Do any of these arguments make sense? Or am I still not getting it...??

You make some interesting points.

While there are others who might see it differently I think you have a point in the annoying tendency on the part of some to bait religious people on the R&S section of Yahoo Answers. Truth be told, it's my impression so far that there's a lot more anti-religious baiting than there is of religious people going, say on the science & math section and baiting people about evolution. Just an observation on my part. I have no answers, I just wish more folks took the high road and didn't partake of such childish tactics so often.

However, for my part I have to say that I see atheism very differently than you seem to but more importantly, I am concerned that you might be conflating atheism with something which is actually very different, which is secularism. While many religious individuals see secularism as no different from atheism, nothing could be further from the truth. While many atheists would be quite happy to see all religion abolished, the purpose of secularism is precisely to foster coexistence among different creeds. While it may be true that there are atheists advancing policies with the intent of eliminating religion entirely, many more individuals of all backgrounds support the notion of a secular public square not for the benefit of atheists but rather for the benefit of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and other faiths.

I remember reading _All the King's Men_ in high school and I vaguely recall this monologue where Willie Stark compares the law with a bed with four people in it and a blanket big enough for three, and I couldn't help but think about that image while reading your question. The one thing that comes out from both sides is the perpetual tension which comes with coexistence nowadays. It seems that we're all destined to be just a little bit put out for the sake of others that we don't know and don't really understand. While it seems that sometimes that tension resolves itself by devolving into a power grab of one sort or another, I really hope someday we'll find some more positive and mutually beneficial way to deal with this situation.

Dear Cool Dad. I have the feeling that everybody missed the point including you. Atheists do not care of what religious people think. If there is one principle in science it is freedom of thought. We have learned to keep an open mind and we have learned to give up cherished scientific theories when proven false. Religious people can believe anything they want it's everybody's evolutionary imperative-in a way- Nobody can stop you from believing or not whatever it is you want to believe or not. We have for most of Christian dominated history of the "west" been "hiding" Our "beliefs" would get us burned at the stake. Some of us did get burned. We would not be communicating in cyberspace if Christianity had its way. The earth would still be the centre of the universe, would be only 6000 years old and we are all made of Mud. Religion is and should stay in the spiritual level where it belongs. We have no problem if you believe in a creator of the universe. We have a problem if he created 6000 years ago. We have no problem if you think you are being watched and your moral behaviour monitored every nanosecond of your existence. We have a problem with Adam being created from mud and given life by a breath. Religion should deal with the soul. It has no place dealing with evolution or geology or astronomy. Bottom line we both are after the same basic question. The why and how of creation. Religions claim to know the answer. We claim we do not know the answer but we are going to find out. And we are finding out. If and when we find out we will accept the answer as indisputable. If it turns out that there is a god as conceived for example by the Christians, we would accept it as a fact-after all that would be the end of our quest. One thing is for sure. I would have a hell of a lot of questions to ask... A lot.

Just as Christians want to save the unfaithful, atheists want to save the rest of the world from the corruption of the mind that is caused by churches, religion and most importantly, obsessive men trying to be right.

Why some are on R&S section?- because not believing in god doesn't mean they're not spiritual. And because of all the "Jesus loves you", "May god be with you", etc that Christians post out of R&S. And to share knowledge and allow the blind (faith) to see some light.

Atheism cannot ever be defined as a religion. Religion is: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. And,

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

I don't think Atheists will ever agree on a moral code, nor do they speak of 'beliefs'- they try very hard to use facts- scientific ones!

If religion was left as a dream- a hope- and nothing more, atheists would probably join a group of dreamers of their liking. As is, religion is used to create war, segregation, intolerance, and political decisions- even political members must nominate their religion. Religion was taken out of kingdoms in the late 14th Century (round-a-bout, i didn't do the search), but because they owned most of the land their power remained. Now religion should be removed altogether and many won't stop until this dream is fulfilled.

