and there is no laws to prosecute them or hang them, so they see it as something truly evil they needed to be stopped.

Atheists were passive in the past, now they are more active... if such ignorance go unheeded, Atheists will get more ostracized and looked down... i think its sort of like pendulum effect.

The point of Atheists is to establish a stance, saying, hey there is possibility, that all of these gods may not exist, which is lack an belief in them.

I'm probably Agnostic Atheists too... i mean i do not think anyone can be 100% atheist. Unless in the near future a group of people, separated from rest of god influenced world brought up believe in nature, where they would actually be 100% atheists, but then again they probably would not know that until they confront a Theist.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis

Well, let's look at what you said earlier: It’s difficult to find what separates, if anything, one form of dogmatism over the other. This need to promote one's doctrine as superior is merely a plight of petty vanity, one I no longer wish to take part in.

Your words. You'd have us believe you're above the fray - and yet, here you are...promoting your views, pointing out that how others choose to define themselves or express themselves is somehow beneath you. You're here defending your banner, your religiosity and your dignity - but you can't seem to do it without judging everyone else

Yes I cannot deny that, except you're still arguing about deities,something you know doesn't exist. I'm arguing about religion in general, something that exists. One day kids get tired of playing with fisher-price and move on to lego.

I'm defending my views, while you defend the views of an entire group known as atheists. You're defending the label and not yourself, much like the Christian or the Muslim. Big difference that you have failed to admit.

As I said earlier, believing in deities or not is simply a matter of taste, but you make it sound like it’s life and limb. It is the 21st century. They don’t burn atheists at the stake anymore.

Indifferent to religion - give me a freaking break :-)

A break from what? This is verified by observation. But first one will actually have to take a look before concluding. Remember, you asked if I knew any ‘real atheists,’ as if they differed in some way. Maybe I should instead grab some fried chicken and some corndogs along the Hudson to find those ‘real atheists’.

Please do explain - how is convincing not proselytizing? How does one 'convince' anyone that atheism works? And then, finally - why do you want to convince anyone of anything? What is this indifference of which you speak

You said I was attempting to convince, not I. So please, tell me how one who leads by example is proselytizing. Or do you still not understand the expression?

Well, since you do acknowledge the differences, you should also factor in that here in the trenches - being indifferent is not a luxury we can afford. If we don't speak up - we live by the laws of the religious
think better :-)

You follow those laws perfectly.

Act better.

reply to post by luciddream

So if i understand the OP properly. It is pretty much saying.. when someone confronts you and belittle you for not believing in their god or any god...

No I'm saying you shouldn't do the exact same thing unless you are a hypocrite and employ double-standards.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Yes I cannot deny that, except you're still arguing about deities, something you know doesn't exist.

I'm not helping you have the conversation you want to have - am I? :-)

Sorry about that - you'll have to find someone else to give you what you're looking for. Maybe start a new thread - and rethink your 'style' of writing

I'm not arguing about deities. I haven't brought them up - not deities or religion - that's all on you

I'm arguing against your OP

The OP where you have decided to be judgmental - and divisive. You put yourself in the superior position - all the while going on and on about how we should all be - indifferent

(Indifference...as if this is something we should all value)

Like life isn't hard enough - now we've got some atheists telling other atheists they're not real - then just exactly how they should behave

Wow

You're indifferent - not at all proselytizing - and you're just walkin' the walk...

:-)

We're done here I think - unless you want to discuss what we're actually discussing - then I'm totally up for it

later gator - catch you on the flip side

Spira

reply to post by luciddream

This century is probably the first when Atheist are talking back. and It seems appalling because religious had the monopoly on their stance for thousands of years. so when there is an opposite opinion, and there is no laws to prosecute them or hang them, so they see it as something truly evil they needed to be stopped.

So true luciddream. The OP must be new. Or, maybe he thinks somehow we should be - less annoying:

When someone asks us: "Are you atheist?" rather than say yes, we should say "No, I'm not religious," thereby cleansing ourselves all stigma that the label 'atheist' carries with it, eliminating thousands of years of baggage, assumptions, misrepresentations, and misdeeds performed by other atheists that come with such a label.

...cleansing ourselves all stigma that the label 'atheist' carries with it...

Maybe this is a clue to unraveling the mystery of the OP's message?

:-)

reply to post by Spiramirabilis

I'm not arguing about deities. I haven't brought them up - not deities or religion - that's all on you

I was under the impression that all atheism amounted to was a 'disbelief' in deities as mentioned many times in the thread. So if we're not talking about deities, why are you here defending your position on deities, your atheism, when it's not even being discussed? That was my point: atheism is becoming politicized, structured, promoting group-think, irrationality, and an act-before-you-think mentality, which you've helped prove by attacking me and not my ideas.

