I feel like ol Frank is making some kind of fallacy error.
Saying that most all atheists share some common trait, doesn't alter the definition of atheism.
Most all atheists have two legs and can walk. Does that change the definition of atheism to those that have two legs ?
I may actively have a belief claim that no gods exist and and as such, I would need to provide some evidence to back up my claim, but that claim doesn't actively change my atheism.
My atheism is rooted in the idea that I don't have a belief that gods exist.
When someone asks "Do you believe that any gods exist ?"
My answer is "No"
I have no such belief.
When asked "Do you believe that an invisible, intangible hat rests upon your head ?"
My answer is again "No. I do not have that belief."
Saying that most all atheists share some common trait, doesn't alter the definition of atheism.
Most all atheists have two legs and can walk. Does that change the definition of atheism to those that have two legs ?
I may actively have a belief claim that no gods exist and and as such, I would need to provide some evidence to back up my claim, but that claim doesn't actively change my atheism.
My atheism is rooted in the idea that I don't have a belief that gods exist.
When someone asks "Do you believe that any gods exist ?"
My answer is "No"
I have no such belief.
When asked "Do you believe that an invisible, intangible hat rests upon your head ?"
My answer is again "No. I do not have that belief."
Insanity - Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result
