Thanks for creating a forum with real debate!

[jstrodel]

It's apparent that you're not an expert in eastern religion - there are branches of both Buddhism and Taoism that are atheistic. Your ignorance of them does not strengthen your argument.

You are using a definition of atheism that may be true in a legalistic sense, that they do not believe in a God, but I think this is more of an attempt at atheist apologetic than a sincere desire to describe in accurate descriptive terms the nature of religious belief and how that functions in relation to cultural and traditional practices. I think that what you call "atheistic" forms of eastern religions exist side by side with more pantheistic or polytheistic forms of eastern religion and basically share a common cultural root, do not see themselves as antagonistic to other related religions.

In the West, atheism is a distinct movement that is linked to a culture war between the church and university to a large degree to determine who is in control of the democratic governments: science or religion. Atheism is really a political movement more than anything else, it is hostile to religion in order to advance a secular agenda, homosexual rights, feminism, a left wing/Marxist state, etc.

Atheists use a legalistic defintion of atheism that attempts to reduce a label of a political and cultural movement that has a very clear origin (the political left, Richard Dawkins, Karl Marx, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennet, Bertrand Russell, Ayn Rand, Stephen J Gould). I would not say that atheism neatly reduces to "liberals/leftists", there are Randian atheists, but the vast majority of atheism is originating in higher education from a small number of people that are typically extremely political (see Bertrand Russell, Stephen J Gould, Christopher Hitchens) and overwhelmingly politically to the left of the spectrum. Karl Marx was the most successful atheist (and leftist) in history and the only person to really create a distinct atheist movement that succeed in removing the old religious aristocracy.

This is really what the atheist movement is, it is the liberals and leftists in higher education (and yes, the Randian libertarians, though Ron Paul is a Christian). Atheism is a political movement. It really does not have much to do with the traditional spirituality of Buddhism and Taoism, as far as I know, there is no connection between the two groups.

Atheism is not at all a mere absence of belief in Gods. Of course people are free to create their own definition of words, but this definition is intentionally vague and leaves out the extremely political undertones of the atheist movement. Atheism is a carefully planned out plan to unseat the power of the Christian church in Western civilization and replace it with secular authority. It has succeed in Russia and throughout the world in the form of Communism, which Marxist's like Stephen J Gould and Christopher Hitchens have denounced (but still are sympathetic to Marxist views).

The desire to obscure the true nature of a movement may be politically expedient, but a definition offered on such terms may be freely rejected by honest inquirers. Atheism is a political movement and the stakes are high.