Is atheism a religion?

(19) On January 31, 2012 at 11:16 pm Susan Heizler [0] said:

I believe Atheism is worship of self. They make themselves to be God. They do whatever they feel they want to do without concern for a deity because they believe themselves to be the ultimate authority.

(18) On December 14, 2011 at 3:10 pm Dean Edwards [0] said:

Is it possible to define atheism without mentioning god or some similar synonym? No. By it's very definition, Atheism is at least a religious related term, if not a religion in and of itself.

I think that atheism is no more or less than a philosophy based on the belief that there is no god, just like polytheism is belief in multiple gods and monotheism is belief in a god.

I think that atheists have far more belief and faith than those who believe in god(s). This is based on the simple logical truth that it's much, much easier to prove that something exists than it is to prove that something doesn't exist.

Here's a final thought to consider alongside the famous baseball/atheism analogy. Just like baseball is a sport but sport is not just baseball, there are atheistic religions but atheism is not just religion.

(17) On February 6, 2011 at 10:34 pm Kluss [692] said:

You are too hung up on that word "belief'. There are many forms of belief. You may "believe" that people are inherently good and if offered the opportunity to do good they will. That does not constitute a religion. There is much more to religion that just a "belief" in something. And besides, no matter how you twist it- atheism is a lack of belief. Trust me, I spend no time thinking about what YOU believe. And you are just silly to base your view of atheists on a few immature militants. I am certain you would not want to be judged as a religionist based on those religious fanatics who mingle in crowded streets and places of worship and then blow themselves up killing innocent people.

An atheist requires no rituals to exist as an atheist.

An atheist requires no rules to exist as an atheist.

An atheist requires no doctrines nor dogma nor clergy nor texts nor organized group to not believe in deities.

Most importantly atheism requires NO TIME whatsoever.

As they say . . . if atheism is a religion then not playing baseball is a sport!

And Rpusk . . . no name calling allowed.

The big question that is coming through this interchange is why you are so hung up on categorizing atheism as a religion. Is it so difficult for you to comprehend that some people have no religion? That is extremely interesting, and disturbing.

(16) On February 6, 2011 at 6:34 pm Rpuskarcik [0] said:

I'm sorry, But you will never be able to convince me that a belief in no God is not a belief. So we will just have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, if it looks like a religion and smells like a religion then it is a religion. And all the atheists who put down religion had better think twice about it because in the process they are only hurting themselves because their belief is just as questionable whether one chooses to call it a religion or not.

(15) On February 4, 2011 at 3:03 pm Kluss [692] said:

Well said Nodleshg.

It is interesting that Rpuskarcik bases their discussion on "being told that there is no God and that I must accept this as truth". That is a sad misunderstanding. Although there are people of different personalities in every bunch, there is no concerted effort on the part of atheists to "convert" anyone else. As a group we really do not care what Rousharcik chooses to believe. He/she shouldn't be so irate about the next person's lack of belief nor should he/she interprete that as a threat.

Rpuskarcik has also misinterpreted the information at this website. It does not give atheism the status of being a religion. Read more carefully. It promotes science, reason and reality and seems to have found a way to allow "ordained" atheists representatives to perform marriages by the same authority religious clergy can.

From:

http://firstchurchofatheism.com/

As a legally ordained minister, you will be able to perform weddings, funerals, commitment ceremonies, and other functions that are reserved for members of clergy.

Since its inception, the First Church of Atheism has amassed quite a following around the world. FCA ministers come from all walks of life. They are every race, ethnicity, age, and creed. The one thing binding every FCA minister is his or her belief in science, reason, and reality.

The First Church of Atheism wants you to pursue and cherish your realistic beliefs without interference from any outside agency, including government or church authority. We provide our service for free, as we believe it is every atheists right to perform these clergy functions.

You may become a legally ordained minister for life, without cost, and without question.

Why not simply accept that atheism is simply not a religion and save yourself a lot of illogical, inaccurate explaining.

