Skeptic groups trying to marginalize atheists

[Iason Ouabache]

But if you're an atheist, then you aren't a skeptic with any credibility concerning religion.  You can still pick on truthers, though.

Heh.

PMZ,
has a friend who is both an atheist and a truther.  Oh, and also against vaccines.

Why have you not kicked him in the balls yet?

[Doktor Howl]

Dok, maybe it's my understanding of the terms.
i would have said that if someone were to claim, "given my experiences, i do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, i am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", they would be an atheist,  whereas an agnostic would adamantly stick to the position of "i cannot know whether there is a deity or not, and therefore do not have any belief one way or the other"
both reasonable positions, and both that wouldn't blow skepticism cred in my estimation.

Yeah, this. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Nothing more, nothing less. Most agnostics are also atheists because they don't have a belief in any gods. Some people take it too far and become anti-theists. Fuck those guys.

Which group were we discussing?  I was under the impression we were talking about the Dawkins tards.

[Iason Ouabache]

Dok, maybe it's my understanding of the terms.
i would have said that if someone were to claim, "given my experiences, i do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, i am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", they would be an atheist,  whereas an agnostic would adamantly stick to the position of "i cannot know whether there is a deity or not, and therefore do not have any belief one way or the other"
both reasonable positions, and both that wouldn't blow skepticism cred in my estimation.

Yeah, this. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Nothing more, nothing less. Most agnostics are also atheists because they don't have a belief in any gods. Some people take it too far and become anti-theists. Fuck those guys.

Which group were we discussing?  I was under the impression we were talking about the Dawkins tards.

Anti-theists. Atheism isn't a group, just like theism isn't a group.

[Doktor Howl]

Dok, maybe it's my understanding of the terms.
i would have said that if someone were to claim, "given my experiences, i do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, i am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", they would be an atheist,  whereas an agnostic would adamantly stick to the position of "i cannot know whether there is a deity or not, and therefore do not have any belief one way or the other"
both reasonable positions, and both that wouldn't blow skepticism cred in my estimation.

Yeah, this. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Nothing more, nothing less. Most agnostics are also atheists because they don't have a belief in any gods. Some people take it too far and become anti-theists. Fuck those guys.

Which group were we discussing?  I was under the impression we were talking about the Dawkins tards.

Anti-theists. Atheism isn't a group, just like theism isn't a group.

Well, too late now.  That's like trying to argue that Democrats aren't actually liberal.

The tards at CoG and Veganza have coopted the word.  You'll have to go get it back.

[Kai]

"I don't anticipate any gods" is not the same as "I don't believe in gods".

The former is a valid believe, ie an anticipation of reality.

The latter is a belief in belief, ie an anticipation it is RIGHTEOUS to not anticipate gods.

The former is stated once and is over with.

The latter is a form of cheering and is therefore stated over and over, ad nauseum.

The latter will profess to be an atheist.

The former won't waste the time.

[Requia ☣]

I agree with what has been said regarding the tendancies of atheists to be self defeating as useful skeptics, but it strikes me as odd that you can say one can't be a skeptical atheist.  the non-existence of god can be taken as an article of belief without being an article of faith by virtue of the extreme improbability of a sky daddy in conjunction with lack of any evidence.

You are mistaking 'there is a God' with 'there is this specific concept of God,'  There are a hell of a lot of those, and some are more absurd than others.

[Iason Ouabache]

Dok, maybe it's my understanding of the terms.
i would have said that if someone were to claim, "given my experiences, i do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, i am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", they would be an atheist,  whereas an agnostic would adamantly stick to the position of "i cannot know whether there is a deity or not, and therefore do not have any belief one way or the other"
both reasonable positions, and both that wouldn't blow skepticism cred in my estimation.

Yeah, this. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Nothing more, nothing less. Most agnostics are also atheists because they don't have a belief in any gods. Some people take it too far and become anti-theists. Fuck those guys.

Which group were we discussing?  I was under the impression we were talking about the Dawkins tards.

Anti-theists. Atheism isn't a group, just like theism isn't a group.

Well, too late now.  That's like trying to argue that Democrats aren't actually liberal.

The tards at CoG and Veganza have coopted the word.  You'll have to go get it back.

Sad but true. Can we at least get rid of the term "militant atheist"? That is just so retarded. No one is taking up arms and killing people for being religious. The people who bomb abortion clinics and fly planes into buildings are militant. People arguing about atheism on the internet are just evangelical assholes.

