I'm not an atheist

MooseJam

I don't believe in god of course because the notion is dafter than a brush , it's so obviously the correct belief to hold that I shouldn't be labeled for it, I don't believe there are pink elephants dancing ballet in my garden but I'm not labeled for that, I think the same should hold for the belief in god.

5uspect

Been reading Sam Harris then? :pac:

TerrorFirmer

religion has been and is a fundamental aspect of life within any society over the past few thousand years, so in that regard it's considerably more worthy of a label then those who express disbelief at dancing pink elephants.

biko

So you're not an atheist, good for you.
There is no need for you to label yourself if you don't want to.

Dades

MooseJam wrote: »

I think the same should hold for the belief in god.

I think food packaging should always state if there are onions involved, but hey you can't have everything.

pH

Yes it's all very clever, we don't need words to describe things we're not, and no there isn't a word for someone who doesn't believe in pink elephants. But when the absence is of note then we normally label it and give it a word.

Hence we have words for those who don't drink any alcohol, or have any hair, or never have sex, or have no money etc. If it's beliefs you're after we have words to describe people who don't believe the holocaust happened, and for example the word 'anarchist' is normally defined in terms of what an anarchist rejects or doesn't believe in.

So if you think there is an important distinction between describing someone as 'bald' and describing them as 'having no hair' then by all means knock yourself out, just remember we have lots of labels and words for things people are not, atheist is just one of them.

Galvasean

May I suggest coining the word 'apinkodanephas'?

velocirafter

i like to think of myself as an evolutionist rather than an athiest. i think there can be a stigma attached to the word athiest.

eoin5

velocirafter wrote: »

i like to think of myself as an evolutionist rather than an athiest. i think there can be a stigma attached to the word athiest.

You are what you are though. Embrace your non-belief. Become a happy atheist and let stigma be damned. Anything else is just confusing. There are plenty (most?) of theists who agree with the theory of evolution.

That is of course assuming you are in fact an atheist (you havent explicitly stated it so I may be jumping the gun).

Zillah

5uspect wrote: »

Been reading Sam Harris then? :pac:

"We don't need the word 'atheist' any more than we need a special word for people who don't believe in vampires or astrology."

Faulty memory may have made that more a paraphrasing than a quote.

Dave!

I'm a Bright

5uspect

I'm a human being!

cavedave

MooseJam
I don't believe there are pink elephants dancing .

Repent

Dades

I'm soylent green!

Tim Robbins

velocirafter wrote: »

i like to think of myself as an evolutionist rather than an athiest. i think there can be a stigma attached to the word athiest.

Yes there is huge stigma attached to that word.
I think people interpret it as:
1. You hate all religion
2. You are as vociferous, as evangelical, as fundamental, as annoying as a Bible Basher.

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Yes there is huge stigma attached to that word.
I think people interpret it as:
1. You hate all religion
2. You are as vociferous, as evangelical, as fundamental, as annoying as a Bible Basher.

I didn't attach all that to the word 'atheist' - at least not until I began logging onto boards.ie

However, what you have described, Tim, pretty well describes a number of the posters here. It particularly applies to most of the more 'evangelical' atheists who frequent the Christianity board. I guess imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

lostexpectation

evolutionist that just as bad, that means your darwins/dawkins groupie (to some) that much more to life then evolution

seamus

As much as the next man, I abhore the need to put people into categories and say "You are this", but the word atheist is an accurate reflection of your belief.

Of course, as mentioned there is a certain sitgma associated with it - people assume that you're part of an actual, tangible organisation with an anti-religion agenda. This is as preposterous as saying that a person who can be described as a lesbian is part of an organisation with an anti-hetero agenda.

That we actually have a word for "atheism" I think is just indicative of the depth to which religion has ingrained itself into humanity. While I'll probably be shot for saying that atheism is something "new", the idea of being completely non-religious and being happily public about it, is something which is a new development in society. And it's growing. But because we're still at the point that theism is considered to be the default position, it's only natural to describe those who differ from the default. It's much the same as having a word for someone who cannot use their legs "paraplegic", but we have no word for someone who's normal (non-plegic?).

