And Proud to Say It

i used to say i was an aethiest aswell, until i found out wat the word actually ment, and that there was another word (agnostic) that explained how i felt much better. i think that 100% being against religen is jst as moronic as being 100% for religen.  i believe in the possibilty of all religens, i jst dont find them very likely. but ther are also many scientific theories that i dont find likely. i prefer to ignor the hole thing and get on with my life. but i luv a gd arguement and thus am drawn into many discussions involving religen.
deleted deleted
5 Responses Oct 8, 2007

I totally agree 100% matter of fact I think it comes from having Knowledge as well anyway I feel that religion keeps the hate going.I mean look at it Christians,Jews,Muslims,Buddist,Jehovah witnesess,Etc all disagree with one another.So I came to an conclusion to Just love all and believe that it is a higher power and that God is God period. I've been married to a Muslim for a year now and they believe Muhammed was a from God and they look down on Christians and I dont agree with it at all.

I agree. I went though a period where I was hell bent against religion. I felt I was atheistic because I knew I still existed completely outside the realms of religious dogma. The fact is I can validly argue any point for or a against any belief system. Therefor I am both Atheist and Religious. Truth is found in the balance between extremes. Anybody out of balance will be unstable and their actions will show this instability. Anyways...

I would disagree. Being 100% a disbeliever in some god, any god, is to follow the basis of evidence that is available at this time. Let's put it this way:<br />
<br />
For belief in God: 'cause the Pope said so... and a few others as well. "We believe it, and that's good enough."<br />
<br />
For unbelief in God: Not one scintilla, not one scrap of empirical, reproducible evidence for the existence of god. Judaism has been around for some 3 millenia, and christianity has been around for two. If there was actual, physical evidence for the existence of god, don't you think the proponents of whichever religion would have produced it by now?

I would argue that being an atheist is not the same as being against religion, because believing or not in a god, is not linked to a religion. Some people do believe in God, or a god, or something, and yet they do not subscribe to how religions are organized. Religions, all of them, are man-made in the sense that even when they proclaim themselves as divinely inspired, they do remain the work of men and women linked by the same beliefs over many centuries. For a good debate along those lines, you may want to browse "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything".