Should atheists study all religions (within reason) before deciding to be atheist?

Yes, I think most individuals should learn World Religions. current and past.

I actually think it should be part of school curriculum to teach Religion[s]. Understanding that they are Belief Systems and not factual events.

I think it would be beneficial to understand these various beliefs because then we can analytically understand where we fall within these beliefs.

So that pupils can retain this information and make informed and practical decisions regarding their own beliefs or lack thereof.

I've always had a fascination with religion[s], always trying to understand it from a sociological and psychological perspective. Identifying key factors of teachings and common denominations within each belief system.

Not really, but I see where you're coming from. I think if they conclude from their own experiences that there's no God, then you have to respect that. But I don't see a problem with anybody investigating other faiths in order to gain a genuinely better understanding of someone else's beliefs.

I was raised as an atheist by my atheist dad, and studying religion was restricted to one lesson a week at school. I also read the Bible (KJV) while on holiday in Newquay as a teenager, and it didn't do much to convince me. I read it in a different light now.

I think the relationship between people is generally respectful. I have a lot of atheist friends (and one or two who practice a faith other than Christianity), and we get on fine. It's gets out of hand on here because people hiding behind anonymous profiles feel more secure when airing their intolerances in the most insulting way they can think of, and the trolls don't help matters.

Ultimately, people will always come to a conclusion (or a point of contentment with not knowing) which will differ from someone else's. We may not agree with their beliefs, but we must accept and respect that they reached them honestly.

I don't think anyone should be forced into any type of action, whether it's someone being indoctrinated & influenced by peers, into believing in something (and that is not just aimed at religion, but anything from politics, to advertising, to news & gossip etc.) or whether it's researching all available religions to come to the same conclusion that they were headed for in the first place.

I mean, let's face it. On the evidence that we have from so-called "Christians". There is strong evidence that many have never read the Bible....they don't need to study their own religion before becoming Christian, so why should it be any different for Atheists, muslims, buddhists etc.

I studied over a dozen religions before becoming a Christian and came to the conclusion that Christianity and Judaism are the only ones that are not easily discounted because of obvious contradictions within their own "holy" writings so I feel they should only look at Christianity with an open mind.

Besides Buddhism, Confucianism and others do not claim to have a relevant deity so why would they even affect an Atheist's belief.

No. There are simply too many. Besides, atheism is simply the lack of belief. You can study as many religions as you choose and still lack belief.

As a deist I believe in God due to reason and my own experiences, not claimed supernatural revelations.

I recognize that not all have had the same experiences as I have had and not all reason exactly as I do, so expecting everyone to come to the same conclusion is rather silly.

Calvin,

You don't have to prove anything. I claim my mother loves me. Guess how much proof I owe you??? NONE. In a debate, both sides bring evidence supporting their view. Burden of proof is for the courts as it is a legal term.

Edit:

I have studied the Koran, the Bible, talked to Jews about their understanding of the Torah, studied Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism and Confucianism. All have great teaching with things worht learning, so I would never say not to study differing religions, just that you don't need to, to claim that you are an atheist. It is simply a lack of belief.

Skeptic,

That's a false tricotomy.

As an atheist, it's probably a good idea to be well aware of religion. I always say I'm a born again atheist. Religion is a natural evolutionary hick-up in the human brain. That doesn't mean there's no God. After all, the hick-ups do take in air (if that makes any sense). But there's MOST LIKELY no God. God is not necessary to any argument.

Once a person has been exposed to religion, he should study a lot of them before settling firmly on atheism, like myself.

But truly blessed are they whose minds are never tampered by any religious exposure whatsoever, but take in pure science and reason.

There's nothing wrong with your premise provided all people agree to go through the same rigorous devotion to study before deciding they are Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, etc. I'm not sure why you think atheists have to be held to a higher standard than believers, but it hardly seems fair. However, I think you'll find that deciding against one deity hardly opens the door to other deities to audition for the vacant part. If what I object to about God is how he treats the Egyptians, then perhaps another deity is for me. But I find the whole idea of a god, a supernatural super-powerful deity to be ridiculous, and nature/science/logic has filled in most of the gaps in the arguments for belief in supernatural interference in our lives, so I don't see any reason to go seeking out another thing to worship in God's place.

It couldnt hurt but people dont really decide to be an atheist or theist or agnostic they usually just believe what they do on its own. The same should be said for someone of any religion they should be studying other religions. If comparative religion was taught in schools instead of only in college there would probably be less religious extremism and more peace and understanding among people.

You missed the key element in atheism, ignorance. How can something be right, if I don't understand it. If an educated person told you that they had done their best to study and understand religion, but it isn't for them. What can you say, sorry. Because they tried and failed, you couldn't fault them.

The atheist we have here are mostly quitters. They want the easy way and easy isn't the way to understand anything. So their atheists because it takes nothing to join. Nothing is expected. and nothing is O.K. to them. They will change their tune one day. The day life slaps them hard in the head. It was easy to quit, but now there is nowhere to turn. Things got tough and they weren't expecting that to happen, to them. I tell them to hang out at the local hospital. They can share their atheism with people that are facing a real tragedy. After they share their thoughts, they will wake up in the ER. I know they wouldn't face real people in any situation. But I know if they got funny at a hospital, they would end up with a room, at the hospital.

Not to dodge the question, but using that logic, shouldn't EVERY person do that before choosing a religion? I don't think that's reasonable so I don't bring it up. But since religious people always say, "How can you reject my religion if you haven't studied it?" I can easily turn the question back on them.

And what do you mean by "within reason"? What if some obscure volcano worshiping tribe in Africa you've never heard is the one true religion? They certainly think it is. What if you're pissing off the volcano by refusing to learn about their religion?

There are three possibilities: all gods exist, no gods exist, or one specific god exists. The last one is the LEAST likely, yet most people choose that one. It's up to THEM to present empirical evidence.