Atheists reasons are valid if their information is correct.

Your points are valid if your motives are sincere.

Those were my thoughts. And I hope I was nice!

Be happy!

1# Yes, they are in the R&S section. They are aware that the subject of God is going to come up. Perhaps they are there to communicate with people and get opinions. Many people take advantage of this to try and force their views and things turn very nasty. Yes, some atheists behave as trolls here, but many Christian trolls muddy their side of the fence too.

There is a difference between Christians answering valid questions and "imposing" their views.

2# You only heard from 7 atheists on the political thing. Many atheists simply want religion, not just Christianity, out of the shaping of the political parties. Many will agree with you on the point of shaping the government with basic moral beliefs.

I don't know where you're going with the argument that atheism is a religion. Who cares what you or they "think" it is? Sounds as if you're trying to get a cheap shot at an argument that doesn't matter.

3# There are people of all beliefs (including atheism) who think it's their duty to convince the "other side" of something. It's an old argument leaving other people saying, "Can't you guys just agree to disagree?"

You're right on this one. Many a Christian vs. Atheist argument has gone in circles and who really cares that the other side has trouble being convinced?

I am a Christian with friends that are Christian, Atheist, and other forms of belief. Many of us have seen these points and arguments over and over. There's a lot of nasty stuff that goes on both ways, but there's a lot of decency too that is to be admired.

It's too bad it seems those who answered you were on the defensive and gave you some rather prickly answers, but perhaps some of them have dealt with some other prickly Christians before answering you.

all reasoning by your reasoning is valid ,

you as you said believe we all end up in the same place so

1 it doesnt mean we are any more right than wrong

thus impose ure isnt valid in your case but it holds that this is not the case for those [any ] who would so do ;[ impose]

as this is an open forum ,where we choose to reply [or not] any imposure [on the questioners part] is a faulse precept

2those who dont want christian influence are assuming all christians to be the same[a presumption] but clearly shapimg of policy is via lobby and influence peddling [thus neo messianic influence is clearly apparent] but this is not doctyrine through out christianity [christ didnt call armgeddon ; revelations did]

argueing the other side is valid this is a forum for all gods children

so yes i feel their answers valid

yes your points are valid

no further thoughts

To the first category of people: Many conservative Christians seem to throw their bible at people rather than nicely discuss it with someone when a question comes up. The truth is, not everyone is going to accept Jesus Christ just becuase I tell them about him. It's not fair to throw my beliefs on someone else and shove them down someone's throat. And, sadly, many Christians do this. We are guilty of being very loud about our faith. But, worse, some peole are rude. Think of the people that fuss about homosexual funerals. Think of the Christians that preach out on the street calling everyone a sinner. That is imposing.

Second group of people: I agree with them completely on this matter. The US is a secular government. No matter what the majority faith is, we have a government that is based off the idea of the seperation of church and and the freedom of religion. It isn't fair to base laws or policies off of one religion. That is giving preference to one faith over another. In a sense, it would be using that faith as a political platform. That goes against laws of church and state.

Last group of people: It is human nature to think that you've got it right, is it not? It is also human nature to seek validation for one's opinions. It gives us great satisfaction when we find that someone agrees with us. The purpose of a forum is to see both sides of something. It's valid to wish to show another side to something. If a Christian wants an atheist to sit quietly while they explain something using Bible verses, then a Christian should do the same when an atheist sits and explains his or her view. And yes, we can dream. That is what seperates us from animals--we have the ability to dream. :-)

By the way, I am a Christian by faith. I wanted to add that so you can see my perspective easier. Have a good one.

Amanda

Everyone wants their view to influence policy. That in itself is human nature I guess I have a live and let live policy about life. I believe in a reconciling god and thusly, I feel I am bias, but I think at the heart of your Q&A is a duality. Some people are athiest because they don't believe and some people are athiest because they are angry. Maybe "the church" wronged them somehow or maybe they have viewed some hypocritical action that influenced them. Again, some people just don't feel religion is right for them. However, some people just want to be right and sometimes there is no joy in being right until you can throw it in the face of someone who is wrong.