I'm arguing against your OP

"...making yourself out to be some kind of hero"

"Your OP is a passive aggressive rant - accusatory, judgmental and insulting "

"If not - then this whole chat we're having is a silly waste of time (you egoist you) "

"You're not an atheist - so you can't renounce atheism. Your OP is a ruse "

"Ahem... Why should we care? You do get my point don't you? :-) "

"You do mean to proselytize then - in a one hand clapping kinda way."

"You're on some kind of milquetoast crusade to make the atheists more palatable - tolerable?"

"I love a good rant, but I prefer an honest one - even when it isn't pretty."

"one day, maybe, if I am very fortunate - I'll find myself sucking down espresso somewhere along the Champs-Élysées with the true atheist elite "

"you'll have to find someone else to give you what you're looking for. Maybe start a new thread - and rethink your 'style' of writing "

"Like life isn't hard enough - now we've got some atheists telling other atheists they're not real - then just exactly how they should behave "

"You're indifferent - not at all proselytizing - and you're just walkin' the walk... :-) "

"The OP must be new. Or, maybe he thinks somehow we should be - less annoying: "


This is what your arguments amount to, ad hominem, trying to make me look bad so you can feel better about yourself and your atheism. Avoid my arguments, I wouldn't expect anything less, but your religiosity is quite apparent.

You're right, we are done here.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Did I hurt your feelings LesMisanthrope?

I am not indifferent

But - I am - a lot of things

Same as you

:-)

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


Not at all actually, only a little disappointed. To be honest I expected more.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


That might be because you and I were having different conversations

Like I said - you want to have the same conversation at the same time - I'm there

But as long as I'm here LesMisanthrope - what's the point of your OP?

I'm still wondering

(humor my friend - and there, there)

:-)

reply to post by logical7

Originally posted by logical7
I am confused as to why my words got such an intense response.

I didn't mean to be intense. Sorry. But reading over my last post, I can see how you might get that impression.

It really is OK with me, whatever words you want to use. I just wanted to give you more information about my "search" and how I came to believe what I believe today.

You could say that I "gave up believing in the existence of God". Similarly I "gave up believing" in the existence of Santa Clause. I think of it more in these terms: I realized how illogical and improbable the entirety of religion (including God and the bible) really is. When I sat back and asked myself, "What are you actually believing here"? I had to face the hard fact that I had been brainwashed and indoctrinated with a fanciful story my whole life (as has most of the planet) and although it was very hard, I had to "give up" the security and comfort I felt believing in that story. That was the hardest part. Because then, I had to own that I really am responsible for my actions and my being, and there was no one to "turn to" when things were going badly in my life. No one's hands I could put my problems in. No comfort from knowing that I would be rewarded in the afterlife.

It was very hard to give up. But when the belief vanishes in the face of logic, there's really not much to do about it. I can't "pretend" that I believe.

Since then, I have become totally comfortable with my situation. I have relearned that I AM responsible for myself. I turn to myself when I need help. I have an amazing resource in myself! I don't need to put my problems in someone's hands, because I can handle them just fine on my own. And I can comfort myself. I'm amazingly strong and I feel SO much better about myself, I can't even describe it.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis

But as long as I'm here LesMisanthrope - what's the point of your OP?

I'm still wondering

(humor my friend - and there, there)

Really, all I wanted to do was share my opinions, observations and conclusions in regards to an ever-growing movement.

Why is atheism becoming politicized, persecuted, idealized, more and more structured and thus increasingly fanatical, when all it amounts to is the completely irrelevant personal choice in whether one believes in a deity or not?

In other words, why are we allowing ourselves to become increasingly religious like our theist friends? Isn't this religiosity the mentality that causes all the problems in the first place?

As I 'proselytized' earlier, although I was hoping to leave it up to interpretation, why don't we instead step away from this dogmatism and show that believing in a deity or not is completely unnecessary, nor is being religious about it, and that one can simply leave that mentality behind in favor of something more practical?

Atheism has a long history. Names such as Giordono Bruno, Vanini and Socrates remind me of the stigma the label atheist once had. Atheist was a derogatory term thrown on those the church deemed heretical and blasphemous. It comes with certain historical baggage which can be used against the one who bears it.

I just don't see the logical reason behind accepting the label in the first place.

