I'm an atheist but I quite like Buddism...

[The Grand Nudger]

Only Buddhas follow the path perfectly. I mess up all the time - but those are my guidelines.

Sounds like woo. Point to a buddha so we can see how perfectly they follow this path?

I fail to understand this demand for exclusivity. Of course you can find all the parts of Buddhism in other things. Nothing has inherent existence - everything is compounded. Buddhists practice and believe in all kinds of magic and woo stuff.

Not really a demand for exclusivity in my case. But being who I am, if some person claims that a tradition grants them something that I want, and I see a more rational alternative without additional baggage and no magic, I take that instead (the baggage is usually the problem which I would like to see resolved - it grinds my gears when people "get it right" for absurdly silly reasons...a much stronger case can be made). Often enough, I just don't want what any given religion says it offers. I have what you might consider smaller aspirations. Most of the time I'm just looking for some tangible work that I can do which provides a demonstrable benefit to myself and those around me. With my hands, mind you, not my "spirit".

So do atheists. Atheism and Buddhism are not of the same category, obviously, or should I hold you accountable for all the practices and deed of self-proclaimed atheists? That would be mindless. I'm strive to be detached from my views, to accept change and new knowledge. Would you continue to be an atheist if God appeared in your living for a chat? I like the fourteen precepts, but obviously they are not eternal or perfect.

Some atheists may, but unless it has to do with their atheism particularly, meh. In any case -this atheist- doesn't. Now I'm not holding you, personally, accountable for everything that buddhists have ever done. That's on them. The issue is that when their buddhism is pointed to as the impetus (your example regarding killing priests, btw, terrible example of a tu qo..because it was some additional belief about the shittiness of priests, not the claimants lack of belief in god which spurred the comment), and I can get whatever you think buddhism gives without that shitty thing, again, I bench buddhism. Like I said, I'm a humanist. I don't think that either atheism or theism (or deism) would continue to have any meaning to me if I were presented with a god. If you're asking me whether, for example..if I met the christian god (or any other) I would become a christian (or any other), or not- the answer is "not". I wouldn't. My atheism does not inform me in this regard, or any other.

the buddha taught that humans are at a special point between animal and divinity - we are self-aware, yet we still suffer.

Woo....don't care. Useless to me.

because of this human, and only humans, can attain enlightenment and transcend suffering.

Woo, don't care, useless to me.

gods, if they exist, cannot - their suffering is too subtle to be an effective learning tool.

Woo, don't care, useless to me.

the goal of buddhism is the end of human suffering

-and good luck achieving that by means of magic.

- the Four Noble Truths are: the human condition is suffering (in the sense of being unsatisfactory), this suffering comes from attachments and desires for things mental and physical, it is possible to free from suffering, the best way to be free from suffering is to lead an ethical life and practice mindfulness (maintain a nondualist POV). is that magic?

What's unsatisfactory, suffering, or the human condition? I think that your summary of where suffering comes from is woo-based, and I don't think that suffering can actually be removed by leading an ethical life or practicing "mindfulness".

is it irrational?

as you've described it? Yes.

we've tested it, empirically, for 2,500 years. it's what monks do - they are ethical and mindful and as a result lead deeply fulfilling and satisfying lives, otherwise, obviously, they'd do something else. all of us buddhists try, and, as they say, YMMV. i do my best, and i know it works for me. how on earth could you possibly have a problem with that?

Yeah, and the christians have tested their faiths empirically as well, for just about as long. Surprise surprise...it's returned similar results in both cases.

I already layed out my problem with -all of it-. I'm a humanist. I don't think that anything you mentioned in that last post or this post is capable of achieving what you claim it sets out to achieve, I don;t think that the foundations upon which any of it are erected can possibly withstand the weight of the house built atop. I don't think that your monks have escaped the human condition, even marginally, and I don't believe that there are any "buddhas" or ever have been. I prefer rational solutions to human problems, and I place humans and human matters at the top of my list. Spirits, buddhas, karma, enlightenment, transcending suffering, none of this means anything to me. Each and every one is a deepity.

(I take it you don't need to me gut your last post anymore, and that you've gone from "what woo?" to "everyone's doing it!" at this point, right? Amusingly..this is right where we started...isn't it..with the whole "kill the priests" routine?)

Let me end this with the suggestion that none of whatever benefits you've found in buddhism actually come from buddhism (and that some of those principles you mentioned aren't all that beneficial - to anyone). I think that they are more correctly attributed to you, personally. Your potential as a human being - all of our potential. Insomuch as religion seems ever present and standing in the way of that potential, I oppose it. Insomuch as it causes others to suffer on it's count, I abhor it. When it keeps it in it's pants, I ignore it.