applauds vigorously

Brilliant!

It will fly with me, and anyone else that gives it wings.

I am going to use it the next chance I get, and I'll tell you what happens.

That would be a great T-Shirt!

Probably only the non-delusional would agree .

@josh_is_exciting Not idiots. Delusional. Big difference.

Love it! @AtheistInNC you earned Level 9 in my eyes with this one! I have not heard this one before, it's exquisite! On labeling oneself "non-delusional" it defines and exposes how abnormal their belief system is.

@SACatWalker "Realist": That was my thought, too.

@SACatWalker @Paul628 I have referred to myself as a "Realist" on many occasions as well. The setting and area of discussion determines what I may call myself, be it "non-believer", atheist, Realist, Secularist, Humanist, or "denier of the legend!" LOL

Assuming we are in fact non delusional. There are more ways to delude oneself besides religion. Be aware of my-side bias

@josh_is_exciting A very good point and well taken.

I don't think that many of the religious minded actually enter reasonable discourse ... and if I should find myself in that situation, I certainly wouldn't ruin it by calling them delusional. However, is it an ad hominem attack if it is true? If you accuse someone of having brown eyes - and they do - is that an ad hominem attack if they think of themselves as a blue-eyed Aryan?

Delusional:
a : something that is falsely or delusively believed or propagated: delusions of grandeur
b psychology : a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary; also: the abnormal state marked by such beliefs

Religious folks, by definition, are delusional.

I am fat. Very fat - morbidly obese as the doctor's say. Telling me I'm fat or calling me fat is the same to me as telling me I have brown hair. Meh. Some may consider it an attack, but if it is true - then it isn't an "ad hominem attack", you are just stating the obvious, and doesn't hurt my feelings a bit. If the religious don't like being called delusional, do something about the delusion - prove I'm wrong, or stop believing what isn't true.

How can you follow Buddhism when the Dalai Lama himself said he is glad he wasn't born a woman? And there are totally different (and more onerous) rules for women buddhist priests than male? Unfortunately, even Buddhism is misogynistic.

@Agnostic1 I never said I followed Buddhism, I said I identify. The Dali Lama isn’t a ruler or de facto leader of all Buddhists. Buddhism c9mes in many forms.

@SarahSiddons - many forms yes, but they all consider women lesser beings than men. Not one for me, I'm afraid, in any of its forms.

I also find Buddhist philosophy to be very beneficial to mental and physical health. I never searched for a god or anything beyond self discovery. Buddhist religion is, to me, an oxymoron. Buddha was clear he was not god and there is no afterlife. He taught people how to reach enlightenment about self and the nature of the universe using meditation. I've traveled to buddhist cultures where it is their religion and they pray to the "lord" Buddha in their temples. It's what happens when a culture institutionalizes spirituality into religion.

Buddha was perhaps the original free thinker. He was able to see beyond the conventional dichotomy between indulgence and asceticism that together were the consensus of the time and seize upon the essence of our reality he called the middle way. He had nothing to say about an afterlife, but instinctively knew everything was connected and kept his focus on suffering, its causes and alleviation. Others who followed have tried to make it something else. That’s OK. But I agree with you and see you are Buddha Sarah.

@GoldenDoll If it’s not for you, then don’t practice it.

@ElementX74 I don’t think I’d use the word “separating”. But to your inquiry. For me this is where yin/yang (or balance) comes in. Consider a few other non-religious spirituality perceived equivalency.

Prayer comes in many forms, prayer and religion are not mutually exclusive. Meditation could be argued as a form of prayer. Some genuflect, some chant, some raise hands to the heavens, some start the hand raising from the ground/root up as a continuation of the bodies end and where the universe begins.

The laws of attraction/connection may be seen as the answer to prayer, to others are seen as the fruits or spoils of labor be they good or bad. If you want what others have spiritually or monetarily you keep putting yourself in the paths of those who have whatever “it” is whether consciously or not by actions.

For me music is a vessel of connection and beauty. I’ve never been Catholic yet I love Handel’s Messiah and I sing it every year because I find it a thing of beauty. I quote scripture a lot both or the Bible, Torah, Book of Mormon et.al because there is a lot of beautiful inspiring prose in its word.