(14) On February 4, 2011 at 4:10 am Rpuskarcik [0] said:

Ok let's look at your statements:

1.) I've never seen a bunch of atheists gathered around a table arguing about which is the one true atheism... How is this proof of anything? What if you did see atheists gathered - arguing true atheism - would that prove anything? Your point is a non-point.

2.)I don't see atheists of a particular brand congregating ritually in mutual support while other atheist of a particular brand congregate ritually next door... Actually they do. Here is an exact quote (Google it) "The First Church of Atheism wants you to pursue and cherish your realistic beliefs without interference from any outside agency, including government or church authority." And there are other atheists doing other things which not all atheists believe in. So are you saying that the belief there is no God is universal among all atheists?

3.)Independence of mind and reasoned thought require no church. These mental activities stand for themselves... There are plenty of people who do believe in God, and that also have independence of mind and require no church.

There are many people who have direct experience which has proven to them, without a doubt, that God exists.

By denying the existence of God, you are denying these personal experiences of meaning. It seems more appropriate to accept that God's existence is not known by everyone.

I can easily accept a person saying that they do not believe that there is a God, and I do not judge them (as some might) and see no reason to try and convert them. If they come to a different conclusion on their own, that is their experience. What I have difficulty accepting is being told that there is no God and that I must accept this as truth. I have difficulty accepting that I can not express my beliefs in a government hosted public forum, yet atheists can express their beliefs without question. I have a hard time accepting that a person can simply not believe in anything, since it is a function of the human mind to interpret outside stimulus according to ones own beliefs. You wouldn't be able to read this if you didn't believe that the individual letters had meaning and the combination of them has even more meaning. Why not simply accept that atheism is yet another religion which, of course, some atheist don't ascribe to.

(13) On February 3, 2011 at 8:40 pm Nodleshg [0] said:

I've never seen a bunch of atheists gathered around a table arguing about which is the one true atheism.

I don't see atheists of a particular brand congregating ritually in mutual support while other atheist of a particular brand congregate ritually next door.

Independence of mind and reasoned thought require no church. These mental activities stand for themselves.

Over to you.

(12) On December 26, 2010 at 3:15 pm Mev321 [0] said:

"...Atheism has a strict set of rules you must follow to be an atheist.

Response: No. Atheist requires lack of belief..."

Therefore, according to atheists, requirements are not rules. This is false. Thus, the atheist's argument is false. Rational individuals acknowledge falsity. Therefore, atheists are not rational. QED

Furthermore,

Religion belief

"I do not believe" "I believe not" (no matter how you wish it were not)

Therefore, atheisim = religion

Any rational individual accepts the conclusion is true because the premises are true.

(11) On October 26, 2010 at 4:44 am Bettastrongafasta [0] said:

If a kid wears a "there is no god" t-shirt to school is he making a religious statement? Atheists ALWAYS go back to evolution...why is that? The majority of Christians I know would agree that the earth is more than 6000 years old, so why is that even mentioned? The Big Bang theory is a christian theory, developed by a priest, and fought against by the evolutionists of the day. Now it is the flag of evolution...who's following who? And who is up in arms about people being atheist? 2/3 of my community do not go to church and no one bothers them. It's the few that get out and hand out atheist literature at the university and at the market that piss everybody off. I was curious about atheism so instead of listening to my religion professor, who says it is a religion, I went on American Atheists website. Wow, tax deductible donations, singles "ministries," teen groups, membership, bookstore, etc. Sounds like a church, and for what it's worth, looks like a church website. If you go on their website and substitute __________church for American Atheist it looks exactly like a church. OK, so you're not a religion....why act like one. Believe me, no one gives a crap what you believe. Millions of people in America skip church every Sunday and don't care about god or church, and no one bothers them about it, save the occasional grandmother who says "you should get in church." What are "we" doing that pisses you off so much? Is it the money thing? seriously? Is it the Ten Commandments posted outside of a courthouse that has the same laws written on its books? seriously? Is it the 3 minutes kids get in school to meditate, or pray, or gather their thoughts for the day? seriously? So who do I talk to about professors that denounce god in the classroom at a state university...who do I talk to about the propaganda I get handed to me that tells me not to listen to the other propaganda about god? Who do I talk to when my church, THAT WE OWN, is told to pull a nativity scene because it is offensive? Seriously? We all just need to grow a pair of balls. It's like all the atheists were castrated in one quick motion. Boo hoo it's offensive..Seriously? You know who I call when this crap happens to me? Nobody. You know why? because I don't give a crap what you think or believe.

