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.
Atheists are a broad demographic, some are anti-religious because they believe religion does more harm than good and that the good it does do can be done by something else and thus they combat what they believe is a threat. Others simply want a good argument for something to believe in, others find joy in debating, etc. All of that can be summed up as personal interest, which considering the influence of religion its good and natural to have some interest in it.
I debate theists because my life is effected negatively by theists everyday. The pledge of allegiance, U.S. currency, government benefits for married male/female couples, all of these things have religious influence even while they shouldn't. The interference of Religion with my daily life is why I debate theists.
Atheists have web sites that explain, discuss, and defend atheism. If atheism is not a philosophy or religion, what's the point? If atheists don't believe in God, why spend so much time discussing God?
So you're saying that atheists pick on Christian's because they're soft targets or they're alone in the world and need to put other people down to their level. The way i see it is that there is dirt, then there is shit beneath the dirt, than there is atheist. They sunk to a level of no turning back and the only way they could possibly try is to put people down is taking their religion or believes away.Which to me feels like i exposed their weakness.
Atheists have web sites that explain, discuss, and defend atheism. If atheism is not a philosophy or religion, what's the point? If atheists don't believe in God, why spend so much time discussing God?
Why discuss Star Trek or The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy if you don't believe in Vorgons or Cardassians?
It's a personal interest. Fiction may be discussed without believing in it. Further, the prevalence of religion in our lives makes it useful to learn about it.
So you're saying that atheists pick on Christian's because they're soft targets or they're alone in the world and need to put other people down to their level.
Believing that you are the centre of the universe, immortal, and judged by a cosmic entity is indefensible. That's why it is a soft target.
The way i see it is that there is dirt, then there is shit beneath the dirt, than there is atheist. They sunk to a level of no turning back and the only way they could possibly try is to put people down is taking their religion or believes away.Which to me feels like i exposed their weakness.
I don't find much credibility in your assessment of atheists here, because even if there were an organised effort to deconvert the masses, it could never be as bad as what Christians and Muslims have done historically, entering a village to massacre people who belong to another faith.
I don't find much credibility in your assessment of atheists here, because even if there were an organised effort to deconvert the masses, it could never be as bad as what Christians and Muslims have done historically, entering a village to massacre people who belong to another faith.
The point is, millions upon millions throughout history have been killed in the name of some ideology. None in history have been killed in the name of an absence of ideology.
You will never see a sign at a soldier's funeral reading "There is no god but he hates fags."
You won't see an atheist fighting over "holy land."
You will never find an atheist willing to fly a plane into a building or strap a bomb to them self in the name of "the absense of god."
History, logic, and observation all show unequivically that religion does more harm than good in this world. If there were a god, I'm pretty sure he would be atheist.
Atheism is an idealogy as well. The ideal that there is no God.
Take a handful of incidents and claim that all religions are bad. I could judge all atheist by your post, but I believe that a semi-intelligent atheist exist; Eventhough I have never met one.
Atheism is an idealogy as well. The ideal that there is no God.
No, it is not. Secular Humanism is an ideology. Atheism is a lack of theism.
Words have meaning, after all.
Take a handful of incidents and claim that all religions are bad. I could judge all atheist by your post, but I believe that a semi-intelligent atheist exist; Eventhough I have never met one.
That's probably because you only ever met exceptionally intelligent ones.
Equivocation is classified as both a formal and informal logical fallacy. It is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time). It generally occurs with polysemic words.
Defining atheism as an ideology and religion does not equate to theistic religion which you were attempting to accomplish.
Calling atheism a religion as you did is actually saying, "Atheists have a manner of thinking which precludes belief in god and they are devoted to this premise if they are hard atheists."
This is not the same as theistic religion, which actually says, "Theists are zealously devoted to god and any number of assumptions imagined as necessary to believe in god, along with activity zealously promoted which spreads this belief and gives this belief special status within society, along with rituals and dogma what are promoted as a means of communicating with god which are required to be believed in at the risk of expulsion from the group."
This taken directly from Wikipedia in which you worship.