I’ve posted A LOT on many forms of social media saying “Americans DO NOT need health insurance, Americans need healthcare” There’s a huge difference between the two, most overlook equating them when they are almost the opposite of each other.
My physical health ends and begins in my brain. The body intelligence connecting to the mind intelligence. When it comes to something like weight loss, I first MUST know I am deserving of the health I want. I must love myself enough to achieve a goal well within my reach. Some achieve fitness through running, lifting, spinning....I achieve and continually improve the communication of my body and mind through yoga.

In addiction recovery the ubiquitous and free way to approach sobriety is faith based. If you don’t have health insurance but need healthcare, one can achieve sobriety through AA, I used it as a launching pad. I’d be in meetings with those who have 40 years sober and attend 5 times a week and thought to myself “I desperately want 40 years sober but I DO NOT want to be sitting in this chair 40 years from now”. Some will say it’s the only way. Ones recovery is like a fingerprint, no 2 are alike. With some diseases the answer/cure is a pill, or surgery, or cognitive behavioral therapy. For me the answer/cure is my yoga mat and meditation station and haven’t been to a meeting in over 2 years.

Religion doesn’t have a monopoly on ritual behavior/acts. Addicts are HUGE on rituals, independent of religion. We are soaked in rituals. Recovery taught me by switching one healthy ritual for rituals which would have sent me to an early grave actually gave me life. Addiction is a tricky beast. It’s selfishness which can only be cured by selfishness. When you first get sober you have to face everything you’ve ever done, the remorse, shame and guilt keep the relapse, recovery vicious cycle rolling. The worst thing you can do in the beginning is go around apologizing to everyone. They don’t want to hear ONE MORE LIE. It takes diving into yourself and a lot of time with yourself to get to the point where you can be believed, forgiven or trusted. When you forst get sober the LAST thing you think of yourself is being deserving of health, sobriety, or trust. It’s a tricky balance with a bafflingly simple concept. I earned all of it back by simply showing up for my life every single day.

Not sure if that answers your question, but it is what it is. I’ll close with the 9th step prayer also known in AA as The Promises.
“If we are painstaking about this phase of our development, we will be amazed before we are half way through.
We are going to know a new freedom and a new happiness.
We will not regret the past nor wish to shut the door on it.
We will comprehend the word serenity and we will know peace.
No matter how far down the scale we have gone, we will see how our experience can benefit others.
That feeling of uselessness and self pity will disappear.
We will lose interest in selfish things and gain interest in our fellows.
Self-seeking will slip away.
Our whole attitude and outlook upon life will change.
Fear of people and of economic insecurity will leave us.
We will intuitively know how to handle situations which used to baffle us.
We will suddenly realize that God is doing for us what we could not do for ourselves.
Are these extravagant promises? We think not. They are being fulfilled among us—sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. They will always materialize if we work for them. Big Book pg. 83 & 84 Alcoholics Anonymous, 3rd Ed.

@SarahSiddons Obs.

I'm a practicing witch, who focuses on energy work rather than any dieties. I know your position.

I was a practicing Taoist for many years. I enjoy being "centered," which is mostly what I got out of it. (that and "we wash the dishes so we can use them again" ideology)

I still use many of the skills I learned, such as, "don't force things to happen." That "shit happens," it's what we do after that matters. "Cottleston pie." and Wu Wei, "the uncarved block."

I don't net in spirituality since there is no spirit.

Hi, but no , we don't - need some belief system. I believe in radio waves and t v waves because I listen to music in my car and watch TCM and AMC on the t v .

@FlaGoldenGirl But you have no direct experience of atoms, yet you beleive the atomic theory.

@FlaGoldenGirl also if you think a little more about TV and radio.... He fact that you receive the image and the sound does not prove that radio or UHF waves exist. It doesn't prove that the signal is a wave function, and now much of TV is carried by digital signal, which are not wave forms.
So you see your beleif systems leak into everything without you even realising it, you beleive things you have taken on in blind faith.

