Antitheism

[Excited Penguin]

I meant "being antitheist" as in being anti theists, not "being an antitheist."

There is no meaning of the word antitheist that means one is against theists. It is simply a rather popular misconception among atheists here.

Just because you're anti theism and therefore an antitheist doesn't mean you're against all theists as people. Being an "Antitheist" is not the same as being "anti" theists. 

That's just dandy. I've been saying it all along, not sure how you missed it.

Deism is a form of theism that is harmless

It's also virtually meaningless.

---

I won't address the rest of your post, since I think I addressed similar points in my reply to MTL. I'll repeat this, though.

If you identify as anti-religion, but not as antitheist, all that means is you are against religion insofar as it doesn't involve belief in deities. Nothing more and nothing less. And seeing how the monotheistic religions revolve around a belief in deities... Well, you can understand the implications yourself. You can't be anti-Christianity, for example, and claim to not be an anti-theist. That's just silly.

[Heat]

If you think a belief is stupid, do you think the person is stupid?

I am not against the person holding the ice cream cone because I don't judge people based on one attribute.

Substitute "gun" or "bomb" for ice cream cone.

Religion is more like a gun or a bomb, than an ice cream cone.

I may not judge them, but I will hold them responsible for what they wield.

You're talking about something entirely different. If someone uses their belief to commit a violent action,  sure I will judge them by it. However if someone is simply holding a weapon? Sure I might make some inferences, but I won't say "they are going to commit a crime with it" because I simply don't know. You are implying that those substituted words are representative of actions, which is different from withholding judgements based on an attribute.

[Heat]

If you think a belief is stupid, do you think the person is stupid?

I am not against the person holding the ice cream cone because I don't judge people based on one attribute.

-Even smart people believe in stupid things.  I think you're going to need a sharper knife if you want to whittle a finer point.

-Perhaps a person can be against a specific belief set and, like you, not judge people based upon that one attribute?  Haven't you just offered at least one of the many possible answers for your previous question in this comment?

I don't know why what you just stated has any relevance to the effort of disproving what I stated. Looks like you just rephrased what I already said.

[Excited Penguin]

Let me be clear. No definition presupposes a hatred of people. To think that it does is simply incorrect.

I have to say I agree.

I fully understand why people hear "anti-theist" and take it as,
"I'm anti-any-PERSON-who-believes-in-god",
but since a theist is by definition someone who supports Theism,
it is supposed to be understood that it is their chosen belief to which I, as the Anti-Theist, object.

A black person does not choose to be black,
so to say someone is "anti-black people" is pretty clearly hateful;

but a theist chose their theist philosophy,
and it is implicit that the "Anti-Theist" is taking issue specifically with that CHOSEN aspect of that person's thinking;

it is implicit that it is their VIEWS that I am against,
not the individual themselves.

PERFECT. Everyone, read this, and tell me whether you're an antitheist or not.

Thank you MTL. With your permission, I think I'll add that to my description.

[Excited Penguin]

-Even smart people believe in stupid things.  I think you're going to need a sharper knife if you want to whittle a finer point.

-Perhaps a person can be against a specific belief set and, like you, not judge people based upon that one attribute?  Haven't you just offered at least one of the many possible answers for your previous question in this comment?

I don't know why what you just stated has any relevance to the effort of disproving what I stated. Looks like you just rephrased what I already said.

[The Grand Nudger]

I -did- rephrase what you just said, lol.  I jumped in back here, with my icecream example, to this portion of your back and forth.

What is the belief of god held by? People. So how then are you not Anti-people who believe in God(s), while being anti-belief in God(s)? It makes perfect sense.

Did I misread?  If so my bad.

[Excited Penguin]

Substitute "gun" or "bomb" for ice cream cone.

Religion is more like a gun or a bomb, than an ice cream cone.

I may not judge them, but I will hold them responsible for what they wield.

You're talking about something entirely different. If someone uses their belief to commit a violent action,  sure I will judge them by it. However if someone is simply holding a weapon? Sure I might make some inferences, but I won't say "they are going to commit a crime with it" because I simply don't know. You are implying that those substituted words are representative of actions, which is different from withholding judgements based on an attribute.

I won't judge someone for simply holding a belief either. Nor would any antitheist, presumably - that's just not what the concept is about. It's about exactly what you're talking about. Making some inferences and withholding judgement since you don't know. But at the same time being against negative use of their theism, if such use ever arises - which it does on a regular basis.

[Edwardo Piet]

@ EP

I don't think you're even trying to understand what I'm trying to say. I think you're here to just argue for the sake of it.

Anti-theism is different to anti-religion, I answered your question. I am not an anti-theist by any definition because I'm not anti-theism. I'm anti-religion but not anti religious people.

But keep being petty and ignore my actual main points like the ones in this post that I have already said repeatedly. Keep focusing on the little things and ignoring the majority of what I say. Keep making threads and ignoring all the serious answers and complaining about the non-serious ones. Keep focusing on the little petty things to try and one-up your opponent. Keep focusing on even the littlest of things you disagree with and ignoring anything you agree with regardless of size. Keep taking your opponents responses literally when it's awkward to do so and when it's actually correct to do so, to take them at face value, instead then assume you can read their mind and know what they "really mean". Keep being annoying. Keep turning this into a competition. You clearly need to do it to feel better about yourself and you have nothing better to do.

Tired of repeating myself EP=Exceedingly Petty.

[Excited Penguin]

Let me put this in perspective for some of you.

If you happen to be a physicist who doesn't like string theory, does that mean you're against string theorists?

It's the same with antitheism. You're against theism. Not against theists.

It seems frankly ridiculous to me that some of you identify as against religion, yet not against theism. I think this stems from the fact that you are embarassed because of initially failing to understand what the word means. If you are against religion, yet not against theism, that effectively means you are against non-theistic religions. Why would you be against those, and not against theistic ones as well?

[Excited Penguin]

Anti-theism is different to anti-religion, I answered your question. I am not an anti-theist by any definition because I'm not anti-theism. I'm anti-religion but not anti religious people.

I know it is different. Being anti-religion while not also being an antitheist merely means you are opposed to religion only to the extent that it doesn't involve belief in God(s). Which is amusing as fuck. -- Because I don't believe that you actually are. I believe you simply don't want to admit a mistake to me.