NATIVITY SCENES ARE NOT "PULLED" FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY IN THE UNITED STATES. TALK ABOUT PROPAGANDA.

(10) On June 8, 2010 at 6:10 am Nij [0] said:

atheism is not a belief in anything. Much less a belief in "something other than God".

It is the complete absence of belief.

An atheist has every right to claim 'freedom of religion', because you are discriminating against them for not having any faith, as opposed to simply not having yours. 'Freedom of' also means 'freedom from'.

With a couple of exceptions, no attempt is being made to make atheism the 'national religion' anywhere. Contrast with the huge numbers of lobbying groups attmpting to make the US, for example, into a Christian theocracy.

Atheists have every right to put up posters for what they think if they can afford the advertising. Just as Christians and Jews and Muslims and Buddhists and Taoists and Shintoists and any other group is allowed to do so. Atheists are not the only ones to do this; Christian propaganda abounds at every church, and atheists are far from being the ones who do it most.

"Not believing in gravity" is a stupid analogy for atheism. We know gravity exists; we can predict and test and confirm its effects. Where is your evidence of any god existing, then? Can you predict exactly what it will do, test these events, confirm that you were right? No. I didn't think so.

I am an atheist. I follow no rituals; I do what I want in my life in accordance with law and ethics. I am not told what I must believe. I believe what I have independently decided on.

Is black a wavelength of light? Is silence a frequency of sound? Is atheism a religion? To all of these: NO.

(9) On June 8, 2010 at 4:22 am Rpuskarcik [0] said:

Atheism is a religion. It is the belief in something other than God. And if I denied a person from renting my house, I would be in deep trouble because that person would claim freedom of religion. Atheists have been attempting (and quite successfully) to make Atheism the national religion. They actively promote there belief. I have seen their posters on the bus. They try to exclude all other religions in public places. I don't see how an atheist could claim that his belief is not a religion simply because of the way it is organized. Atheists do have rituals and dogma. The analogy of not playing baseball as a sport does not apply. Because baseball is an activity, not a belief. A better analogy would be not believing in gravity. If that were the case, then you would have to have an explanation for why things seem to fall. And there lies the dogma.

(8) On June 6, 2010 at 11:18 am Theopolis7 [0] said:

Atheism indeed is a religion. Even the U.S. Supreme Court in a foot-note of Torcaso v. Watkins declared atheism a religion. If you disagree, then please explain why the First Church of Atheism exists, and is tax exempt like other religious denominations. The First Church of Atheism currently has 2586 ordained ministers. In case you think I'm making this up then go visit their web-site at http://firstchurchofatheism.com/

CLARIFICATION REGARDING BLACK'S OPINION . . . OPINION:

In a dictum footnote attached to this opinion, Justice Black wrote:

Among the religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others.

This is frequently cited by people on the religious right as that the Supreme Court has declared Secular Humanism to be a religion, but such people are simply unaware of the fact that dicta have no legal force.

(7) On May 25, 2010 at 1:59 am Nij [0] said:

Nonsense.

The absence of something is not something. Silence is not music (although it is a useful tool within true music). The absence of belief is not belief. The absence of religion is not a religion. Hence, the analogy is near perfect in this situation.

