Comments on: What atheism isn’t

By: Sokratesz

Sokratesz — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 14:34:09 +0000

I dunno, I found some bits of it interesting but it wasn't clear where you were going with the story.

By: Hang

Hang — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:19:52 +0000

You realize I'm atheist right?

By: Sokratesz

Sokratesz — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:50:58 +0000

`''If I went on about how Satan buried those fossils as a test of my faith, you could safely label me a-dinosaur as I’ve made an active assertion about how the world could be without dinosaurs.''

Obvious troll is obvious.

By: Sokratesz

Sokratesz — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:50:08 +0000

''If I went on about how Satan buried those fossils as a test of my faith, you could safely label me a-dinosaur as I’ve made an active assertion about how the world could be without dinosaurs.''

By: Xianhang Zhang

Xianhang Zhang — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:38:51 +0000

This is where I disagree with you on a factual basis. People born with an absense of religious doctrine don't become atheists, they become animists. They invent weather gods & tree spirits rather than nothing.

By: star_stuff

star_stuff — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:50:05 +0000

I think the point here is that, as the argument says, people aren't born with religious beliefs until they are exposed to them and often indoctrinated. What you are debating about, by focusing on the definition of atheism, is semantics and deflates the entire point of the born atheist argument.

Consider, instead, that in the absence religious doctrine the person then has the capacity to make an intelligent decision about not believing in God. Thus, by being born in a state of tabula rasa, the individual can later become atheist naturally. The 'born atheist' argument is metaphorical for the newborn in that it empowers atheism when children are raised without indoctrination.

By: Hang

Hang — Sat, 09 May 2009 02:25:40 +0000

Read the preceding and following sentences and it makes sense:

Because this distinction is not made clear, most of the Christians I talk to believe that atheists are God deniers. Atheists are atheists because the implications of a God existing is so morally threatening that atheists must construct a psychological shield that justifies their immorality and secularism. The idea that atheists are actually capable of answering the preceeding questions is so astounding that it’s never even considered.

By: Hang

Hang — Sat, 09 May 2009 02:25:00 +0000

Read the preceding and following sentences and it makes sense:

By: Anon

Anon — Sat, 09 May 2009 01:56:04 +0000

“Atheists are atheists because the implications of a God existing is so morally threatening that atheists must construct a psychological shield that justifies their immorality and secularism.”

Respond to the fact that you just claimed that all atheists are inherently immoral. On what grounds could you possibly make this claim?

Please clarify the claim that atheists label themselves atheists to protect themselves from the ‘morally threatening’ possibility of a god existing.

By: Anon

Anon — Sat, 09 May 2009 01:56:00 +0000

“Atheists are atheists because the implications of a God existing is so morally threatening that atheists must construct a psychological shield that justifies their immorality and secularism.”

Respond to the fact that you just claimed that all atheists are inherently immoral. On what grounds could you possibly make this claim?

Please clarify the claim that atheists label themselves atheists to protect themselves from the ‘morally threatening’ possibility of a god existing.