Rev Hellfire

It seems paranoia is alive and well in the atheist camp, the simple fact is the majority of people couldn’t care less if you’re a atheist or not its simply doesn’t matter.
Strikes me of a classic case of navel gazing imho.

Dades

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

It seems paranoia is alive and well in the atheist camp

How'd you figure that?

Asiaprod

Dades wrote: »

I'm soylent green!

I don't know anymore

MooseJam

I haven't been reading Sam Harris but it seems he has some sound ideas, there are some good points raised here so I don't feel as bad about being an atheist, looking on the bright side at least I'm not bald !

MooseJam

cavedave wrote: »

Repent

OMG I'm going to elephant hell amn't I

Mitch Connor

everyone is an atheist in some way - I just belive there is one less god then people who belive do.

Rev Hellfire

Dades wrote: »

How'd you figure that?

Ohh I don't know...

velocirafter wrote: »

i like to think of myself as an evolutionist rather than an athiest. i think there can be a stigma attached to the word athiest.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Yes there is huge stigma attached to that word.
I think people interpret it as:
1. You hate all religion
2. You are as vociferous, as evangelical, as fundamental, as annoying as a Bible Basher.

lostexpectation wrote: »

evolutionist that just as bad, that means your darwins/dawkins groupie (to some) that much more to life then evolution

seamus wrote: »

Of course, as mentioned there is a certain sitgma associated with it - people assume that you're part of an actual, tangible organisation with an anti-religion agenda. This is as preposterous as saying that a person who can be described as a lesbian is part of an organisation with an anti-hetero agenda.

Next thing there'll be whispers of government agendas, people going missing and mysterious camps full of non-believers from which no one returns.

seamus

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Next thing there'll be whispers of government agendas, people going missing and mysterious camps full of non-believers from which no one returns.

Well it's easy to say, "There's nothing wrong", when you're in a luxury villa looking the other way.

The fact is, there *is* a stigma attached to atheism. It's not as bad in Europe as it is in the US, but it's there. There are people who will recoil in horror when someone mentions atheism. There are parents who will weep for their children when they "come out".
It's OK to be a "lapsed catholic" or say, "I'm not all that interested in religion", but to actually go out and "declare" your atheism is on a par with revealing that you like to secretly watch your mother getting undressed.

It's primarily because people actually have no idea what atheism is. It's managed to become attached to satanism as an "anti-religion" where people actively go out of their way to be immoral and depraved. If people were actually helped to understand that atheism isn't even a religion, it's just a viewpoint, the same as being a Fianna-Failer is a viewpoint, it would help to promote some rational discussion about religion.

Of course, all of the major religions have a vested interest in maintaining the existing falsehood, and nobody's going to campaign on behalf of atheists, rarely even atheists themselves

Dades

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Ohh I don't know...

Next thing there'll be whispers of government agendas, people going missing and mysterious camps full of non-believers from which no one returns.

It ain't paranoia if they really are out to get you!

Do you not think the term "atheist" is looked at in a negative light? Remember the study in the US that determined them as the most mistrusted minority?

Galvasean

Dades wrote: »

Do you not think the term "atheist" is looked at in a negative light? Remember the study in the US that determined them as the most mistrusted minority?

Yeah, I seem to recall Atheists were trusted on a comparable level to sexual deviants. Wowza.

JimiTime

It seems you are having some identity issues. Maybe you need someone to unite you all, give you a creed etc. Then there will be a breakaway group that believe that you have left your 'we are just A-Theist' roots and there will be great wars and book burnings, and men in silly hats.........Oh hang on a minute!

Seriously though, how you guys can say atheism is innocuous. Ha! At one stage Robindch was trying to say everyone was born atheist. Maybe he should scheck out this thread.

Dave!

I don't mind if ye don't believe in god, as long as you're not an atheist!

JimiTime

DaveMcG wrote: »

I don't mind if ye don't believe in god, as long as you're not an atheist!

LOL:D