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.

[Jackalope]

[Cyberman]

I always appreciate having someone come along and tell atheists what atheism is, but this is getting into real tinfoil hat territory. "A-" = without; "Theism" = the belief in gods or doctrine of same. No need to make such heavy weather of it.

[Brian37]

I appreciate what you guys are doing on this forum, how you have real debate and let Christians voice their views. It shows that you are committed to our common goal of understanding the world. I have been on other atheist boards where I was banned just for presenting a Christian perspective, also, IRC channels. Thanks for being true to atheist principles.

Um theists have been banned on this board, but not for debating, but spamming and out right nutty bigotry.

I have much more value for a theist who can handle the blasphemy and ridicule than I do for insecurity. I wont mince words and in the time I have been here most know that. I find ALL, not just your claims, but ALL claims of invisible friends absurd.

Look at me this way, because I do not speak for all atheists. EXAMPLE,

Claimant "The Chargers won the Super Bowl this year"

Skeptic "Bullshit, the Ravens did"

What I hate in conversing with theists is when they falsely say "YOU HATE ME". No I may hate what you utter, but you are not merely one claim on one subject.

Theists will stay longer at any atheist website, and enjoy their stay more if they separate their claims from them. The issue is not about the person, but what the person claims.

[paulpablo]

I'd also like to add that this is the best forum I've been on. I don't just mean because I'm atheist and the forum is based on atheism i mean it's safe to say that this forum is way way way WAY better designed than any of the muslim forums i used to go onto.
The layout is bright, easy to use, flows smoothly with my computer, even posting videos only makes the threads go marginally slower.
On the muslim forums I used to go on and sometimes still do go on they are usually dull, jerky, slow at loading, the one muslim forum I'm not banned from and i use now actually had adverts slapped right in the middle of the page so sometimes you can't even see what you have just posted.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

You were doing so well up to the last sentence! An atheist with principles is like off is a TV channel.

We graduated grade school so of course we don't have principles! We have bosses though.

[Ben Davis]

---

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.

---

You're conflating secularism and communism (political movements with specific agendas) with atheism (an apolitical position on a non-political subject). I'll give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you're simply labouring under a misapprehension rather than being deliberately intellectually dishonest but you are misrepresenting a very clear and well understood definition.

[Ryantology]

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).

I had no idea I was a member of a large, organized, planned attempt to subvert a single, specific religion.

[jstrodel]

You're conflating secularism and communism (political movements with specific agendas) with atheism (an apolitical position on a non-political subject). I'll give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you're simply labouring under a misapprehension rather than being deliberately intellectually dishonest but you are misrepresenting a very clear and well understood definition.

No I'm not. You are intentionally defining a term to obscure the fact that those two movements come out of the same people, with the same funding, and the same culture. You are creating a definition of a term to make atheism appear like it has come out of thin air.

Your central piece of evidence is a dictionary definition. Don't you realize that people write dictionaries and have their own motivations for doing so?

Why can't you see that what you are doing is extremely political and is intentionally avoiding a real appreciation of the nature of the atheist movement?

---

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).

I had no idea I was a member of a large, organized, planned attempt to subvert a single, specific religion.

You have a picture of Bertrand Russell as your avatar. Give me a break. Did you post in the ecstasy thread too about how Christians are fools because they think atheists are drug users?

[Aractus]

Nice, a thread where we all get to pat ourselves on the back and tell ourselves how great we all are!