Moreover, by definition, atheism cannot be a religion: it does not contain any dogma required of all people, it does not have any central leadership. Atheism is not a religion. Very simple answer.

Anyway, why the outburst against atheism? The majority of atheists don't care what a person believes. If you had a president who wanted to swear in with a Quran though, you'd have a huge uproar from the Christian sects. Now who care more about having their "rights infringer against"?

(6) On May 24, 2010 at 9:03 am Fox atheist [0] said:

That is a good one, "not playing baseball is a sport." but only a simpleton would equate sport to a religion. If you used your brain you would know your analogy is just hogwash. You have some form of belief system, even if it is undefined. you would be a fool to think that all that man can think off falls neatly into the pre-defined religious sects. religion isn't all about gods. If you want to play around with analogies, then think of religion as music and being atheist is silence. You can still make music with silence, for instance John Cage's composition, 4′33″ is just 4 minutes and 33 seconds of silence.

If you are so threaten by religion, perhaps your mind is too weak to make your own decisions, other wise why do you care so much what the people or government does? So the President swears an oath on the bible. I don't remember reading any news lines in the following weeks where there was a huge spike in people finding God.

(5) On May 1, 2010 at 3:01 pm Kluss [692] said:

CONTINUED:

5) lastly, this is very different from "free thinking." Atheists like to think of themselves as free thinkers but they're not because they're conforming to specific expectations and even trendy views (it's "cool" to be an atheist).

Response: No. We are freethinkers because we don't have to conform our ideas to the dogma of religion. We can change our minds based on the evidence, unlike a lot of theists, who, no matter how much sure evidence you give them, will still believe the earth is only 6000 years old and that evolution doesn't happen.

They also conform their beliefs against everything religious; therefore they are sculpted by religion -- they are just the anti religion.

Response: No. Our beliefs are based on evidence. If what is believed to be true is proven incorrect, we change our beliefs to incorperate the new data. It has nothing to do with religion. That's why it works.

It's still based off of religion, however. A revolutionary and a counter-revolutionary, although their goals are different, they are both revolutionaries. To be a free thinker means you do not throw away ideas simply because your 'religion' tells you to, but you actually consider everything and place it in your own perspective, not just spit out baseless sentiments that have been uttered five billion times before you. The options aren't only atheism and religion, there is a grey area in between; but humans as social creatures are too easy to hop into the 'fold' and become one of the sheep.

Response: Being a freethinker isn't about accepting all ideas. It's about being able to accept any idea for which evidence proves regardless of what religious dogma says. We believe in evolution because that's what the evidence (fused chromosome #2, ERVs, homologous bone structure, etc) proves. We believe in the Big Bang (red shift, cosmological background radiation) because that's what the evidence proves.

(4) On May 1, 2010 at 3:01 pm Kluss [692] said:

DISCUSSION FROM ANSWER PAGE

Atheism is still a belief, so it is a religion.

Response: Religion requires tenets and dogma. Atheism has niether.

Atheism has a strict set of rules you must follow to be an atheist.

Response: No. Atheist requires lack of belief in a deity nothing more. The things that follow are not required of atheists. You can be an atheist and believe the earth is the center of the universe if you want to.

1.) You must believe in science. Although some atheists will refrain from using the word belief, substituting words such as "trust" although it's all the same because they're in denial.

Response: There is nothing wrong in believing whatever you want. The problem is believing based on faith. The problem is that too often belief and faith are considered synonymous. Atheism does not require a belief in science, though usually atheists do believe in science. Some theists believe in science as well.

(Science is actual unstable, religion isn't.

Response: Science is stable because it changes to fit new evidence. Religion is the one that isn't stable because it clings to the beliefs based on what was known 2000 or more years ago.

Just like the recent discovery of Ardy that disproves man being related to monkeys? Response: The discovery of Ardy proved nothing of the sort. Please read the actual papers written and peer-reviewed by paleontologists instead of the snippets from the news media.

