Caucasian, Atheist, Bisexual.

 

And damn...this thread is....well...."entertaining" to say the least. But I have to agree with sees_all, take the debate to an actual religious debate thread....I don't think debating was the intention of this thread when it was created. And it's kind of annoying to see the same debates everywhere I look when I happen to peek my head into OT.

Caucasian, Atheist, Bisexual.

 

And damn...this thread is....well...."entertaining" to say the least. But I have to agree with sees_all, take the debate to an actual religious debate thread....I don't think debating was the intention of this thread when it was created. And it's kind of annoying to see the same debates everywhere I look when I happen to peek my head into OT.

 

Though this thread wasn't created with the intention of sparking debate, I certainly do not mind there being a degree of debate. But that whole Catholicism debate did get a little too off topic.

Caucasian, Atheist, Bisexual.

 

And damn...this thread is....well...."entertaining" to say the least. But I have to agree with sees_all, take the debate to an actual religious debate thread....I don't think debating was the intention of this thread when it was created. And it's kind of annoying to see the same debates everywhere I look when I happen to peek my head into OT.

 

Though this thread wasn't created with the intention of sparking debate, I certainly do not mind there being a degree of debate. But that whole Catholicism debate did get a little too off topic.

 

 

Well the debate in general doesn't bother me. But, yes I am atheist, BUT, I do like to have an understanding of others' religions. It's hard to explain, but I'll try anyway. I may not believe in any of it, but there is a part of me that enjoys listening to how others feel about their religion, more out of curiosity than anything, and it's really hard to get a good idea of how a person truly feels about such things when they are constantly defending it in a debate. I would just like to be able to poke my head into a thread that has "religion" in the topic of discussion and not see a debate, so that I can see people talking about their religion in a manner that isn't tainted by argument and debate. It's just hard to get much out of two sides arguing.

 

Yes, I know I can go look the information up, but that isn't as great as hearing (or reading in this case) from others around me that are part of the same community as I am (being this forum, weird analogy, I know, sorry). I hope all of that made sense. lol

 

EDIT: I used the word debate way too many times..... <.<

Atheist, Caucasian, and I identify as heterosexual, but I voted bisexual because I might one day identify as such. Let's just say that I'm exploring with that avenue. Really I don't like being pigeonholed on the issue of sexuality; it's just so fluid and changes as we grow (not in everyone, certainly).

How can you include Bahai faith, which has less than 300k members in the United States and Europe (which is the vast majority of voters) and not agnosticism?

 

 

In addition, for those of you who seem to be unaware, agnosticism isn't a religion per se. All it means is that you do not claim to know that your beliefs are correct. So technically everyone in the world should be an agnostic, because nobody "knows," but of course people will claim to know they're correct even with quite literally 0 evidence :rolleyes:

How can you include Bahai faith, which has less than 300k members in the United States and Europe (which is the vast majority of voters) and not agnosticism?

 

 

In addition, for those of you who seem to be unaware, agnosticism isn't a religion per se. All it means is that you do not claim to know that your beliefs are correct. So technically everyone in the world should be an agnostic, because nobody "knows," but of course people will claim to know they're correct even with quite literally 0 evidence :rolleyes:

 

Agnosticism is not a religious position: it is an epistemological position. One is either a theist or an atheist; agnosticism is addressing a different question entirely - the availability of knowledge. Thus with regards to religious belief, one can be an agnostic theist or agnostic atheist, but not simply an agnostic.

I'd strongly disagree, Ring. Theism is the explicit acceptance of the proposition "There exists a deity or deities." If one does not accept the proposition, one is not a theist - that is, an atheist (if you feel the word is too laden down with added, contemporary baggage - feel free to use the term non-theist).

 

As such, Deism is a subset of Theism - as it includes the belief in a deity (an impersonal creator god). Also, agnosticism in the sense that you define it is non theism; even if you haven't made up your mind, you still do not explicitly accept the core statement of theism. :thumbup:

I was under the impression that Atheism is the belief that there is absolutely not a deity. Thus I would think that agnosticism could be used to define the middle ground. If I'm wrong on the first part then I'll have to rethink it :razz:

Like I posted, agnosticism addresses a seperate but related question. Admittedly, the exact meaning of 'atheism' is debated; if you want to be safe, using 'non-theist' is probably the best idea. The importance of these distinctions is to do with the burden of proof, a concept I'm sure you're familiar with. :wink:

"Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist."

 

It seems there are multiple viable definitions.

 

 

 

I'm just kind of confused now