@OneTrueDog Nah, I just believe in tv waves or what ever they are because I see a picture and radio because I hear sound. Nothing more complicated than that. I believe there is something ? waves ? what ever ? because I see and hear the results If not the waves themselves. No blind faith in seeing and hearing.

@OneTrueDog I have not idea what an atom theory is so can't believe it something I don't even know, I see a picture on tv and hear on the radio so I believe what ever is making the sound and pictures. Simple as that.

@FlaGoldenGirl what makes the TV work?

@OneTrueDog I believe in radio and tv waves also and I worship these waves. I even worship the electricity that makes them both work. That electric can kill you at any time so don't take a long bath close to your radio.

it doesn't mean without belief, and I don't know anyone who thinks it means that. Atheist means "without a belief in god". Atheos, the greek word, means "without gods". -ist in the English means someone who believes in or practices. A proctologist practices proctology, a unionist believes in the strength of the union.

@mbergwell - I love your post. I'm just not interested either, although theists still annoy me. I shall be a "non-believer" from now one. Thankyou.

@mbergwell exactly!

Pretty much how I see it, too. I just don't really care, because to me it's simply mythology; and beyond what we can learn from religion in a historical context, it means nothing more to me. I have no more connection to God or Allah than I do Zeus or Poseidon. So I'd say non-believer works just fine for me also.

Perfect! I don't like any label that assumes a strict tenant of belief. I'm sure my beliefs are not like all others. Just like the label Christian does not detail everyone's individual beliefs. Non believer is ok, I like Freethinker best though.

Saying "god" or "gods" gives an air of superiority to something. The question will always be posed, "where did we come from?" Someone or thing created life but do we have to bow or serve it? Not in my world. Sticks and stones ... the word Atheist shouldn't hurt and it's a powerful label to wear.

I use the word agnostic to mean I don't know; but that does not mean I care. I take agnosticism to be the freedom to believe whatever I want, whenever I want. If I want to worship the sun goddess with my body on a beautiful day; or if I want to see mischievious sprites in a stream or forest; or if I want to be a part of something part of the time; or if I want to believe there is just one main deity for me to talk to, I can do any of those things. They are not incompatible because they are fleeting, and do not hold much import except a way to channel feelings inside my head and heart.

I see this as rather simple- and concise. All man-made gods are foolish nonsense. If Nature is 'cognitive'- and not the smartest person on earth, or any person that has ever been on earth, knows this- that would make Nature a god/creator- or whatever you want to call 'it'.
And the lesson in composition: "an" is the article that replaces "a" when the following word starts with a vowel. Ain't difficult.

It is not mandatory to use an article such as "an" in the case of the statement "I am atheist." Just as the article "an" is not necessary for the following statements, "That shape is asymmetrical" or The patient's symptom is atypical.

In fact, when you break down the meaning of the words, placing "an" in front does not make sense. I am an non-theist. The patient's symptom is an non-typical. That shape is an non-symmetrical.

Yes, Mr. Allen, you figured it out- apparently by accident. Yes you do not put "an" in front of a word beginning with a consonant such as "non-typical". I think that must be pre-kindergarten grammar.

@Allamanda I took a teaching course about three decades ago- and I've forgotten most of it. Ah, poor me! LOL, but I am not presenting my thesis in the Agnostic room, anyway.

My cardinal point: I am NOT going to argue with anyone about man-made gods (Nooooo, I did not put a capital on "gods"; that word deserves no capital) I am a "believer"- in reality! Persons that will argue with a theist obviously have too much time on their hands. I am not an atheist.

I am an agnostic. The smartest people in the world can only speculate about how many "Big Bangs" there have been- and a plethora of other, currently-unknowable subjects.

Very, very well said. Very informative. Thanks

"I'm on that hunde'd?"
???

Why not use the word atheist though, it would be more brief, I'm not following your point as you still say that you don't believe in deities in your longer reply?