Yes, by definition, I am an atheist. But I don't wish to align myself with the dogmatic expressions, the billboards, the maliciousness, the nationalism, the idealism, the stigma, and the group-think. So I simply refuse the label (assuming that's possible), the history and the need to meet the demands of that label.

It's tough to describe, but I can better define what I am not more-so than what I am; and by observing other atheists, I am not an atheist.

I hope this helps a little bit. Maybe not.

Do you wish to share some suggestions? Maybe there's a better way to do without the religiosity (for lack of a better term) involved in defending one's label?

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

It's tough to describe, but I can better define what I am not more-so than what I am; and by observing other atheists, I am not an atheist.

I hope this helps a little bit. Maybe not.

That sounds like that might be the true you

it helps - a lot

I can better define what I am by being opinionated - and dogged

(that's not the same as dogmatic - so don't have a go at me)

:-)

a star for this post - and a real reply later...it will have to wait for a bit

laters LesMisanthrope

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Why is atheism becoming politicized, persecuted, idealized, more and more structured and thus increasingly fanatical, when all it amounts to is the completely irrelevant personal choice in whether one believes in a deity or not?

I think it's a natural response to oppression, criticism, and discrimination. I don't join ANY movement or cause, but I do understand those who do. It's natural for a person who's being ridiculed, to band together with those of like mind (or who agree on one thing), to justify one's position and basically not feel alone in the world. These are human beings, after all. With the same vulnerabilities and frailties as everyone else.

Secondly, there's power in numbers. If I was being harassed or denied something because of my personal opinions, I may feel the need to join with a group for support. But probably not. It's just not me. I would likely use the law to stop it.

Discrimination against atheists in the United States occurs in legal, personal, social, and professional contexts. Some American atheists compare their situation to the discrimination faced by ethnic minorities, LGBT communities, and women. "Americans still feel it's acceptable to discriminate against atheists in ways considered beyond the pale for other groups," asserted Fred Edwords of the American Humanist Association. However, other atheists reject these comparisons, arguing that while atheists may face disapproval they have not faced significant oppression or discrimination.

In the United States, six state constitutions officially include religious tests that would effectively prevent atheists from holding public office, and in some cases being a juror/witness, though these have not generally been enforced since the early nineteenth century.

Source

That's why some people join together - to fight these insane laws and prejudices more effectively. If you're not being discriminated against, then it's all good.

As I 'proselytized' earlier, although I was hoping to leave it up to interpretation, why don't we instead step away from this dogmatism and show that believing in a deity or not is completely unnecessary, nor is being religious about it, and that one can simply leave that mentality behind in favor of something more practical?

Fairness and equality have been hammered into our brains ever since kindergarten, if not before. Is it FAIR that religious groups can advertise on billboards, TV, the Internet, and on buses, but when an atheist advertises that their God might be a pipe dream, people petition (sometimes successfully) to have the ads removed? Regardless whether you agree on advertising atheism, we do have free speech in this country. If someone wants to advertise, let them!

Why should all atheists "join together" and "step away from this dogmatism and show that believing in a deity or not is completely unnecessary"??? Most of us have and do. But the squeaky wheel... And I'm actually thankful for them. Without the squeaky wheels, there would be more discrimination than there is today. Likely a LOT more.

Yes, by definition, I am an atheist. But I don't wish to align myself with the dogmatic expressions, the billboards, the maliciousness, the nationalism, the idealism, the stigma, and the group-think. So I simply refuse the label

And that's your choice. Suggesting that others make the same choice as you (which IS what you're doing) is to suggest that we all do things alike... It SEEMS like you're asking other atheists to join your branch of atheism: Those who are atheists, but don't take the label...

It's tough to describe, but I can better define what I am not more-so than what I am; and by observing other atheists, I am not an atheist.

You're just generalizing. Because atheists come in ALL shapes and sizes (metaphorically speaking), You're assuming that atheists are made up of the militant and outspoken atheists who make the billboards. But those are the few...

I am a woman. But I don't wear makeup, heels or dresses. I am not "feminine". I don't shave, I don't get mani/pedis or use "product" on my hair. I employ logic FAR more than emotion. I live with four dogs in the high desert on a farm, which makes for a dirty house. And I don't care. I am SO different than MOST women. Yet, I do not denounce the label, NOR DO I DEFEND IT - Just because most women are different than I am.

It SEEMS that you denounce the label "atheist" because you don't want to be seen as a militant atheist. You defend your chosen label of "Not an atheist". And that's fine. But you can't expect people with different ideas to conform.

I've run out of characters... LOL

Really, all I wanted to do was share my opinions, observations and conclusions in regards to an ever-growing movement.

