Athiesm religion in drag?

[former athiest]

It seems to me that Athiesm is just religion in drag.
It's not founded on science.
Science is the pursuit of understanding.
Athiesm is founded on faith. Faith in the nonexistance of god.
Athiesm is not founded on any scientific facts. Only theories.
Athiesm perverts science to promote it's own agendas just like christianity.
Athiesm is no more factual than christianity.

[Cathar1950]

It seems to me that Athiesm is just religion in drag.
It's not founded on science.
Science is the pursuit of understanding.
Athiesm is founded on faith. Faith in the nonexistance of god.
Athiesm is not founded on any scientific facts. Only theories.
Athiesm perverts science to promote it's own agendas just like christianity.
Athiesm is no more factual than christianity.

I can only assume from your handle that you were once an atheist before you saw the light.
I often see ex-non believers project their own personal experience and somehow
make it universal.
I can only wonder what you mean by atheist that alone guess what you mean by drag.
There are many variities of atheism and I would guss most would disagree with you unsupported ideas that it perverts, or is in drag.

[Chad]

Good thing I'm not an athiest.

[Cmass]

Chad wrote:

Good thing I'm not an athiest.

I too am glad I'm not an athiest! Nor am I an Atheist. Nope, I'm a proud Pastafarian - which is based on sound science.

[Cmass]

It seems to me that Athiesm is just religion in drag.

It seems that way to people who feel threatened by it or have no idea what it is. I personally don't dress in womens clothing but certainly don't care if you do. (BTW: What does the Bible tell us about dressing in drag?)

It's not founded on science.

Straw man alert #1. But...Hmmm. Maybe you are right. I don't recall the scientists who founded Atheism.

Science is the pursuit of understanding.

Yep.

Athiesm is founded on faith. Faith in the nonexistance of god.

Wrong. As a general rule an Atheist simply does not believe God exists. This is not done through "faith". This conclusion is often arrived at via philosophical thought experiments or by looking for evidence of the extraordinary claims made by believers of Bible God. If the Bible God concept does not make sense or if a person finds no extraordinary evidence to back up the extraordinary claims of Christians (and other religionists) then there is no reason to have "faith" in Christianity or in the claim that Bible God exists. It is a LACK of faith. YOU require faith: Faith that the stories you are being told are true even though many make no sense and have no evidence to support them.

Athiesm is not founded on any scientific facts. Only theories.

Straw man alert #2

Athiesm perverts science to promote it's own agendas just like christianity.

What specific perversions are you referring to? Specifically, what do you think my agenda is? Also, does Atheism pervert science the same way Christianity does? Do you believe the sun orbits the earth or that there was a global flood or that the earth was made in only a few days or that snakes talk etc.. etc.. etc...?

Athiesm is no more factual than christianity.

Correction: Atheism is simply the lack of belief in God which is a conclusion reached by lack of facts or evidence from Christians and other religionists.
_________________

Athiesm is a system of belief concerning god.

Redundancy does not make your argument stronger.

Athiesm is not a field of science. Chemistry is a field of science.

Correct! Now we are getting somewhere.

Athiesm is the religion of no god.

Now I understand you. Since you have no clue as to what religion is you cannot possibly know what Atheism is.

Now that we have cleared up that mess, what is the question for debate? Or were you just venting? You might want to do a bit of reading about Atheism before going further with this.

[Cmass]

Cathar wrote:

I can only assume from your handle that you were once an atheist before you saw the light.

I doubt he was ever an Atheist. This is a tactic (lie ) I have seen many times from Christians fundamentalists: They claim to understand your position better than you by pretending they were once just like you. It is a rather shallow way to assert that they now possess understanding and knowledge you have not yet grasped.
In this case the OP shows a glaring lack of understanding of Atheism so I can only conclude he was never really and Atheist.

[former athiest]

Since you have no clue

I thought that personal insults where against forum policy?

I also think that people, resort to insults in the absence of a valid argument. I may be wrong.

Or were you just venting?

Who's venting? When did I insult you? When did I resort to personal attacks in the absence of valid arguments?

My reasoning for claiming that Athiesm is a religion is simple.

Science is founded on fact.
Religion is founded on faith in the absence of fact.

Show me Valid concrete undisputable absolute scientific evidence to undeniably prove the none existance of god.

[former athiest]

If Athiesm is founded of fact SHOW ME THE FACT.
If Athiesm is NOT founded on fact then athiesm is founded faith.

[Undertow]

Show me Valid concrete undisputable absolute scientific evidence to undeniably prove the none existance of god.

There is no such thing. Case closed.

Former Atheist: Being skeptical of a belief someone else holds does not take faith. The chronology here is very simple. Some people like to have faith in supernatural ideas. After this becomes apparant, some people protest this through being skeptical and lacking a common belief in said supernatural ideas.

The initial position takes faith. The skeptic's position does not and rather insists those who take the initial position give them something stronger than faith to grasp.

Let's be objective about this - The skeptical atheists position was a generalisation on my part. There are some atheists designated 'strong atheists' who assert that 'there is definately no god' with as little evidence as those who assert that there is a god. These strong atheists have arguably just as much faith as theists.

I'd argue, and this is only specualtion, that most atheists are so for the most part because they are skeptical of others ideas regarding supernatural entities and not because they simply believe that 'there is definately no god.'

[former athiest]

In this case the OP shows a glaring lack of understanding of Atheism so I can only conclude he was never really and Atheist.

I have only 1 claim regarding atheism.

Athiesm is not founded on fact.

Until you can show the facts proving atheism. Athiesm is not founded on fact. Which proves my point and shows your own "glaring lack of understanding of Atheism" that you yourself did not see the fact that atheism is not founded of fact.