Is that a question...?
I'm not saying I don't believe, I'm saying they don't exist. Religious claims have zero validity. And I don't let them have a nuanced shred of thinking they do. Saying things like, "I [don't] believe" or "I'm an atheist," gives the illusion that their claims are valid, that we are on equal grounds philosophically, and that it is some kind of personal choice and therefore should be left well enough alone. Quintessentially I'm saying the same thing, but in the background it's a much deeper communicative battle - just like the connotative differences between "fat," "obese," "chubby," et cetera. They present the same thing in different ways. My way is to shatter the comfortable illusions that a lot of religious people round my way have. Most religion is never a a personal choice, it's an indoctrinated aspect to one's identity. And they are off their rocker if they think their not-so-personal not-so-choice is anywhere near actual facts and grounds for nonchalant dismissal - as based on my experience. And it is a disservice to my fellow man to allow them to keep riding that train of thought - cuz fuck them.

Hi JimG, I am curious to know why you feel it is a problem if religious people think of atheism as another belief system?

@mrdunn the only thing we have in common is that we don't believe in gods. Theirs no atheist hierarchy or common ideology. Religious sects have a lot more in common and are more unified in their belief systems than we atheists.

disagree strongly I don't have 'faith ' that there is no god - I don't care to hear about or make up stories about men in the sky (I have no faith) and I feel that the actual word faith is meaningless - Back to the invisible pink unicorn and the flying spaghetti monster- Do I really have to actively disbelieve in a thousand plus, things in order for someone to get that it is of absolutely zilch importance to my life - You can believe that for yourself but don't be putting it onto me! Own your own words they arent everyones truth

Believing a egative is still a belief, a speculation. Concerning more is a belief in one’s own straw man argument. A powerful position is Socrates’ when he said that wisdom is to be aware that knows nothing until one humbly seeks for the truth. In short beware of my-side bias

@Gripster31 ----and you still want to convert me to your 'words!" how about we leave each other alone because as I have said many times - I have no interest in this - Atheist is still fine by me and everybody knows exactly what I mean by it - Play with words to your hearts content - please do but leave me out of this one please 'now' thank you, as you don't listen to anything I am saying.

@Gripster31 he also asserted women have more teeth than men...couldn't be bothered to look, I guess.

It must be a wonderful think to have absolute truth, so much so that no discussion is necessary anymore. But is this not dogmatic just as much as some/most religions are dogmatic???

@Gripster31 No, not dogmatic. It just stops people from proselytizing and let's others know that without faith, I love hearing facts, which are subject to change, while faith is more fixed and based on fantasies in the absence of facts. I find the word 'Atheist' a practical description - unless a better catch word comes along.

@Gripster31 I am lot's of other things - some are life long and some things come and go. I can be a bitch or I can be a hero....get what I mean?

@BrigittaCuadros facts are objective. What is often changing is our understanding of their meaningk

People at work hold up their crosses (on their necklaces)-and back away..???

@J-MaisOui haha!

Only if you accept the baggage. I don't. It belongs to the believer...LOL

@BrigittaCuadros if we are talking about general people that don't already have a relationship to me, then yes I use the term atheist without caring about the baggage. But with people I have known all my life and are still religious or at least believe in a God, then it can be confronting to come right out and say "I'm an atheist" and the baggage of that term can lead to misunderstandings. I like to take the softly softly approach with those i love and still want in my life

So true. You are what you believe yourself to be.

Btw, Non-believers are the third largest group of people in the world next to Christianity and Islam.

@SonnyMlaPH where is this stat from?

edgy

Working from the 'Enjoys' section of your profile, would you call yourself a non-smoker?

(stirring it, just a little )

@Godot - I've never smoked, sooty if your comment has gone over my head, but I don't get it I'll have to check my profile -

My feelings to the letter.