And with such fervor! :-)
The turn-the-other-cheek-indifference thing is not really your schtick I think :-)

Why is atheism becoming politicized, persecuted, idealized, more and more structured and thus increasingly fanatical, when all it amounts to is the completely irrelevant personal choice in whether one believes in a deity or not?

There are more of us now - increasingly - and this is what happens

We live in a time when you can say out loud you don't believe in god and live your life accordingly. Should we give up ground? Not unlike what's happened to feminism (as just one example) when real victories are had and it feels like we've achieved what we were fighting for - seems like we might be able to drop the apprehension and quit struggling. There are a generation or two of young women now that don't understand that things are not exactly equal because they feel things are equal enough. They weren't here for the times when it wasn't equal - at all

I'm not sure where you live or how old you are, things being relative and all that - it may seem to you that the war was won a while back and there's no point in making a fuss anymore. And to some extent maybe that's true - in some places. But look around at this world - outside the cozy cafes of Paris or Stockholm - religious groups are increasingly political. They mean to claim territory - and if you value a secular world where people of all types are making decisions that work for all of us - together - you'll understand that sometimes you have to stand together and make some noise

Most people don't wear their philosophical, spiritual or political beliefs on their sleeve - there's no need. Sometimes I think there is a need. These days the atheists have a voice and some clout - we are getting all political - and uppity. Thank god :-)
In God We Must
Why won’t the U.S. accept its atheists?

We had met in a private room because Johnson worried that anywhere else in the town, people might overhear us and be offended by her godlessness. No wonder she often feels alone in her non-belief. But Johnson is far from unique. As I found out when I travelled across the US last year, atheists live in isolation and secrecy all over the country. In a nation that celebrates freedom of religion like no other, freedom not to be religious at all can be as hard to exercise as the right to swim the Atlantic.

As atheism rises, America declines

According to The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, one in five American households profess no religious affiliation. That can't be too surprising to anyone who understands human nature or historical trends. A prosperous society built upon the back of the very values espoused in the Judeo-Christian worldview inevitably yields to satisfaction, complacency and arrogance -- the belief that our material possessions, our comforts, our good fortune are all the result of our own hands. Soon it's more than just not "needing" God for our provision. Man rebels against Him, and is offended by the mere suggestion of His authority. This culminates in an inevitable downward slouch that has accompanied so many great civilizations of the past. So it appears to be with us.

Granted, the number of "nones," as these trendy hipsters like to call themselves, is not overwhelming, but it's certainly higher than it should be if we were still a humble and rational people. The inversion of those two principles (humility and rationality) is one of the most stunning things about the atheist. They claim to be people of reason, yet eschew and despise its very foundation. They fail to grasp that apart from the eternal consistency provided by the biblical God, they would have absolutely no basis for reason at all.

He's entitled to his opinion - and his beliefs. So am I. In a truly secular society this wouldn't be a problem - we'd live side by side in peace

As I 'proselytized' earlier, although I was hoping to leave it up to interpretation, why don't we instead step away from this dogmatism and show that believing in a deity or not is completely unnecessary, nor is being religious about it, and that one can simply leave that mentality behind in favor of something more practical?

Someday maybe - but not yet. In certain parts of the world - and maybe all of them - decisions are made for everyone based on the beliefs of some. And they won't let it go. In some countries they're killing each other over religion - in others school curriculum is decided, the bodies of women are controlled, politicians elected and laws made

What are our options? Do we pretend that these things don't affect us to the point where eventually we're forced to live our lives as clandestine atheists? Look at the numbers in this country - the United States - we are a minority

Atheism has a long history. Names such as Giordono Bruno, Vanini and Socrates remind me of the stigma the label atheist once had. Atheist was a derogatory term thrown on those the church deemed heretical and blasphemous. It comes with certain historical baggage which can be used against the one who bears it.

I just don't see the logical reason behind accepting the label in the first place.

:-) Honestly I don't know how to respond to this - the answer is in your question

Yes, by definition, I am an atheist. But I don't wish to align myself with the dogmatic expressions, the billboards, the maliciousness, the nationalism, the idealism, the stigma, and the group-think. So I simply refuse the label (assuming that's possible), the history and the need to meet the demands of that label.

That is your right - and your choice. Godspeed and all that :-)

I'm going to continue to be mouthy when need be

Do you wish to share some suggestions? Maybe there's a better way to do without the religiosity (for lack of a better term) involved in defending one's label?

