CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
... why do you quote someone who brilliantly sums up the impossibility of an extreme atheist, when I know you for a religious loon consistently deriding atheists?
... do you really not understand that brilliant quote you took the time to type out?
I like how atheist claim that I take something out context and then don't state what is the meaning. Could it be that I'm correct and you have nothing?
Firstly, Atheism is not a religion, religious group or ideology. It is, in the simplest terms possible, a lack of belief in a god or gods.
Secondly, Al Qaeda may be the most prolific faith based terrorist group, of which have been the conspirators and persons responsible for thousands of murders, since their creation.
Atheists have no such crimes committed in the name of 'Atheism' (a tautology, as how can you do something in the name of something that professes a non-belief).
Atheists, as a whole do not preach non-belief in a evangelical, fundamentalist way as Al-Qaeda do, and certainly do not proceed to commit crimes (Al-Qaeda commit murders, mostly) if the people they preach to do not comply with their own beliefs.
To clarify, Atheism is simply the non-belief in something. Just as not collecting stamps is not a hobby, and the people who do not collect stamps couldn't collectively be labelled as 'radical' for views they may hold, Atheism is not a; religion, ideology, faith system or irreligious movement.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines religion as:
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power , especially a personal God or gods:ideas about the relationship between science and religion
No, you are not the one calling the kettle black, but a more reputable source is calling the kettle white.
1. not any particular or certain one of a class or group: a man; a chemical; a house.
2. a certain; a particular: one at a time; two of a kind; A Miss Johnson called.
3. another; one typically resembling: a Cicero in eloquence; a Jonah.
4. one (used before plural nouns that are preceded by a quantifier singular in form): a hundred men (compare hundreds of men ); a dozen times (compare dozens of times ).
5. indefinitely or nonspecifically (used with adjectives expressing number): a great many years; a few stars.
6. one (used before a noun expressing quantity): a yard of ribbon; a score of times.
7. any; a single: not a one.
Supporting Evidence:
The meaning of A
(dictionary.reference.com)
Just wanted you to work for it. I already knew the outcome of your search. This still doesn't change the fact that so many atheist promote atheism here and thus making it a religion by definition.
Unfortunately the most radical religious group is not a part of this debate. I believe Christians are the most radical, feeling the need to convert people for centuries, going through bloody crusades of entire cultures to rid the world of non-believers. No one has been more actively pushing their religion in the worlds history than Christians. I do not think they are bad people, or that christianity is a bad religion, I just think that they are the most radical.
I'm glad to learn that atheist are more radical than Al Qaeda. If I was an atheist I wouldn't have posted on the side that said atheist were more radical. One cannot argue against a group that believes they themselves are more radical than Al Qaeda.
Looks like the government is after the wrong group.
Congratulations on failing to see the pie chart or reading any of the comments. You think everyone down rates you because they don't like the truth, or that they are just against opposition. No, it's because you are an ignorant bigot who can only pose one sided arguments then ignore and fail to refute any coherent arguments against your position. Your arguments are weak and pathetic, and whenever someone disputes you with points you can't argue, you simply ignore them and never answer. How about you grow some brains and balls, it seems like you are lacking in both categories.
I saw the pie chart and I am aware of the pie hole that started it.
I also saw which side atheist posted on. Stated that you are more radical than Al Queda, the facts speak for themselves.
As far as posting one sided arguments, I haven't seen atheist do anything but the same. I suggest before you throw stones, you move out of the glass house.
First off, please explain how atheism is an "absolutist attitude." Second atheism is not a religion, it is the lack of one, all it is, is the statement that someone lacks a belief in a god, that's it, if someone says they are an atheist, that is the only thing that can be presumed about them. Lastly, any group has a variance within and is only considered "radical" either based on its difference from the norm of that group, or relative to your own group. Radical is a completely relative term and you have not defined a norm so there can be no comparison to judge difference.
I'm not an extremist, just seeking the truth. The truth is that atheist are conceded and only deem their way of thinking as the right way. Where is the logic in thinking your always right? I'm not the one that claims to know whether or not God exist, I clearly state that I have faith God does exist. Beyond this I don't know, but an atheist knows all.
So why then do you devote so much of your attention to atheists? I know, and have met many Christians and Muslims who do precisely the same thing, yet you reserve your criticism for atheists.
I am aware that many Christians and Muslims do the same thing I accuse the atheist of doing, but I cannot stand somebody that deems themselves above everyone else. Many of the atheist here believe they are superior beings to everyone else and as long as they continue this, I will keep after them.
I have yet to see any other group here as radical as the atheist are and if one should arise, I shall go after them regardless of their believes. I am an equal opportunity offender.
I am aware that many Christians and Muslims do the same thing I accuse the atheist of doing, but I cannot somebody that deems themselves above everyone else. Many of the atheist here believe they are superior beings to everyone else and as long as they continue this, I will keep after them.
