Atheism is the punk rock of religion

[fr0d0]

"Atheism = lack of belief in a god" is a statement of yours, not of mine. I merely quoted you.

You wen't further than that. You agreed with it, and I've quoted you agreeing with it.

"1. Atheism is a religion (correct by his own research)"
You admitted consumerism is not actually a religion, it simply shares characteristics in that it has quite a following. How you can say Atheism is actually a religion through the same definition is beyond me as it shows incredible bias against Atheism in particular.

I said as much (that consumerism doesn't come under the main definition of religion) above. No need to keep saying it.
How I can say that atheism is actually a religion is THAT YOU ACTUALLY SAID IT!!! I'm quoting your post where you quote the dictionary. You agreed with me that consumerism was to religion was what atheism is to religion. I therefore established with you that both consumerism AND atheism WOULD be defined as religion using your own quote.

I wasn't of this position until you enlightened me. I state nothing about it. You did. And I quote you doing it.

"2. Atheistic religions don't exist (despite proof of such presented)"
They don't. People within a religion can possess certain atheistic views but that does not make the religion itself atheistic. Also all of the religions you listed hold claims of the supernatural and have figures which posses powers on par with any deity and are worshipped as one, this means they could not be seen as being atheistic.

"On a par with a deity" =/= a deity. If it isn't a deity. If it isn't a god/s to believe in, then it isn't theism.

If a person can be a fully accepted member of a religion and also an atheist, then we have a religious atheist. It matters not if others of his faith are theists. The point that you contested is that there could not be religious atheists. And clearly there can.

"3. Atheism is the lack of belief in god/ gods, "thats simply what it is, a lack of belief and nothing else" (widelyt agreed) except that..."
3., 4. and 5 should really be put in the same point.

You don't get out of it that easily, sorry. I have quoted you saing that lack of belief in god/s is the only qualification of an atheist. I have shown by quoting you directly that you have said that other things define atheists. Some of which are actually factually wrong.

"4. Atheism is the lack of belief in anything proven"
er... no... no it isn't. I'm not sure where you got that from.

I quoted you. Follow the link.

"5. Atheists don't believe anything supernatural without proof (clearly disproven)"
Someone who believes in ghosts or psychics or any mystic mumbo jumbo like that we would call a spiritualist. Yes they have atheistic views but they are defined by what they *do* believe rather than what they do not.

No, they are atheists if that's what they claim. Remember what you've agreed: "atheism is merely a lack of belief in god/s. Nothing more".

I said you had lied about giving examples of contradictions I had not already proven were not contradictions.
All of the points raised I had already countered but as all can see I countered them once again

You have countered nothing. All of the points raised against you stand unscathed.

P.S. "black holes, aliens, dark matter" all of these are theories except for black holes as we can see the physical effects exerted on anything that crosses one.

Aliens are theories? We see the effect but is it a black hole that we see or some other phenomenon. That isn't proven.