Do you honestly believe that atheism fits that description? There is no church of atheism. Nothing is worshiped. There is nothing supernatural, nor is there a spiritual leader. And how can you persue atheism with zeal or devotion when there's nothing you can do except make up your mind about it? Secular Humanism was defined as religion by the supreme court soley for political reasons. How can the lack of religion, be religion?
True atheism (not your belief, which i think is more like agnosticism) relies on faith, just like any other belief.
Threatened by religion's role in our government. The founding fathers included the seperation of church & state for a reason. They saw what happens when the two are together with Europe. The pope runs the country and becomes a politician.
During a social studies class we do (so long as it doesn't include kids being told to praise god). Private entities have every right to display any religious symbols they wish - that includes walmart or grocery stores. They can say "merry Christmas", they can hang pictures of Allah. It's their business. Tiger Stadium is the property of a state run entity, and could not do such things. Guys do it in front of free speech alley (by the union at LSU) all the time. Yet you don't mind forcing Christianity on people. Precisely why we are better than them.
Agreed, but this classroom business is clearly the former. Kissing their rears would be letting them take control of our ports. Agreed. By understanding them, we can better determine which are enemies to be destroyed . . . and which are not, and can be simply ignored. Agreed, Donald Rumsfeld is no Sun Tsu. :lol: All warfare is based on deception. The best victory is when the opponent surrenders of its own accord before there are any actual hostilities ... It is best to win without fighting. For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill. Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory: (1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. (2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. (3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. (4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. (5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign. -- Sun Tsu, The Art of War. Salty, I know you don't realize it, but trying to insult anonymous internet characters is laughably futile. Are you quitting on me? Well, are you? Then quit, you slimy fugging walrus-looking piece of chit. Get the fugg off of my obstacle. Get the fugg down off of my obstacle. Now. Move it. I'm going to rip your balls off, so you cannot contaminate the rest of the world. I will motivate you, Private Pyle, if it short-dicks every cannibal on the Congo. -- Gunnery Sgt. Hartman
Because the government was somewhat ignoring it's own rules. Christianity is such a big part of this country, its difficult to completely seperate church & state. Only due to "atheist" pointing out the rules have things started to change. What if our government started putting "Praise to Allah - the one true God" on all of our money, and erecting statues of him? Should we not take them down because they are already up? I don't like when atheist go after things that aren't government oriented either, but I fully support keeping the church & state seperate.
I absolutely do. Athieism in reality is the worshipping of the self. martin certainly pursues with zeal. He also preaches the gospel of the self. Secular Humanism was defined as a religion because it is. It replaces God with the Self.
That's not what atheism actually is. Atheism, by definition, is the absence of theism. If you cannot say "I believe in a Deity/God/Supreme Being" then you are an atheist. If you are not a theist, then you are an atheist. There is nothing about "self". It seems odd for a follower of a faith to try to attack atheism by saying it is also a faith. The reasoning must be that if atheism is a religion, then atheists have no cause to criticise other religions. But atheism possess none of the hallmarks of a religion. No belief in God, prayer, churches, holy books, priests, belief in supernatural beings, miracles, afterlife, heaven, hell, the soul, sin, blasphemy, ceremonies, or chosen people. martin is certainly an atheist and he is also an egoist, but that is not a part of atheism. Egocentricity does not require self-worship. Secular Humanism is quite different but not really a religion either. It is a non-theist philosophy dedicated to the fulfillment of the individual and humankind in general. Secular humanism encourages a commitment to a set of principles which promote the development of tolerance and compassion and an understanding of the methods of science, critical analysis, and philosophical reflection. Secular humanism lacks the essential characteristics of a religion, specifically the belief in a deity. Dedication to the fulfillment of "the individual" does not constitute worship of self, in my opinion. Secular humanists respect the individuality of others in the same fashion as themselves. Myself, I'm an agnostic. I believe that a Creator may be real but that it is impossible for us to ever know if He exists or what he expects from us. Agnostics do not disrespect nor challenge the existence of God, but they believe that religious practice and doctrine are the work of self-proclaimed holy men, not the work of God.
Most of the athesists I've met enjoy pronouncing "there is no God" way too much. They love to speak about their religion of nothing more than Christians discuss Jesus. And I don't think there is "self-proclaimed holy men" in the Anglican church of which I am. We do not have a pope to make declarations of faith......our only doctrine is what can be shown in the Bible. Maybe you're discussing other religious affilations.