I admire your desire for a more genteel world - but we humans come in so many varieties - some of us more this than that - others so much more that than this

Sometimes we have to allow each other find our own level - if you know what I mean

Some of us are scrappers - some of us are scrappers that want to be doves

:-)

Anyhow - I like the mix. I admire most the people who live honorable lives that are true to their own nature - whatever that might be

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

I think it's a natural response to oppression, criticism, and discrimination. I don't join ANY movement or cause, but I do understand those who do. It's natural for a person who's being ridiculed, to band together with those of like mind (or who agree on one thing), to justify one's position and basically not feel alone in the world. These are human beings, after all. With the same vulnerabilities and frailties as everyone else.

I can agree with this; but to band together and ridicule others, and make them feel alone is not changing anything. In fact, it makes things worse. It becomes oppression, criticism and discrimination.

It SEEMS like you're asking other atheists to join your branch of atheism: Those who are atheists, but don't take the label...

I haven't created a branch of atheism, nor am I asking anyone to join it. My attacking atheism is no different than you attacking Christianity. I'm laughing and pointing at the absurdities, contradictions and the hypocrisy that is never adressed. Of course, anyone trapped in the closed-mindedness of religion would see as if I'm trying to be some prophet. I'm simply not. I'm sharing an opinion and ideas.

You're just generalizing. Because atheists come in ALL shapes and sizes (metaphorically speaking), You're assuming that atheists are made up of the militant and outspoken atheists who make the billboards. But those are the few...

That's quite obvious and I already pointed that out.

I am a woman. But I don't wear makeup, heels or dresses. I am not "feminine". I don't shave, I don't get mani/pedis or use "product" on my hair. I employ logic FAR more than emotion. I live with four dogs in the high desert on a farm, which makes for a dirty house. And I don't care. I am SO different than MOST women. Yet, I do not denounce the label, NOR DO I DEFEND IT - Just because most women are different than I am.

You were physically born a woman. There's no changing that unless you did so physically. There is no similarity between the two labels. The label atheist, like Christian, is a matter of personal taste.

It SEEMS that you denounce the label "atheist" because you don't want to be seen as a militant atheist. You defend your chosen label of "Not an atheist". And that's fine. But you can't expect people with different ideas to conform.

"Not an atheist" isn't a label. "Atheist" is a label, and I am not that label. In other words, if someone asked me to choose a label to describe my religious beliefs I wouldn't use the term "atheist." There is no label here.

I denounce the label for the reasons stated, basically because atheism being too religious.

But you can't expect people with different ideas to conform.

Exactly. So why do you argue for atheism if you cannot expect others to conform?

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


I'll have to respond later. Must go to work. Thanks for replying.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
I can agree with this; but to band together and ridicule others, and make them feel alone is not changing anything. In fact, it makes things worse. It becomes oppression, criticism and discrimination.

That's part of progression. If people stopped fighting when it gets hard, we would still be living in the UK. (Not that that's a bad thing, I'm making a point)

I haven't created a branch of atheism, nor am I asking anyone to join it. My attacking atheism is no different than you attacking Christianity.

But I don't attack Christianity. I support freedom of religion. I don't agree with some Christian's views, and I give my opinion in it, but I don't attack people or their religion.

You were physically born a woman.

So what? What does it matter if I was born into or choose a label? It STILL describes who I am.

"Not an atheist" isn't a label.

OK. I disagree.

I denounce the label for the reasons stated, basically because atheism being too religious.

OK. You think atheism is a religious position. Fine. I have already shown (and you agreed) that not all atheists are without religion, and not all who believe in God belong to a religion. so they are two different things. But if you insist on seeing it as a religious position, that's your choice.

I'm SURE you have other labels in life you have chosen and weren't' born with, but you've taken my queries about that as an ad hominem. So, I am left without anything to say.

So, you denounce the label. Continue to do so because it doesn't matter to me WHAT you call yourself (or don't call yourself).

Exactly. So why do you argue for atheism if you cannot expect others to conform?

Show me ONCE where I have argued "for atheism". The only thing I do regarding atheism OR religion is state my personal beliefs. I have NO interest whatsoever in having people believe as I do, or to accept my beliefs. I simply don't care what choices people make. It's none of my business.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


Great input Spiramirabilis.

There's not much I can argue with here and I appreciate the honesty. Although I disagree with the methodology, I agree with the motivation behind it.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Although I disagree with the methodology, I agree with the motivation behind it.

I could say the exact same thing - so I will

There's more to what you were saying than even you seem to see

(that's not a criticism )

Maybe someday we'll be past all this nonsense LesMisanthrope

:-)