1. Atheism is a religion and you're as bad as the fundamentalists

Comment #82195 by Nug on October 25, 2007 at 8:46 pm

In response to #81414:

While I completly agree with what is stated I do not feel that it is the correct aproach. Throwing a few zingers may win the debate and make supporters that were already supporters laugh, but it fails to enlighten the debate with a knowlegable response. Laughing off a hurtful debate point with a one liner will not open the minds of current believers.

There are however many times one liners are usful but not against such a broad and significant statement.

2. Atheism is a religion and you're as bad as the fundamentalists

Comment #81474 by Nug on October 24, 2007 at 7:39 pm

(Atheism is its own religion):
This statement allows the faithful to believe that they are arguing against only another set of beliefs, just as if they were debating against Judaism or Islam. By accepting this statement it is easy for believers to disregard or negatively filter any information that comes out of an atheist's mouth whether true or false.
Because of the harm this statement can deal, I think that this must be the first debate point that should be addressed at all debates, even though it is not truly worthy of doing so.

The first thing that should be pointed out is that it is unjust to lump all non-believers into the category of atheist. Usually the pro-religion debater is knowledgeable enough to not do this in a direct statement but his or her supporting listeners are not knowledgeable enough or willing to decipher the difference in the debaters' arguments. Also, to a believer there is a difference between being a non-believer and being godless (Uncaring and indifferent to all meaning). Atheist debaters should make clear that this definition of godless is different than being "without a god". In essence I am trying to say that we should dumb it down a little bit and try to lessen the negative connotation that the word atheist carries by explaining what atheism truly is.

To directly attack the statement claiming atheism as a religion the debater should state what a religion is. Religion is a structured set of beliefs that are permanent, and the truth of these beliefs is held to be self-evident. So, religion can either be accepted or declined. What people miss is that religion is pretty much a yes or no question; religion doesn't really allow picking and choosing and not much room if any for personal beliefs within their own religion.

Atheism is a world view that adopts productive qualities that can help further the human race by trying to understand that which is not yet understood and help explain what is understood (from as large as the universe to as small as the atom). It uses tools such as science, reason, logic, skepticism, etc… "But science is a religion too". Yes, science is very well structured but it is not however permanent in its beliefs. Mistakes are allowed to be corrected, and beliefs and ideas are allowed to be criticized and even proven to be wrong. Science adapts and dare I say it, it evolves. It evolves in the fact that it has become more efficient throughout history, while religion has remained set in stone. Science is proactive while religion remains frozen in time with only the names of its believers changing. Science fills holes with facts and others with theories, while religion fills holes with mystery and the acceptance of not understanding. Science does not have all the answers and it might not ever, and that is why it is neither a religion nor a substitute for one.