Well, that is much clearer. But I think you probably underestimate how much atheists are offended by religious usurpation of public land. Or even non-atheists who believe in the separation of church and state. How about Ramadan in the park? Or the Church of Nudism? Religion is religion. Holy wars have been with us forever, they are a result of religion, and nothing has changed recently. Crusade and Jihad are synonymous. How about Northern Ireland? A Holy War by any standard. Christian on Christian and quite modern. Several arguments going on at once ... the idea that religious people are basically good and that atheists are somehow "not as good". What does that have to do with anything? One man's philosophy is another man's heresy. Personally, nativity scenes don't bother me. But I think they inauthentic, presumptuous, and kitschy.
I don't underestimate it....I just think it's nonsense. Are they able to drive by an accident without looking? Can posters on an internet forum just scroll past posts they don't like or do they need to say something every time they disagree just to make sure all points of view are covered? Fine with me. There is a very busy intersection nearby and every holiday season it's decorated....a menorah, a nativity, a christmas tee, and a crescent moon and star. There are laws against public nudity. Except for that ancient and modern part. That isn't my argument or point of view. Atheists could get over themselves though. Okay.
Either. They certainly can question a post. That's what forums are for. If posters don't wish to be questioned, perhaps they should write a blog. Northern Ireland is not ancient.
It's delivered in the same sense of incredulity as an adult that believes in Santa or the Easter Bunny, which is proportionate to the claim of belief. Are you sure that you know what that word means? I have seen it. They're a direct response to the religious billboards that I see which far outnumber atheist billboards. It's an attempt by a small group to spread knowledge and push back at the religion that is shoved down our throats. Wanting to be left alone does not mean "bend over and take it up the ass". Sometimes you have to stand up so you will be left alone. A schoolyard bully is no different. That you disagree, yet feel you are right is exactly my point. God is not a gray creature; He is very black and white. Everyone who has read the Bible and believes it to be God's word knows that there is one way to salvation, yet thousands of people feel that their interpretation is that one way. Someone has to be right. Someone has to be wrong. People making remarks like "that's what I believe" are simply providing validation to themselves because that's the belief system that's convenient or makes sense to them. Again, that's not faith which by every version of the Bible lies the only path to salvation.
When people say they are atheists, what they are really saying is that they have no belief in the God that is preached by the world's major religions. In fact, I lump atheists into the same lame group as I do religious people because they are playing along with the notion that the God of the major religious texts is actually THE God. IF there is a creator then it is as finely woven into the fabric of who we are, and for that matter every living thing, as our respective DNA, and NOT a dreamed up magician who takes sides and has a bi-polar diagnosis, much less who passes judgement or sits on a big golden thrown giving the thumbs up or thumbs down to the recently dead.
Not really, they are saying there can be no deity without evidence. Atheist = God cannot exist if evidence doesn't exist. Agnostic = We have no way of knowing if God exists. Believer = We take it on faith alone that God exists. Well, I think that is absurd. Atheists accept no form of deity. On this we can agree.
Except there are no adults who believe in those entities and for good reason. They aren't comparable. But I still reject the idea that if one is incredulous that the corresponding commentary must somehow be mean-spirited or condescending. Come on, man. Obviously I do. I did preface the reference with "for me" which means a personal connotation. Sort of like a serpent's words might slither out of it's mouth. I responded to your assertion that atheists "For the most part and almost without exception" don't want to force their views on anyone. But as you just acknowledged, it's about tit for tat, not civil rights and they can be and are just as aggressive as pro-Christian billboards. Hyperbole simply gives atheists a rallying point to force the removal of any and all religious, I mean Christian, symbols whether they are on public property or not. There are religious symbols on public property representing other religions but I haven't seen the lawsuits against them just yet. I can't say that I have a belief "system". I try to live my life a certain way and by all accounts, I'm not always successful. I am not attempting to gain salvation or avoid eternal damnation. I'm not concerned about being right or wrong or whether someone else is right or wrong. Dead is dead. I'm focused on the living.
Hold on a second. You have categorized these respective groups in a very absolute way and, fact is, it just isn't so. The link below shows a recent pew research center poll that asked Americans about their religious beliefs and, as you will see, it isn't so cut and dry. I do not disagree necessarily with your categorizations if we were talking in "theory." However, in practice, I would say that many people see Atheism as more of a rejection of modern religious dogmas than as complete disbelief without evidence. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/10/23/5-facts-about-atheists/ My personal opinions, which is about as good or bad as anyone's else's about this subject matter is this: There is an energy form that is the origin of all things. We are a part of this energy form, along with the rest of the universe/multi-verse, not the other way around. This energy form has no more interest in our day to day lives than I do about the daily lives of the cell tissue in my left leg.
I'm not trying to be absolute about a complex issue, but trying to succinctly categorize the three primary factions. Some people do not distinguish between agnostics and atheists, but I think it is an important distinction. Atheism translates as "no deity", agnostic as "no knowledge". You have only to consider VBall to see that there are also many believers who also reject modern religious dogmas. So I tend to disagree that this is a defining characteristic of atheism. Disbelief in God remains the the key element. It is interesting that 14 percent of self-described atheists profess some belief in a God. That is, by definition, a contradiction. Atheism and a belief in God are mutually exclusive. I think these 14% must actually be agnostics or believers who reject religion (as you describe) and don't really understand the definition of atheism.
