Originally posted by darvlay
How many times are you going to misspell "you're" in this thread when it's all said and done?

Doesn't the first misspelling count once and for all?

Originally posted by darvlay
How many times are you going to misspell "you're" in this thread when it's all said and done?

I don't know, I wasn't planning to misspell it previously.

I also have no idea how long this thread will be or how many times I will post in it...

Would you like a tally up when this post is sufficiently dead and buried to know for sure?

Originally posted by Trev33
People who believe the same and worship the same god within any religion.

Therefore it is clearly the correct group.

Majority rules.

there are more people who do not eat caviar than people who eat it. therefore it is clearly the correct group.
majority rules.

Originally posted by Trev33
What are the bad reasons to be an atheist?

If this forum is any indication, it can turn you into an insufferable windbag.

Originally posted by darvlay
If this forum is any indication, it can turn you into an insufferable windbag.

The world would implode if this forum was an indication of anything serious.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I don't think your grasping the concept of a bad reason...

See the thing about bad reasons is that they are bad...
They don't stand up to logical scrutiny...
Kinda by definition.

By definition of 'atheists' don't believe in god, therefore anyone claiming to hate god is not an atheist.

The question was again, for the third time... what are the bad reasons for being an atheist? Not a wrong or impossible reason but a bad reason.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Wrong.

And actually Richard Dawkins very emphatically calls himself an atheist.
In fact he's famously an atheist... So don't know what your thinking here.


I don't think it is actually true that you can't know one way or another.
However even if I were to accept that...

If you don't have evidence for the existence of something then the correc ...[text shortened]...
default position. And it requires no faith to hold it whatsoever.

As you should well know.

Pleaase get your facts right. If you have read "The God Delusion", Richard Dawkins clearly outlines, on page 73, the spectrum of disbelief on a scale of 1 to 7, 1 being strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God and 7 being Strong atheist "I know there is no God." Richard aligns himself as a 6: very low probability, but short of zero "I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable. (my italics). These are not the words, as I said before, of an out and out atheist.

Originally posted by Trev33
By definition of 'atheists' don't believe in god, therefore anyone claiming to hate god is not an atheist.

The question was again, for the third time... what are the bad reasons for being an atheist? Not a wrong or impossible reason but a bad reason.

Surely I am not alone in having hated certain fictional characters from books, tv shows, movies, etc.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Is it just me that finds "There is more [atheists]" scrapes across the soul like fingers on a blackboard?


Yeah, there are good reasons to be an atheist, and bad reasons to be an atheist...


This is a bad one.

Even the plural would scrape here . . .

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Surely I am not alone in having hated certain fictional characters from books, tv shows, movies, etc.

Superman might have been fictional but he still existed.

You might hate superman but you recognize that he exists it the form of TV or comics as fiction. If you recognize the existence of god in any form in order to hate him you are not an atheist.

Originally posted by Trev33
Superman might have been fictional but he still existed.

You might hate superman but you recognize that he exists it the form of TV or comics as fiction. If you recognize the existence of god in any form in order to hate him you are not an atheist.

"Fictional atheists" as opposed to "factual atheists"?

Originally posted by Trev33
Superman might have been fictional but he still existed.

You might hate superman but you recognize that he exists it the form of TV or comics as fiction. If you recognize the existence of god in any form in order to hate him you are not an atheist.

To me, a fictional character does not "exist". "Exist" means the person or thing is, or was at some point in time, actualized in the real world.

Superman is in the same boat as the fictional character "God". Neither exists.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
Pleaase get your facts right. If you have read "The God Delusion", Richard Dawkins clearly outlines, on page 73, the spectrum of disbelief on a scale of 1 to 7, 1 being strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God and 7 being Strong atheist "I know there is no God." Richard aligns himself as a 6: very low probability, but short of zero "I cannot know fo ...[text shortened]... robable[/i]. (my italics). These are not the words, as I said before, of an out and out atheist.

I can't find my copy of the book, but I am fairly certain that 6. is still well within his 'atheist' category.

Originally posted by Trev33
People who believe the same and worship the same god within any religion.

Therefore it is clearly the correct group.

Majority rules.

1.2 billion Muslims and Catholics each. There are more atheist?

Move to America, more freedom here for minorities then anywhere else.

Also all religions can come together to form the majority.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
Pleaase get your facts right. If you have read "The God Delusion", Richard Dawkins clearly outlines, on page 73, the spectrum of disbelief on a scale of 1 to 7, 1 being strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God and 7 being Strong atheist "I know there is no God." Richard aligns himself as a 6: very low probability, but short of zero "I cannot know fo ...[text shortened]... robable[/i]. (my italics). These are not the words, as I said before, of an out and out atheist.

An atheist is simply someone who doesn't believe that gods exist.

A definition Dawkins promotes.

He doesn't believe gods exist.

Therefore he is an atheist, and he calls himself such.

He may not claim to be a gnostic strong atheist, but that doesn't mean he is not an atheist.