LOL @ Bill O

[redandguilty]

Dunno of any agnostic or atheist dirges that would motivate or rally the "troops" to "battle"...like for example...when I sang "Onward Christian Soldiers" along with my classmates in parochial grade school.

Or did I miss any that the late Madalyn Murray O'Hair might have composed?

Do any anthems of atheist states count? I might have heard one in the Hunt for Red October...

 

[redandguilty]

so calling it a "religion" seems a bit of a stretch.

I don't think it qualifies as a religion, but it is a religious belief. It's on the same shelf as theism.

edit...I'm not sure about assigning the word "religious" to it. It's certainly a belief and not a religion though.

 

[redandguilty]

I think atheism is a belief that some atheists adhere to "religiously" and some don't. You can be atheist to a degree the same way theists are. But it's not technically a religiously held belief. It's religious in the way the word is commonly used, not implying adherence to an organization, just adhered to with unshakable conviction. People use the word religiously to describe habits that have nothing to do with religion. But without the organization, that's the only way I can see getting away with using the word.

 

[Michchamp]

Do atheist governments count as organizations?

well, what do you mean? technically most governments (outside of the middle east) SHOULD be atheist.

 

[redandguilty]

well, what do you mean? technically most governments (outside of the middle east) SHOULD be atheist.

should be agnostic. few have been atheist.

 

[Michchamp]

I think atheism is a belief that some atheists adhere to "religiously" and some don't. You can be atheist to a degree the same way theists are. But it's not technically a religiously held belief. It's religious in the way the word is commonly used, not implying adherence to an organization, just adhered to with unshakable conviction. People use the word religiously to describe habits that have nothing to do with religion. But without the organization, that's the only way I can see getting away with using the word.

it's the absence of religion, not another variety of it. Simply saying "I don't believe in things that aren't or can't theoretically be proven by physical observation or test" does not require a religious belief, faith, or anything like that.

now are you going to say to me "What about your chemistry book? You believe that right? Did you personally test every theorem, principle and law in it? NO?!?!? OH... LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE USING 'FAITH' JUST LIKE PAT ROBERTSON, REVEREND MOON, THE POPE, AND MICHELLE BACHMANN THEN, MR. I-THINK-I'M-SO-SMART." and start arguing semantics??? Because I hate when people do that.

 

[redandguilty]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

Revolutionary France
Revolutionary Mexico
Soviet Russia
China
Cuba
Albania
N. Korea

 

[Michchamp]

should be agnostic. few have been atheist.

well, they shouldn't have anything to do with it. they shouldn't even consider the inquiry.

but if you want to cite all the social and political ills of Soviet Russia or similar states or revolutionary movements to somehow tar atheism, and try to show how it's a religion too, go right ahead. I won't even try to argue against you because you're a good guy.

 

[redandguilty]

maybe Cambodia under Pol Pot

 

[redandguilty]

well, they shouldn't have anything to do with it. they shouldn't even consider the inquiry.

but if you want to cite all the social and political ills of Soviet Russia or similar states or revolutionary movements to somehow tar atheism, and try to show how it's a religion too, go right ahead. I won't even try to argue against you because you're a good guy.

Most governments that run the way I think you'd advocate are secular, which is different from atheist. You can be theist and secular or atheist and secular. The two aren't incompatible. An actual atheist government is fundamentally different.

 

[Michchamp]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality

Oh. That's not a counter argument either. I wouldn't try to say that they're basically substituting a political figure for "god," and therefore trying to make the claim that atheism is a religion too doesn't apply to these instances, because I'm not arguing against you. I think you're right.

 

[Michchamp]

Most governments that run the way I think you'd advocate are secular, which is different from atheist.

okay, yes. Why are you bringing up totalitarian regimes then?

 

[redandguilty]

okay, yes. Why are you bringing up totalitarian regimes then?

I think I included all of them from the wikipedia list to be fair, but I went out of my way to tack on one extra baddie because I have a side and am biased.

 

[redandguilty]

it's the absence of religion, not another variety of it.

It's the belief in the absence of any god. That there is no religion based on this belief is true to my knowledge, but that's not the meaning of the word "atheism". In theory, you could base a religion on it.

now are you going to say to me "What about your chemistry book? You believe that right? Did you personally test every theorem, principle and law in it? NO?!?!? OH... LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE USING 'FAITH' JUST LIKE PAT ROBERTSON, REVEREND MOON, THE POPE, AND MICHELLE BACHMANN THEN, MR. I-THINK-I'M-SO-SMART." and start arguing semantics??? Because I hate when people do that.

