AJP,

Scratch a theist and you'll find a myriad of different theistic beliefs.

Scratch an a-theist and you find a myriad of different religious beliefs. Here I mean beliefs that are based on faith rather than fact. A very small subset of such beliefs would include Gaia worship and eco-catastrophism in general, spiritualism, various utopic civilisation faiths like communism etc etc.

I don't and won't get embroiled in one of your endless semantic arguments here, but I use 'religion' in its widest sense eg "the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices".

"It doesn't look like you learnt much from our last encounter."

oh you mean the discussion where I started off saying the deity couldn't be disproven because it couldn't be defined and you ended up showing me (after who knows how many posts and tangential rabbit-holes) how the deity couldn't be disproven because it couldn't be defined. Yeah you really got me there </sarc>

Perhaps I didn't learn anything because there was no one with anything to teach me.

mhaze,

You're using equivocation to commit the fallacy of false equivalence. That's quite a combo.

<<Scratch an a-theist and you find a myriad of different religious beliefs. Here I mean beliefs that are based on faith rather than fact.>>

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

Furthermore, the definition of religion requires more than just an element faith.

http://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/religion

<<A very small subset of such beliefs would include Gaia worship and eco-catastrophism in general, spiritualism, various utopic civilisation faiths like communism etc etc.>>

And these are all intrinsic to or tenets of atheism, are they? R-i-i-i-ght. I take it that it's far-Left thinking you are falsely equating to atheism?

What about libertarian atheists, or alt-right atheists, or moderate left-wing atheists, or moderate right-wing atheists?

There is nothing within atheism to support or necessitate the beliefs you've listed. Your argument is dumb.

http://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/atheism

<<oh you mean the discussion where I started off saying the deity couldn't be disproven because it couldn't be defined and you ended up showing me … how the deity couldn't be disproven because it couldn't be defined.>>

No, that never happened. You're lying again. I showed you that you were wrong by showing you how a version of deity could be disproven.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8106#252015

No, I mean the one where you couldn't understand the fact that atheism and agnosticism weren't mutually exclusive.

We're a little slow to catch on, aren't we mhaze?

AJ Philips,

The usual strawman arguments from believers. I've often wondered if it's a deliberate tactic or if they really can't understand the concept of atheism.

mac,

Good question. Having had this debate many times over the years, I’ve found myself asking the same thing.

<<I've often wondered if it's a deliberate tactic or if they really can't understand the concept of atheism.>>

Apart from the occasional theist who has lived a sheltered life and never known anything but belief, I think most of them do it deliberately.

I think there’s a kind of envy going on.

Perturbed by the fact that there are some out there not bound by the intellectual shackles of a dogmatic belief system, they seek to drag such people down to their level by pretending that atheism is some sort of a dogmatic belief system in its own right. This is where I think the 'absolute certainty' red herring comes in (as if we ever wait for absolute certainty to act upon a belief or take a stance on a particular issue).

This becomes particularly evident when Born-Agains try to paint atheism as a religion: having been atheists once before, they simply HAVE to know that what they’re saying is complete rubbish.

The interesting thing about mhaze is that he doesn’t even believe in a god (he even acknowledged once that he was technically an atheist before going on to strenuously deny it (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8106#252526)).

In mhaze’s case, I think it just boils down to his politics, which seem to have a whiff of McCarthyism to them.

The desparate efforts by some to label atheism as a religion comes from the same defensive delusion that the earth is only 10,000 years old and that dinosaurs were around in Jesus' time. The idea that some people are capable of free thought must be a threat.
To suggest that the only thing stopping them from raping and murdering is because of some iron age writings is the most self-damning thing I've ever heard.

Fairies, pixies, leprechauns, unicorns, Santa Claus, Gods - all the same, except only one offers comfort from the fear of death.

If there was no "promise of an afterlife" I doubt that any religion would survive. What's the point?

Why would the human mind - which can't grasp the true idea of infinity or imagine anything beyond 3 dimensions - even be able to comprehend the nature of the universe?

It's like a seagull sitting on top of the Opera House that can't possibly conceive the entirety of what is happening directly below it's feet.

Only hairless killer apes cursed with the awareness of their own mortality are arrogant enough to place themselves on the same level as some all-encompassing, convenient and benevolent entity because to claim to understand something is to have control over it.

"No, that never happened. You're lying again. I showed you that you were wrong by showing you how a version of deity could be disproven."

Well AJP, if that's what you need to tell yourself, then so be it. I don't feel the need to re-litigate your misunderstandings here.

But I suspect you know better. At least I hope you know better. Otherwise I've badly over-estimated your cognitive abilities. And then my dismantling of your falsely held views would be just cruel.

"The desparate efforts by some to label atheism as a religion..."

Atheism isn't a religion. Equally theism isn't a religion. Theism just means a belief in the deity. It encompasses many religions.

Atheism encompasses many different beliefs united in their rejection of a deity.

Just as there are many many religions that generically are theistic there are many many religions that are generically atheistic. Again I use 'religion' in its widest sense eg ""the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices".

As Chesterton said, “He who does not believe in God will believe in anything.”