Before Reading: Do not start reading unless you plan to finish...this is going to be a long one. Also, try not to comment unless you have read the post in its entirety.
I became an atheist at the age of 16. I was raised in a semi-Catholic home, but my family members never took the notion very seriously. As I started AP biology, my views on evolution were solidified. I never doubted the scientific accuracy of the theory, but never really had a true understanding. That is where the primary issue lays. Accepting that God created man, or accepting the earth is 6000 years old is something that can be done with little or no effort. It is hard when having a debate, all a believer has to do is invoke the power of God, but we as Atheists have to give a science lesson. We also have to explain the simple fact that "hey buddy, god didn't write the bible, humans did." There is no extrapolation needed!
My main audience for this article are the agnostics out there. I have to say, I don't understand them. The inability to disprove something does not make it a fact. One of my favorite quotes is "The absence of fact is not evidence of fiction." - Mark Twain. I believe that if you do not believe in God or a spiritual force, than you should feel confident that you need not sit on the fence. It is not up to the atheist to disprove an existence, but more up to the believers who present the idea. Burden of proof should not keep anyone in the agnostic boat.
I am a confident atheist for one simple reason, and agnostics should pay close attention: To this point, humanity has absolutely no reason to believe there is, or ever was a god or gods. Keeping that in mind, why be agnostic? Why not just go with what is logical and maintain atheism until there is a good argument for the existence of a God? Just a thought. Fire back if you thinking I'm being too absolute.
I became an atheist at the age of 16. I was raised in a semi-Catholic home, but my family members never took the notion very seriously. As I started AP biology, my views on evolution were solidified. I never doubted the scientific accuracy of the theory, but never really had a true understanding. That is where the primary issue lays. Accepting that God created man, or accepting the earth is 6000 years old is something that can be done with little or no effort. It is hard when having a debate, all a believer has to do is invoke the power of God, but we as Atheists have to give a science lesson. We also have to explain the simple fact that "hey buddy, god didn't write the bible, humans did." There is no extrapolation needed!
My main audience for this article are the agnostics out there. I have to say, I don't understand them. The inability to disprove something does not make it a fact. One of my favorite quotes is "The absence of fact is not evidence of fiction." - Mark Twain. I believe that if you do not believe in God or a spiritual force, than you should feel confident that you need not sit on the fence. It is not up to the atheist to disprove an existence, but more up to the believers who present the idea. Burden of proof should not keep anyone in the agnostic boat.
I am a confident atheist for one simple reason, and agnostics should pay close attention: To this point, humanity has absolutely no reason to believe there is, or ever was a god or gods. Keeping that in mind, why be agnostic? Why not just go with what is logical and maintain atheism until there is a good argument for the existence of a God? Just a thought. Fire back if you thinking I'm being too absolute.
