[ShizukaMikudou]

Originally Posted by grimfang999

By that logic birth control is a religion. Religion implies the worship of something, and I sure as hell dont worship condoms.

Again, the wrong meaning of "belief" is being read here. I believe that if I sit in my chair, the chair will hold me. I have faith that sitting in the chair is what it is meant for. That does not mean I believe in a "Chair" religion, based on the fact that chairs do in fact work.

Originally Posted by grimfang999

Incorrect. May I state that communism is extremely anti-religion in many of its forms. Ignoring "real" communism (aka the fascist regimes which took place in Russia, Cuba, China, etc), most of these are about the collective.

I never mentioned Communism, did I? Communism is all focused on the government and society as a whole. Although Marxism-Leninism and Secular Humanism have similar beliefs in that there is no such god, they are very different in their beliefs about ethical philosophy.

Originally Posted by grimfang999

MORAL truth is relative, yes. But again you are redifining instincts. Humans typically share similar reflexive instincts, and if this is the case, there is ultimately some truth in action outside of moral, which forms from cultural and social norms. The extent however depends on your view of huma nature, which varies fro ideology to ideology.

However, some aspects can be seen throughout humanity: most notably unless you are outright rejected already or have mental psychosis, you will not harm another member of your community without due reason. Likewise, we are a social species, which struggle to live a completely isolated life, and thereby we are a collective species. what makes us individualistic is, interestingly nough, social and cultural virtues.

Therefore, only some human truth is moral truth, and being an Atheist does not mean you are an individualist.

Exactly, the extent depends on your view of human nature, which is one of the factors that make your worldview. Now, the real discussion here on this very topic is where that truth is coming from. Why is it that killing innocent people is wrong? Could the same definitions be set if the world were different, and killing was as natural as breathing? These natural morals, instincts, and truths are coincidentally similar in many cases. Worldviews often collide over the existence or origin of these natural morals.

Originally Posted by grimfang999

Define importance, because in todays society we do accept authority, and authority implies importance. You could mean we put ourselves in priority, but is that always the case? Some people are willing to sacrifice their own pleasures or even their own lives to protect the ones they care about, therefore you do percieve some beings as higher than yourself, but that does not make them "Gods".

The focus of the meaning is in why. Why does a person risk his life for another? Because he believes that it is the right thing to do. Why do people give money to help the poor? Because they believe it is the right thing to do. Focus on the subject pronoun in these sentences.

Originally Posted by grimfang999

Could you source this? As far as I would gather they would be provided the same rights as a religious group.

It wasn't too hard to find - just the key words "Supreme Court declares Atheism a religion"
The Supreme Court also gives the definition I've been trying to explain here: "The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being."

Originally Posted by killshot

Alright, on the off change you aren't a troll, I'm willing to give you a real response. People calling atheism a religion is sort of a pet peeve of mine since it demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the subject. Now that my knee jerk reaction is over, I'll reply to what you actually said.

First of all, what have I done to make myself a troll? The thread called for a discussion, and I contributed. If simply giving my opinion, which doesn't happen to agree with many of the atheistic opinions here, is trolling, then the thread starter should have said so in the first place that this thread was only for atheists to come and agree on their beliefs.

Originally Posted by killshot

Belief in something does not qualify that something as a religion. I "believe" in gravity, yet gravity is not a religion. Religion has several historical and cultural implications that are not applicable to atheism.

Here, I quote myself from this same post, but in answer to Grim's.

Originally Posted by ShizukaMikudou

Again, the wrong meaning of "belief" is being read here. I believe that if I sit in my chair, the chair will hold me. I have faith that sitting in the chair is what it is meant for. That does not mean I believe in a "Chair" religion, based on the fact that chairs do in fact work.

Originally Posted by killshot

Atheism is not also known as secular humanism. The two ideas have much in common and many atheists are often secular humanists, but the terms are not interchangeable. You bring up several ideas in the remainder of this section that would require much more than an offhand response so I won't touch on them for now.

Yes, yes it is. Atheism is Secular Humanism as Kangaroos are Macropus rufus's.

Originally Posted by killshot

I don't understand what you are saying here. Why would Christian terms be any different than other terms?