So then why are you stereotyping all atheists this way? You're aware this makes you look like a bigot, right? This is why people down-vote you, because you are making pejorative remarks. You're comparing atheists to Al Qaeda, this is why people down-vote you.
They stated a battle and I intend to end the war. If they do not like the truth I suggest they leave or learn to live with it. I found it quite amusing that bigots call others bigots.
Nobody is starting anything, if you are fighting an imaginary war, only you are aware of it. Comparing atheists to a terrorist Network, makes you look like a bigot, I'm just letting you know.
Why would I deny what I set out to achieve? I had to work hard to get to the same level as atheist. It doesn't come nature for me. I'll be glad to return to my nature unbigoted state after I prove my point. 'Til then hang on the ride is going to be a bumpy one.
i know, but I am a stupid guy, because I have some semblance of hope for humanity, and I keep thinking my hope will go away because my attempts to reason with people never work. This inkling of hope I have that he, or others like him, can be reasoned with persists like a malignant tumor and I keep trying just with the hope that at least some person will see what I have to say and listen to it, identify with it, or maybe even learn something from it. I just would like to think that I can get through to someone with my words, I have some faith in humanity, it's completely irrational but I will always keep trying to use logic to change people's minds.
Atheist claim God does not exist. This is an absolute, unless you believe God may exist. In this case you would not be an atheist. Isn't this the attitude atheist take on this? Absolute attitude.
Watching atheist attempt to disprove that God doesn't exist, is enough to make someone believe God does exist. Atheist don't even believe their own line of crap they use. Where is the logic in not believe in your own BS?
Seen all people that belive in God use these words? logical fallacy, critical thinking, pseudo-problem of logic, a matter of proper authorities, logical coherency, uses incorrect authorities, debating has rules, equivocation, logical errors, anecdotal, and sophistry.
Atheism is not the claim that that god does not exist, it is simply the lack of a belief in a supernatural deity because the evidence for such a deity is insufficient. If you don't understand what atheism is then you don't know what you're talking about. And if you don't know what you are talking about then you should stfu. The belief in a god, is a positive assertion of fact, that is where the burden of proof lies. Atheism is the lack of belief in something that has not been proven to exist, i will not believe in an unproven god any more than I will believe in leprechauns or unicorns. No atheist can disprove God, and no christian can prove it, because God is an unfalsifiable hypothesis, you cannot disprove God, much like you can't disprove me if I say that I can fly when no one is looking, or that I own an invisible hamster that has no physical properties or can be measured in any way. It is logical to not believe in something that has not been proven, and God, just like the hamster or my flying ability, has not been proven to exist so I will not believe in it.
Almost all religions have Gods, and all of those ones have holy books which give equal amounts of evidence for the existence of their god as the bible gives for the existence of your God. The Qur'an, Upanishads, the Vedas, the book of mormon, the guru adi granth: you are an atheist when it comes to the gods these books assert the existence of. You cannot disprove any of their claims that their God exists anymore than yours does. You are an atheist when it comes to all but one God. I just take it one step further.
On a side note, I'm sorry but if you would like to have a legitimate and informed debate you should pull your head out of your ass first.
Tell the rest of the atheist here the difference. You claim one thing and the rest claim another. Atheist have said over and over again God does not exist.
Or not having read every argument ever posted by an atheist, but you know, your hypothesis is definitely the more plausible. I never said I knew the wording of the belief of others, I just said I don't know that, apparently you are the one who can't read.
How can you claim to read after being here for more than thirty days, and seeing what others post. If you can read than comprehension is not your strong point.
I don't read all of their arguments. But that's not the point. I never claimed that that is the description of atheism that everyone holds to, only that the actual claim of atheism is not a positive assertion of fact (such as there is no God) but merely the denial of rejections of claims that there is one. Apparently ignorance is your strong point, you have demonstrated that time and time again.
It's strange that you hate atheism so much when you never even took the time to look up the definition. Your ignorance isn't based on your observation, it's based on your out-spoken positions on subjects of whose basic principles you do not even understand.
To be fair, some degree of controversy has arisen among theologians and philosophers on this point. The traditional understanding created a three part spectrum: theist (I believe there is a God), agnostic (I don't know what to believe), atheist (I believe there is no God.) However there turns out to be a problem because it fails to delineate between people who don't believe in God, and those who believe there is no God, which are actually two different approaches to atheism. I have similar problems with those who claim "there is no God" as I do with people who claim "there is a God", as neither science nor logic, our two most objective methodologies, are able to verify either claim. That is why I and other people have started to use the term agnostic atheism. Technically, since we are claiming that there is no way to know, we are a version of agnostic, but since we do not believe, we are also atheist. Hence the hybrid term, that allows for a fourth point on the spectrum.
