Anti-theism and anti-religion

[Dystopia]

After reviewing some of my posts and real life arguments I've came to the conclusion that I hold a frontal opposition to religion, but I'm not against the simple god concept, despite considering it silly. I positively criticize and claim to be against all religions, constantly trying to prove them false to believers, I think they are unnecessary and childish, a rational healthy mind shouldn't accept religion.

Can I be anti-religion without being an anti-theist, or does being anti-religion necessarily make me an anti-theist?

[Cato]

Strictly speaking, a god is not required for religion nor is religion required for belief in a god; Buddhism and Deism immediately come to mind.

In its most common use, anti-theism subsumes anti-religion in that it is not simply the belief in a god that is taken issue with but what this god is purported to dictate in the areas of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and politics. For the vast majority of propositions, it is a distinction without a difference. I doubt that many hearing the word anti-theist for the first time will immediately conclude that the referent is simply someone that has it out for god claims, but is perfectly okay with the religious baggage in tow.

The opposite works as well. Deists are often accused of atheism by other theists. For that matter, people that believe in a different god will run into the same issue. This reminds me of the saying "I don't care what religion they are as long as they believe in Jesus".

The distinction isn't typically invoked in any meaningful way; i.e, the purpose isn't usually to clarify terms important to the conversation, but meant to obfuscate the issue at hand.

[vorlon13]

In the case of Scientology, the only recognized requirement is a sincerely held belief in making money.

(for the folks running it, of course, the flock tends to take it in the ass)

[buddabobblehead]

Scientology is a great example of a 'religion'. Its quite clear to all Scientologists, and everyone else, that it was all made up by Ron Hubbard. No deity, no problem.

I would propose that most believers in the US are not particularly religious. They believe in god but not really church, a book etc. Those people usually sef identify as 'spiritual'. Its interesting to me how many people cant really let go of the god thing. They have to cont to believe in the supernatural. Its just too unsettling for them.

[vorlon13]

Most 'believers' aren't Literalist, Inerrant in their view of scripture, or particularly eager to learn of any more strictures they might feel guilty about not observing.

Atheists don't believe, as noted in several of those delicious de-motivational cartoons here, in 5853 Gods. US Christians don't believe in 5852. And I would add, they don't believe in 90% of what their God decreed in their Scriptures.

I posit Atheism has won, and has won many, many years ago in the US. The Christers may not acknowledge it, but the fact of their overwhelming selective reading and selective belief, and selective adherence is the clincher.

Now, we just need them to get honest with themselves.

[The Grand Nudger]

Atheism had "won" long before christers showed up. Epicuras, Cavarka, as long as people have been positing god there has been a dissenting voice. Their dissent remains as intact as it has always been.

[Dystopia]

Strictly speaking, a god is not required for religion nor is religion required for belief in a god; Buddhism and Deism immediately come to mind.

In its most common use, anti-theism subsumes anti-religion in that it is not simply the belief in a god that is taken issue with but what this god is purported to dictate in the areas of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and politics. For the vast majority of propositions, it is a distinction without a difference. I doubt that many hearing the word anti-theist for the first time will immediately conclude that the referent is simply someone that has it out for god claims, but is perfectly okay with the religious baggage in tow.

The opposite works as well. Deists are often accused of atheism by other theists. For that matter, people that believe in a different god will run into the same issue. This reminds me of the saying "I don't care what religion they are as long as they believe in Jesus".

The distinction isn't typically invoked in any meaningful way; i.e, the purpose isn't usually to clarify terms important to the conversation, but meant to obfuscate the issue at hand.

Anti-theism requires anti-religion except for religions who don't preach to a personal god. The problem is I'm not against the god concept and people believing in god, I'm not against deists or agnostic theists... If you tell me 'I believe in a higher force', my answer will be 'good for you', if you tell me 'I'm a christian', my answer will be 'religions don't make any sense'

---

Atheism had "won" long before christers showed up. Epicuras, Cavarka, as long as people have been positing god there has been a dissenting voice. Their dissent remains as intact as it has always been.

True story, but you guys still need to enlighten me up in my distinction. I'm trying to label myself and don't know how

[Bad Wolf]

After reviewing some of my posts and real life arguments I've came to the conclusion that I hold a frontal opposition to religion, but I'm not against the simple god concept, despite considering it silly. I positively criticize and claim to be against all religions, constantly trying to prove them false to believers, I think they are unnecessary and childish, a rational healthy mind shouldn't accept religion.

Can I be anti-religion without being an anti-theist, or does being anti-religion necessarily make me an anti-theist?

You can hate cancer but that doesn't mean you hate people with cancer, right?

[Dystopia]

After reviewing some of my posts and real life arguments I've came to the conclusion that I hold a frontal opposition to religion, but I'm not against the simple god concept, despite considering it silly. I positively criticize and claim to be against all religions, constantly trying to prove them false to believers, I think they are unnecessary and childish, a rational healthy mind shouldn't accept religion.

Can I be anti-religion without being an anti-theist, or does being anti-religion necessarily make me an anti-theist?

You can hate cancer but that doesn't mean you hate people with cancer, right?

No of course not, my question is if I'm an anti-theist or anti-religion.

---

Quoting wikipedia:

Antireligion is opposition to religion. Antireligion is distinct from atheism (the absence of a belief in deities) and antitheism (an opposition to belief in deities), although antireligionists may be atheists or antitheists. The term may be used to describe opposition to organized religion, or to describe a broader opposition to any form of belief in the supernatural or the divine.

So I guess there is a distinction between anti-religion and anti-theism

[The Grand Nudger]

All in an effort to help someone label themselves for whatever ungodly reason they deign to do so...

I'm an anti-theist. It's not an issue of belief, my anti-theism doesn't arise from atheism (though I happen to be an atheist as well). Similarly, I take a stand against what most would describe as religion only as a consequence of it flowing from a god. When it comes to godless religions, it isn't my anti-theism that forces me to conclude that they're all a bunch of dolts. That's my "rational bias" at play.

If you aren't opposed to the very idea of a god, anti-theism probably isn't the proper label for you, though I suppose you could find wiggle room in deistic concepts (they don't escape my anti-theism, personally..if and when they manage to wiggle out of being personal or individually relevant gods they cease - to me- to be gods at all in any meaningful sense. Just the misuse of a word for fairly transparent reasons).

You might find that you have some things in common with me, but having some things in common with an anti-theist, or the anti-theist position does not make you an anti-theist.