Because obviously, the term, "God" is being severely misinterpreted.
If you mention "God" to a Christian, the Christian takes the meaning of "The One and only God, creator of the universe."
If you say "god" to a Christian, the word means "A role model, idol, or being of moral importance."
For example, it is like when a fangirl says "Justin Beiber is my idol! If he told me to take of my clothes, I would do it. If he told me to go sky-diving with him, I would do it. If he told me to Never say Never, I would post it around the internet and turn it into a moral." And no, I am not a fan of the guy either, before even something as obviously sarcastic as this gets taken seriously.
Now, if you say "god" to an atheist, the meaning is the same whether or not you capitalize the letter.

Originally Posted by killshot

This is a massive leap of logic. As a christian, do you believe yourself to be the next best thing to god? Why would an atheist automatically have to become a narcissist and value themselves over all others? Are you saying there are no self-sacrificing atheists?

Everything I have said up 'til now answers these questions.
As for your first question, no, I don't. As a Christian, I realize that humans are extremely sinful beings, and heck, if I were in God's place, I would love to burn this world and try again with a new one. Compared to God, well, there is no comparison. God is a brand new, eternally clean diamond, and humans are a very, very moldy piece of poop. And that is a severe understatement.
The human spirit is conceited, and doesn't want to accept a being higher than oneself, for if there is a God, then that means we all are expected to do good works, or else we'll go to Hell. As a Christian, though, I can accept this, and yes, it is a humbling thing for everyone and anyone to admit that they are wrong, but through admitting your sins, and accepting God's forgiveness, God has said many times that He will forget your sins completely.

As for the other questions, I'll quote myself:

Originally Posted by ShizukaMikudou

The focus of the meaning is in why. Why does a person risk his life for another? Because he believes that it is the right thing to do. Why do people give money to help the poor? Because they believe it is the right thing to do. Focus on the subject pronoun in these sentences.

Originally Posted by killshot

Citation needed. And who are these atheistic leaders? Didn't you just say that atheists only believe in themselves? I don't follow your logic.

Atheistic leaders - leaders, as in, referring to a few of the strongest, most outspoken athiests. See above for previous references to the same thing.

Originally Posted by killshot

It makes perfect sense. Although the quote I used was intended to entertain as well as inform, it doesn't make it any less applicable. The quote tries to convey atheism as a lack of belief because that is exactly what atheism is. Saying anything to the contrary is just plain incorrect. Agnosticism is the belief that the existence of God is unknowable. Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive terms. For example, I am an agnostic atheist, meaning that while I do not believe in a god, I also concede that it is impossible to prove or disprove his existence.

Everyone does not have a religion. This is just silly.

You keep saying "is" and "is incorrect", while giving examples. Do you have any reason why or how or what makes the quote truth?

Originally Posted by killshot

They have different definitions for a reason. They are most certainly not the same thing. There is nothing to discuss here, you are simply incorrect.

Again, how are they not the same thing? Throwing out statements without some backup isn't defeating my argument. xD I defined them both, explained them, then explained them further to aid my argument.

Originally Posted by killshot

Again, some basic fact checking would tell you this is wrong. Many belief systems make no attempt at explaining the origins of the world, let alone the purpose of life. Is is incorrect.

Well, with that, you've declared several worldviews, including atheism, completely without foundation.
Every belief system has an opinion. Christianity believes that God, the first and eternal cause existing outside of time and space, created the world.
Atheism believes that either the world's beginning was an accident, or that the world has always existed. Buddhism, Shintoism, and all the other religions also have their stories on the world's origin.
The same goes for mankind's purpose. Christianity believes that we are to be witnesses of Christ to everyone else, and that we will be saved by Jesus Christ from our fate in Hell.
Atheism believes that we have no purpose other than personal pursuit of happiness.
Buddhism believes that humans need to achieve Enlightenment.

Originally Posted by killshot

Yes, zero is a number, but that has no relation to the topic being discussed.

Yup, it doesn't, but that simply means that the number zero analogy didn't support atheism's status as an anti-religion. xD

Originally Posted by killshot

I'm still not convinced you aren't a troll, but since you are willing to show some common curtsey I will give you the benefit of the doubt. In the future, please stop centering your posts. It looks strange and makes them more difficult to read.

Actually, for one, I'm not centering my posts; I'm giving them indents. It makes them look neater and less all-over-the-place. I do it all the time when writing papers for school. xD But sure, no problem, I'll stop if it bothers you that much~ ^^