"there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere."
They use ideology to describe atheist. Just because there is different views of atheism, it doesn't exclude it from ideology. If this ways the case then religions can be excluded from being the same as well. Therefore you must address a particular group to which you talking about.
To use SOPHISTRY as an argument is the same as calling someone a lier without proof. It carries no weight. It is just an excuse, to avoid facing the facts.
Atheism requires one thing and one thing only - the absence of a belief in a god. There is no required philosophy of life, conjectures about the afterlife, worship rituals, no mythos, dogma, or suggested set of behaviors. Atheism has no leaders, local or global, or places of worship. Let's pretend for a second that your definition of religion is correct, and atheism constitutes a religion.
By definition, you would then have to accept the lack of belief in the Tooth Fairy, Bigfoot, UFOs, and unicorns to each constitute their own distinct religion. I could make up a creature and if you decide the probability of its existence is so absurdly small that you wouldn't waste a second living or thinking as though it did exist, then you and I would then suddenly belong to the same religion.
There are infinite things not to believe in, and by your definition, they must each constitute a religion. There would then be infinite religions and we would all belong to most of them together. Thousands could be created every second as people invented concepts and beings and then proceeded to not believe in them. We would all belong to more religions than we could possibly count and I don't know how religion could possibly retain any semblance of meaning in that situation.
By the same non-sense there are several religions that you belong to. The Round Earthers, The CreateDebaters, Etc., you didn't realize just how religious you are.
They use ideology to describe atheist. Just because there is different views of atheism, it doesn't exclude it from ideology. If this ways the case then religions can be excluded from being the same as well. Therefore you must address a particular group to which you talking about.
I'm puzzled by how you misread:
"there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere."
To mean:
"there is no one belief or set of behaviors to which the ideology of atheism adheres."
When it actually means:
"atheists possess no common ideology or set of behaviours."
To use SOPHISTRY as an argument is the same as calling someone a lier without proof. It carries no weight. It is just an excuse, to avoid facing the facts.
Your sophistry is so plain I don't think it necessary to specify. It's like if you said that you owned the United Nations, and I called you a liar. It would be unnecessary for me to elaborate.
You said that atheism is not ideology, I just proved it is. I never said that it is only one ideology, therefore your argument is senseless.
No, you equivocated. The meaning of ideology that is important to the discussion we were having is the one where people share a common set of beliefs, rituals, practices, and opinions, often with a central qualifying dogma.
This isn't atheism. In the narrowest sense positive atheism is the belief that god doesn't exist, due to improbability or infeasibility. It is not ideology as per the common definition.
Calling it ideology as per the auxiliary definition where ideology is synonymous with belief, and then exchanging that definition with the first, popular definition is an act of sophistry known as equivocation.
In other words, a light bulb need not be light nor are the ones used in commercial applications light.
Isn't it about time you looked for a new word. Others continue to learn and use other words, your still stuck on word number one.
In order to help you out I suggest you go back to Wiktionary:Word of the day. They haven't used equivocated since 1986, todays word is whangdoodle.
To help you even farther I have included the definition:
(often humorous) A whimsical monster in folklore and children's fiction; a bugbear.
I picked this site just for you because you love Wikiapedia, and Wiktionary also starts with the letter W. How you got this far in the alphabet is a mystery? Shouldn't you be on A still?
Isn't it about time you looked for a new word. Others continue to learn and use other words, your still stuck on word number one.
I should ask the same of you. You're still stuck on using equivocation as a basis of argument. Haven't you learned to move forward and base an argument on evidence and reason?
"Why discuss Star Trek or The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy if you don't believe in Vorgons or Cardassians?
It's a personal interest. Fiction may be discussed without believing in it. Further, the prevalence of religion in our lives makes it useful to learn about it."
God isn't a fiction, atheists only believe it is a fiction because they don't want to accept the fact they are dumb and weak. They can only try to pick on theists because they believe that by doing so they could make this world a better place. BUT THEY ARE WRONG.