So you have to "hope" that science will not end up getting you killed one day and trust in people--because in the end scientists are just people--although atheists tend to see them as gods.)

Response: Science is a process by which things are proven via evidence. With modern science, the human lifespan has nearly tripled in just the last 200 years.

2) Obviously, you can't believe in any god, religion, faith, hope, afterlife, or have any spirituality or you're "not a real atheist" you're "agnostic."

Response: Atheism/theism is a claim to what you believe. Agnostic/gnostic is a claim of what you know. The two terms are not mutually exclusive. There are agnostic theists (deists, pantheists) and there are agnostic atheists (even Dawkins claims he is an agnostic atheist because given evidence he would change. He simply thinks, like most atheists do, that the probability of a god is very low.) I have never heard of any atheist claiming "you're not a real atheist." That is something that is generally used by Christians to disassociate themselves from the poor examples of their fellow theists, i.e. "That priest isn't a true Christian, otherwise he wouldn't have raped that child."

3) You must say "you believe in people."

Response: Atheism requires nothing of the sort. Atheism is a lack of belief in a deity. Nothing else is required. I am an atheist, and personally I do not believe in people because on the whole I think most are stupid, ignorant, and selfish beings who don't care for anyone but themselves.

4) atheists know what it's like to be 'discriminated against' because they are a collective system of believers. Rather than acknowledging the discrimination as personal, they attribute it to all atheists, because atheists all 'believe' the same thing. They're all the same faith, just like Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

Response: Again, the only thing universal among atheists is a lack of belief in a deity. Any claims of descrimination are based solely on that.

Look at the recent happenings in North Carolina in which people are trying to remove an atheist from his public office simply because he's an atheist. And, they're basing this on an ammendement in the NC state constitution which violates the Constitution of the United States and for which Torasco vs. Watkins sets a precidence that no state government may bar an atheist from hold public office due to the seperation of church and state and the guideline that there can be no test for public office.

If they were trying to remove him for a legitimate reason that would be one thing, but the argument is based solely because he's an atheist. That is the definition of descrimination. It is no different than if they tried to remove someone from office solely because he was black or if she was a woman.

CONTINUED

(3) On June 16, 2009 at 11:51 pm Nij [0] said:

More discussion than answer, and the third point kind of skirts the issue at hand by going through "depends on your definition".

Discussion

According to well-known Atheist Michael Ruse Atheism is indeed a religion.

Followup

An interesting view. But please provide a reason why one individual's position should override dictionary definitions :) Mr Ruse is welcome to his view. That does not make it accurate. If I could be bothered, I could probably find atheist Bishops in the Church of England. That would not mean that the CoE was an atheist organisation.

Discussion

The answer to this really depends on your definition of religion, some people exclude non-theistic beliefs (such as Atheism or Buddhism) from the definition of religion, whereas others prefer a more general defenition whereby any belief or system of beliefs (such as science) can be considered religion.

Discussion

if its got an ISM its good enough for me.

(2) On March 8, 2009 at 9:30 pm PeteNco [657] said:

Probably the difference also between Ruse and Atheist Bishops is that Ruse remains an atheist whereas it is arguable whether atheist Bishops can simultaneously also be Christian since Christianity is by definition theistic. I don't believe Ruse is suggesting that he believes in God.

(1) On March 8, 2009 at 8:51 pm PeteNco [657] said:

Michael Ruse is indeed entitled to his opinion as a well known atheist who has studied this matter. Nor is there a suggestion that Ruse is not entitled to his opinion. No-one is suggesting all atheists will agree with him. Most won't.This is a Wiki. Adding a different opinion need not draw attacks especially on the person of Ruse. No doubt he has his reasons for saying so, and presumably remains an atheist, since he would not believe God exists. Presumably he regards atheism as a non-theistic religion.

It probably is debatable whether a person who claims not to believe in God or who disbelieves in key Christian doctrine is a Christian. Perhaps they need to join the atheists?

Sign in to add your own comment. (This only takes a few seconds.)