Why are you atheist?

[Mystic]

Well, because, family structure is based heavily on the belief

We inherited a lot of beliefs from evolution, including beliefs in "goodness" "praise" etc..

Yes - evolution creates beliefs

Apparently none of them truly are justifiable in the absolute sense of the word.

[The Grand Nudger]

Some Bird species developed monogamous relationships, because, it was in their advantage.

Most species, it's in their advantage to have multiple relationships.

Which one occurred our species? Perhaps not monogamous, but definitely one father (patriarchal) per family unit, became a norm.

Not saying no societies go against that later, but over all, this seems like to be our nature.

And even it seems we naturally have a dislike towards polygamy even if the parents are known to the child.

I'm not sure. I'm just theorizing here.

The thing is, a society that it was the norm to not know your father, would be chaotically dysfunctional.

Jealousy would be for the advantage, and the feeling of "family" and "long lasting love commitment", would be at our advantage.

It's no wonder almost all societies if not all, have a concept of marriage.

Bolding mine for brevity, this is really the core of it-

Again, if something is "natural" or "the norm" that does not make it "right" or "good" which is the point I'm trying to stress. I don't agree with your notions of our development, we we're anatomically and behaviorally modern long before we have any reliable way to work out how many females uncle og stuck it to, or vice versa. We just don't know - but that doesn't matter at all, because regardless of which one of us has the more accurate picture of how this whole monogamy or waiting till commitments came about - it won't have anything to do with whether or not it's "right" or "good" in the sense that you're going to use those two terms. Understand?

Now, your comments about what society would be like if it deviated from "the norm" are demolished in the face of all the "norms" we might choose from. Further, not knowing ones father has been pretty common, throughout history and even today. We seem to have managed.

None of this, mind you, being any argument that you should strap a plank to your ass and go balls deep in the next girl you see - or the girl after that...just an interesting aside really.

[Mystic]

You are right that it doesn't make it right or wrong.

Well, it's not so much about if it's right but that it goes against the natural tendency. There is more reasons in my case. The religious see this natural tendency as divinely mandated and society is still religious. Now Christians are more so open about this issue now, but, my family, my distant family, my community, how would they react? I can't blame them from naturalism perspective to their judgement, because evolution programmed us that way, and it also programmed us to succumb to the praise consensus of society.

They naturally have this feeling (evolution) and it's amplified via culture and religion (Islam). I don't know. I don't want to dishonour my family to be honest. And I haven't even came out that I have left Islam (only my family and a few other people know).

Is it wise to go against the values of the society you are brought up with, to create a bad image of yourself? I don't know. Perhaps, we should aim to destroy these cultural barriers and taboos, or perhaps not.

I don't know. I am confused to be honest about this issue.

[The Grand Nudger]

It depends on whose "bad image" you are referring to. If doing something would create a bad self image...well, probably ought to avoid that (and again that doesnt actually mean that the subject is "bad" just that it's something you;d probably want to resolve before engaging in). On the other hand, if all it boils down to is "what would others think"......

They don't have to live in your head, with you, for any amount of time or forever.....but you do.

(I have to mention this..but mystic...naturalism probably doesn't mean what you think it means......not that you have to approach anything from the point of naturalism at all - if you choose otherwise...nor would naturalism failing to offer you some acceptable thing - to you- mean that you had to approach it any other specific way -ie those peoples whose opinions you worry about are not right by default-)

[Mystic]

You are right. They don't have to live in my head. I been wanting to let my community know the truth to be honest, and sort of been planning that as soon as I get into a relationship, I am going to announce that I have left Islam on facebook.

[The Grand Nudger]

Gonna be rough. I don't envy you on that count. Bet it takes steely ones to do though. Do you think anyone will appreciate the subtlety of it - that you haven't left all "the good" - you've just left allah out of that good...or, that you still have a lingering belief in a creator? Will that mean much to the folks whose opinions you're worried about?

[Mystic]

Well, I'm more worried about it for my family's sake. I think they would respect me more if I do state I still believe in a Creator.

[The Grand Nudger]

LOL< some level of solidarity in deception required eh. Wouldn't wanna put the lie to their own lie..would we..hehehe

---

In all seriousness, at least you don't expect a total meltdown. Got some former JW buds....people wont even talk to them. Not their friends, not their family, nobody. Same with scientologists.

[Mystic]

LOL< some level of solidarity in deception required eh. Wouldn't wanna put the lie to their own lie..would we..hehehe

I see what you did there.

[The Reality Salesman01]

there are so many threads here in which people explain that very thing.


why didnt you read through those?

The central reason- I guess. All the threads I've seen are about specific things which I'd find surprising if they are the central reason they don't believe.
But if the central reason is 'there's no evidence'- Okay- I've learned my lesson. Like I said in my OP, i'm not rejecting that reason, I'm just assuming it as the most common one. EDIT- but, it doesn't appear to be the case given some of the posts that others have made.

Rejecting the suggestion that any God is true needs no other reason than the fact that there is no God theory with evidence to support it.

It's kinda the definition. It's a defining characteristic of what makes an atheist an atheist and what separates them from Theists.

A-theist: Will not accept any God hypothesis without evidence showing that its true, there are claims of God(s), there is no evidence, therefore-Atheists.

Theist: Will accept a God(s) exists inspite of not having evidence, and instead based on individual interpretations of their personal experiences, which they often refer to as evidence. There's lots of Gods that require only this criteria to gain followers, none have evidence, so-Theists.

If there was evidence, and God theories weren't just a bunch of unfalsifiable hypotheses, then we wouldn't need these silly titles or categories of "belief" or for Atheists "lack of belief" on these subjects.

If somebody was convinced they were The Queen of England, and we could prove they in fact were not, we would either call them a fraud or a schizophrenic. We're just categorizing behavior and practicers of said behavior.

It's kinda the path you choose! Nothing more than that.