"Believing that you are the centre of the universe, immortal, and judged by a cosmic entity is indefensible. That's why it is a soft target."
Chrisitian's don't believe they are the centre of the universe, immortal or judged by a cosmic entity.... I'm sorry sir but you obviously do not know what a Christian is. A Chrisitian is someone who respects God. They are not the centre of the universe they know that. They know that they are just a little small pawn that god can see from up above. They know that they will never be immortal. They pray because they God always helps them. YOU won't understand and never will. I feel sorry for you. Maybe when you reach the pearly gates of heaven and it is your time to go. God will ask you why should you be here. And you won't have a answer. All you will do is go to the depths of the underworld where you belong. Atheist.
God isn't a fiction, atheists only believe it is a fiction because they don't want to accept the fact they are dumb and weak. They can only try to pick on theists because they believe that by doing so they could make this world a better place. BUT THEY ARE WRONG.
You asked a question, I gave you an answer: people enjoy discussing interests, including interests in fiction.
Chrisitian's don't believe they are the centre of the universe, immortal or judged by a cosmic entity.... I'm sorry sir but you obviously do not know what a Christian is.
Christian dogma requires that you believe the creator of the universe's son was sacrificed so that all mortal men may enter a heaven (immortality) if only they believe in and accept Christ. Further points of dogma assert that the earth is fixed, and that the sun and planets rotate around it, presumably the entire universe too orbits the earth, this is part of what the firmament is. Revelation describes an event where stars fall from the heavens onto Earth. The creator of the universe is painted as a judge of humanity's transgressions.
This is entirely self-absorbed thinking, it presumes that we are the only intelligent life in the universe.
A Chrisitian is someone who respects God.
No. A Christian is one who believes in the godhead and salvation through Christ.
They are not the centre of the universe they know that. They know that they are just a little small pawn that god can see from up above.
What's that famous bit of scripture often shared with unbelievers?
For god so loved the world he sent his only son to die so that you may live.
In other words the creator of the universe sacrifices himself/son so that a planet of people may be forgiven by himself.
They know that they will never be immortal.
The part of life through Jesus refers to everlasting life. It does not insinuate that if you disbelieve in Jesus you will die right there.
They pray because they God always helps them. YOU won't understand and never will. I feel sorry for you. Maybe when you reach the pearly gates of heaven and it is your time to go. God will ask you why should you be here. And you won't have a answer. All you will do is go to the depths of the underworld where you belong. Atheist.
Appeal to fear. Fortunately, I don't fear what doesn't exist.
Would you like to discuss Allah and his prophet Muhammad (PBUH)? He is the one true god.
So you're saying...they're alone in the world and need to put other people down to their level.
He didn't say that. You did.
The way i see it is that there is dirt, then there is shit beneath the dirt, than there is atheist. They sunk to a level of no turning back and the only way they could possibly try is to put people down is taking their religion or believes away.Which to me feels like i exposed their weakness.
If this is what helps you sleep at night, then keep telling yourself that. You clearly have already made up your mind about a diverse demographic of people, so I'm pretty sure it's not even worth honestly disputing.
Not to nitpick, but if atheists were scared, wouldn't we not argue?
Anyway, while the sanity behind believing in something that not a one of the 6 billion people on earth has ever found an ounce of proof for, based on various books written before plumbing, and that in many cases still insists god made us out of clay 2000 years ago despite all evidence to the contrary, is pretty pretty convincing,
I'm going to go ahead and speak for most atheists I think, and say "sanity" is not the problem when it comes to theism.
Honestly I don't think that atheists argue with theists for any one unified reason. It was more of a joke than anything.
Not to nitpick, but if atheists were scared, wouldn't we not argue?
I was taught that if there's something to fear, there's something to fix.
Anyway, while the sanity behind believing in something that not a one of the 6 billion people on earth has ever found an ounce of proof for, based on various books written before plumbing, and that in many cases still insists god made us out of clay 2000 years ago despite all evidence to the contrary, is pretty pretty convincing,
Of course it is. The evidence against those dusty texts is discovered by curious and sane people.