No. I save that argument for cases where people act like they rely on science for all their beliefs. Nobody actually does that.

 

[redandguilty]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality

Oh. That's not a counter argument either. I wouldn't try to say that they're basically substituting a political figure for "god," and therefore trying to make the claim that atheism is a religion too doesn't apply to these instances, because I'm not arguing against you. I think you're right.

I'm not really sure what this says about the difficulty of building a cult of personality compatible with a theist religion or atheism. Atheism might be a target just because it's a radical departure from the past and cuts a society's existing influences out of the loop. It's probably just easier to denounce and outlaw the existing dominant religion rather than rise up its ranks.

 

[Michchamp]

okay, so your arguments based on semantics have swayed me. atheism is a religion after all then, and complaints about the tenets, excesses and negatives of other religions by atheists are baseless, because they're simply trying to "convert" the others to their "church" or whatever you want to call it. It's not qualitatively different than other religions.

we are all just sheep who need to cling to beliefs in something be it a god, a spiritual life energy, or even "material science" as an abstract concept in order to survive. anyone who thinks that by becoming an atheist, they are getting closer to understanding some objective "truth" about the world is a fool who is simply exchanging one moral/religious/cultural practice for another, and probably should be ridiculed for even trying to think differently.

you win this round.

 

[tinselwolverine]

okay, so your arguments based on semantics have swayed me. atheism is a religion after all then, and complaints about the tenets, excesses and negatives of other religions by atheists are baseless, because they're simply trying to "convert" the others to their "church" or whatever you want to call it. It's not qualitatively different than other religions.

we are all just sheep who need to cling to beliefs in something be it a god, a spiritual life energy, or even "material science" as an abstract concept in order to survive. anyone who thinks that by becoming an atheist, they are getting closer to understanding some objective "truth" about the world is a fool who is simply exchanging one moral/religious/cultural practice for another, and probably should be ridiculed for even trying to think differently.

you win this round.

Thanks for fielding this one for me, Red; it's opening day (okay, technically, last night was opening day) and I was watching a whole lot of baseball games, especially the Tigers winning 4-2 at Minnesota.

Verlander goes 7 (I think; maybe 6) and gets the opening day win.

 

[redandguilty]

okay, so your arguments based on semantics have swayed me. atheism is a religion after all then, and complaints about the tenets, excesses and negatives of other religions by atheists are baseless, because they're simply trying to "convert" the others to their "church" or whatever you want to call it. It's not qualitatively different than other religions.

we are all just sheep who need to cling to beliefs in something be it a god, a spiritual life energy, or even "material science" as an abstract concept in order to survive. anyone who thinks that by becoming an atheist, they are getting closer to understanding some objective "truth" about the world is a fool who is simply exchanging one moral/religious/cultural practice for another, and probably should be ridiculed for even trying to think differently.

you win this round.

1st, I didn't say that, blah, blah, blah...but about the semantics bit; it's not semantics to differentiate between atheist and secular nations. When a group of mostly theists found and run a secular nation, you don't get to claim that for atheism.

 

[Michchamp]

im not. youre the one that started using the analogy "anthems of atheist nations = anthems of religious practices =, atheism is like a religion too." but when a bunch of atheists found a nation and create a cult of personality or nationalistic movement within it, it doesnt mean atheism is akin to a religion. they are entirely separate.

 

[redandguilty]

im not. youre the one that started using the analogy "anthems of atheist nations = anthems of religious practices =, atheism is like a religion too." but when a bunch of atheists found a nation and create a cult of personality or nationalistic movement within it, it doesnt mean atheism is akin to a religion. they are entirely separate.

You said atheist organizations don't collect tithes or take public positions and Turok said they don't write anthems that rally the troops and I responded to both asking if atheist governments counted.

But don't get carried away with my comparisons between religion and atheism. I specifically said it wasn't a religion, just a belief. There are ways that some atheists treat atheism like a religious belief and in theory you could build a religion around atheism, but I'm unaware of anyone having done it.

The examples of atheist nations I gave weren't just nations founded by atheists. All but one were classified by someone other than me as states where atheism was held as a state belief. They are actual examples of atheist organizations that collect money in a compulsory way, take public positions, and have anthems that rally the troops. If you argue that they don't count as atheist organizations because the existence of a cult of personality or a nationalistic movement, then you've introduced an out that will let a lot of badly behaving religious groups off the hook.