Hello I read your common and I have also had similar thoughts and reservations as you are stating however it occurred to me and perhaps it has not occurred to you that maybe God isn't perfect. Have you considered that and what would be the consequences if in fact there was a God and that God was not perfect.? I mean myself having thought this through I could mention a few consequences right off the bat

@Nothing isn't it pretty clear that 'God' isn't perfect? No entity is perfect which performs such vile and unspeakable actions on humans and animals from tiny infants on up; either 'God' is not all-powerful or 'he' is good, but 'he' is not both, which makes 'him' very imperfect

I used to feel that way, too, but then I realized that most atheists would gladly change their minds if given irrefutable proof of the existence of god(s), so I stopped splitting hairs and started referring to myself as atheist. I mean, there are atheists out there who would refuse to accept proof if it existed, but I think the majority of us are rational human beings who put our faith in science and are willing to change our minds when presented with new information.

That having been said, you won't find me holding my breath.

@Allamanda Hence, my decision to describe myself as atheist. ?

I have worn out the topic of "atheist". I refuse to comment on gods that do not exist, or have never existed- I am NOT an atheist. If I am going to waste time---- it's going to be on something that is pleasant- not profound foolishness.

I don't care if Donald Duck wears rubber boots when he is swimming, so that his feet will not get wet. And I feel that the discussion about gods is even more absurd than the foregone premise.

I like it!

Atheism is not religion or any type of church. it is simple , do not believe in bullshit

@tonia Dah. "broad church" is irony, as is quite plain by the rest of my comment. Are you an American by any chance?

"A" to me is anti. I prefer not to be a militant atheist.

what negative ideas?

No morals, devil worship, eating babies. Too many people just get a real negative gut reaction at the very mention of the word.

Which Huxley is that?

Oops! Should have been "While I identify" Thanks for the pass on the typo. That would be Thomas Huxley, the scientist who coined the word agnostic in 1869. He initially was encouraging young scientists to resist religious pressure and insist on evidence in order to accept something as true. He specifically said that we couldn't know about "metaphysical" statements in the absence of any evidence one way or the other (about th existence of a God, for example.

The "crepuscular" comment cracked me up!

It was a struggle at first and then...there it was.

Great comment. I agree ,Agnostic is saying if there is s god I believe .the atheist wants proof that a Devine eternal creator exists. Burden of proof on the godly. I have learned through the comments and various videos just how dominant and powerful Christianity in certain parts of America is. Many of my American cutural , political and even comedic heros are Christian. safe zone , accepted by God fearing salt of the earth folk. Faith, in a creator . Sounds simple . Not for we Atheists though. It just sounds silly.

I disagree. Agnosticism is not "not knowing", it's inability to know in general. Atheism is simply denying the existence of god(s). One can be gnostic or agnostic atheist. Those saying "man, idk if there is a god" are just those who don't know, perhaps? But I wouldn't call them agnostics. People tend to throw around the terms loosely without really paying much attention to the meaning, and I think it breeds many issues.

Obviously, you are not an atheist, so I can see why you wouldn't be comfortable. & Dawkins doesn't have "followers". He's a science writer, primarily on evolution, (& a damn good one!) that also happens to speak on subjects regarding religion, atheism & belief in general, & is damn good at that, too! Nothing he states is "dogma", & I disagree with him on occaision, just as I have my differences with Dennett, Harris, Hitchens, Krauss, et al. Atheism has no dogma, it is a simple statement on non-belief, usually on the grounds of lack of proof. Just out of curiosity, are you here just to troll? Fine with me if you can bring actual evidence or arguments with you.

Began your screed with a strawman then got less interesting. Q, where do mansplainers get their water? A, from a well actually

Agnostic is something we all need to embrace, as scientist do. It means "I don't know." But, meantime ....

@GoldenMean Sure, I know .

@witchymom Because everyone that is religious instantly makes presumptions which are predominatly false! I prefer terms which open the mind to questions instead of instant judgment.

Nope. Not how it works. You can have a position on faith, which would be what you're talking about, but that's one step removed from the plain reading of your statement. If one lacks a belief in something, that is not a faith position. It may be a position of ignorance if that thing is a reality,. In a reality where no one can know, however, not believing is a neutral position. It's not like, say, global warming, where we have proof of that, and not believing is an active position.

@ChrisLAbbey nope
To claim as an atheist that there is no god is to make a claim not based on evidence but in a confidence in you intuition, or a faith in it. Otherwise one would be an agnostic.