Quote:Without meaning to come across as insulting;
If I conclude Aliens have psychic powers thats a position on Aliens. If I conclude Aliens don't have psychic powers then thats still a position on Aliens. If I conclude Aliens don't exist then the most you could squeeze out of it is thats a position on reality in that I don't think Aliens are actually part of it.
I conclude through lack of any evidence God exists that he does not exist. This is a position on evidence, it is a position on reality, on fiction. It may even be a position on life. How can it be a position on religion? I don't acknowledge it as a reasoned or backed thing to have a position on. I can no more have a position on that than on the belief of someone elses imaginary friend who I have concluded I have no reason to believe exists. The point of whether his cardigan is red or yellow would be moot, I don't think theres a cardigan there or even a persons body for it to rest upon.
My position cannot be religious, I fundamentally reject the premises on which religions operate.
All of this is tautological, given what you're assuming is the definition of a 'religious position'.
If someone asks, "What is your position on God's existence," would you consider "I'm an atheist" to be unresponsive? If it is responsive, then "I'm an atheist" is a "position on God's existence". Now, it seems reasonable to me that someone might consider "I'm an atheist" to be responsive. It also seems reasonable to me that someone would consider it unresponsive, since "I'm an atheist" is essentially equivalent to "I don't have one".
It's all just arbitrary based on what you're accepting as a "position". Like, imagine I ask the number of apples you're holding. You might say, "I'm not holding any number of apples"; or, you might say, "I'm holding zero apples." Which response is appropriate depends on what you accept as "holding k apples".
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”