[Doktor Howl]

Dok, maybe it's my understanding of the terms.
i would have said that if someone were to claim, "given my experiences, i do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, i am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", they would be an atheist,  whereas an agnostic would adamantly stick to the position of "i cannot know whether there is a deity or not, and therefore do not have any belief one way or the other"
both reasonable positions, and both that wouldn't blow skepticism cred in my estimation.

Yeah, this. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Nothing more, nothing less. Most agnostics are also atheists because they don't have a belief in any gods. Some people take it too far and become anti-theists. Fuck those guys.

Which group were we discussing?  I was under the impression we were talking about the Dawkins tards.

Anti-theists. Atheism isn't a group, just like theism isn't a group.

Well, too late now.  That's like trying to argue that Democrats aren't actually liberal.

The tards at CoG and Veganza have coopted the word.  You'll have to go get it back.

Sad but true. Can we at least get rid of the term "militant atheist"? That is just so retarded. No one is taking up arms and killing people for being religious. The people who bomb abortion clinics and fly planes into buildings are militant. People arguing about atheism on the internet are just evangelical assholes.

Nope.  It stuck, like when a kid gets nicknamed "Stinky" when they're 9.

[Cain]

"I don't anticipate any gods" is not the same as "I don't believe in gods".

The former is a valid believe, ie an anticipation of reality.

The latter is a belief in belief, ie an anticipation it is RIGHTEOUS to not anticipate gods.

The former is stated once and is over with.

The latter is a form of cheering and is therefore stated over and over, ad nauseum.

The latter will profess to be an atheist.

The former won't waste the time.

And lo, there was a motorcycle, and it's parts thereof were correct.

[Doktor Howl]

"I don't anticipate any gods" is not the same as "I don't believe in gods".

The former is a valid believe, ie an anticipation of reality.

The latter is a belief in belief, ie an anticipation it is RIGHTEOUS to not anticipate gods.

The former is stated once and is over with.

The latter is a form of cheering and is therefore stated over and over, ad nauseum.

The latter will profess to be an atheist.

The former won't waste the time.

And lo, there was a motorcycle, and it's parts thereof were correct.

*(possibly) Angelic Choir*

[Sir Squid Diddimus]

Is it really so silly for someone to dismiss religion/gods/deities?

What if someone (like myself) just thinks the whole idea of it all is dumb and doesn't want to think about it, doesn't want to believe it, doesn't want others preaching to them (me) about it?

Does it make me some kind of friggin tard to call myself atheist if someone asks me about it? I mean it's not like I go around standing on a soap box yelling to the world that "god ain't real, y'all!". I just don't care enough about the shit to bring it up unless someone's talking about it (like here) or asks me about it.

But I guess I would have to label it as such, since skeptic doesn't work when you just don't want to bother questioning it.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Is it really so silly for someone to dismiss religion/gods/deities?

What if someone (like myself) just thinks the whole idea of it all is dumb and doesn't want to think about it, doesn't want to believe it, doesn't want others preaching to them (me) about it?

Does it make me some kind of friggin tard to call myself atheist if someone asks me about it? I mean it's not like I go around standing on a soap box yelling to the world that "god ain't real, y'all!". I just don't care enough about the shit to bring it up unless someone's talking about it (like here) or asks me about it.

But I guess I would have to label it as such, since skeptic doesn't work when you just don't want to bother questioning it.

I think that the idea is that if you say that there are no gods, you may be correct, but it can't be scientifically verified, and that atheism is irrelevant to a skeptics club, since atheism is a specific claim that cannot be proven.

The skeptics may agree, but disproving theism is not their purpose.

[Chairman Risus]

I can't prove there isn't a god, but I think I can prove certain gods don't exist.

[Don Coyote]

I can't prove there isn't a god, but I think I can prove certain gods don't exist.

prove it.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I can't prove there isn't a god, but I think I can prove certain gods don't exist.

At best you can prove that people's understandings of a particular deity aren't possible.

Existence of Yahweh is not provable or disprovable, but events in the Old Testament are. For all we know, he does exist, and really likes lying to us about creating the Universe in 6 days. Hell, he might actually be just one particularly wussy god out of many, and is just very butthurt. The other gods let him dominate world religions because they don't actually give a crap about any of us. Or it guarantees he's too busy showing them all that he doesn't show up at their parties anymore.

You can't prove or disprove this idea.