I am not nice. Yes you are missing it. So are they.

You people are talking totally different languages that only sound the same.

I am tired right now. keep that in mind.

There is a basic difference in how you view the world and how you respond to the questions.

This basic but simple to understand difference explains the prevalence of atheists in the hard sciences and the prevalence of spiritualists(?term) in the soft sciences.

If you ask a person "WHAT" an A-Bomb does a physicist/engineer/atheist will give you a bolt by bolt explaination of how the elements react, how the charges are shaped, how it is delivered and detonated, etc, etc, etc.

Totally centered on how.

If the person answering is a spiritual(?)/ sociologist/culturalist you will get entirely different answers about why it creates fear, disrupts economies, gives economic power, depletes economic power, gives protection, gives danger/ makes us strong or makes us weak, etc, etc, etc.

Totally centered on why.

(note that I am not good on the motivations and focus more on hows than whys)

The big problems happen when engineers are asked and try to answer "Why".

Yes they can explain the big bang very well as "HOW" it might have happened, but are really at a loss about "WHY"!

Of course then they respond by giving an even better explanation of "HOW" not realizing, or even recognizing the difference.

The religious are Just as bad. The creation story as far as "How" goes simply sucks. (Just change the words and names in the above explanation, I'm tired.)

The thing is that science really has no interest in fighting religion if religion lets science go after the "HOW" of the world and everything in it including religion. Science is more than happy to show religion how even religion works.

But religion has been trying to have more, a big mistake. Science can not deal with "WHY" and that is what religion, politics etc. are supposed to be doing. Science needs to know why it is doing what it is doing. (Yes the pursuit of "TRUTH", whatever that means) This problem is old, ever since the 11th century if not before.

The situation now is that religion has been enjoying a free ride (for about 2,000 years) and trying to protect its priveledges.

Religion must get more active and start making itself relevant. Unfortunatley they have no clue "HOW".

Certainly not by fighting science, but by helping science.

By giving reasons "WHY" for Us who concern ourselves with "How", to bother telling You who concern yourselves with "WHY", how to survive into the next century.

If you are not clear about this pick something in the natural world and ask a religious type and a science type what It is or what it does. "WHAT" is in between and will get you the different responses

(Note that "WHAT" asked of a Botanist or Biologist will get you a catalogue entry)

Hopefully this makes my point about how and why you people are speaking different languages that just happen to sound the same. The same words have totally different meanings.

The first category can be ignored, as you suppose. The second category, however, cannot be: atheism is not a religion -- it is by definition the absence of religion. Furthermore, it is based on science, so it is not a matter of faith. It is always correct to base public policy on science; it is never correct to base it on faith. The third category is less significant: it matters that you get it right only if you have unlimited time and resources, so can afford to spend some on religion, where (except for the feel-good aspect), they will be completely wasted, at a cost to society as well as to the believer.

1. When I come onto here, I choose to be around Christianity, the rest of the time that I spend off of the computer, whether it is with relatives, friends, co-workers, or total strangers, I am told about their God and their beliefs, without regards to mine whether I like it or not. Sometimes I can't even answer the door without somebody trying to convince me to believe what they believe in!

2. Atheist influence? to be atheist is to believe in no God or supreme being, who would give us rules to live. therefore atheists have no one to decide their morals but themselves. No atheism is not a religion.

3. As much as I feel that should people believe in what they want, religion still is the number one reason that people die, go to war, and treat others that are different as inferior. The only place that I question people's beliefs is here on YA! So if you are exposed to my rants, you choose to be.

being nice, we share different views on how valid your points are.

EDIT: Ricket, you sound like a nice, welcoming host. how thoughtful of you to invite him to your house to question his beliefs, I doubt he would have done such a thing to you if he invited you over to his house for dinner, shame