Why do Atheists Hate Religion?

[celestio]

Atheism is a religion because atheists don't know that God doesn't exist. They simply believe it.

Doesn't follow logically. If the only attribute of religion was believing in something that can't be known, it might be accurate, but that's hardly the only attribute to religion. However, it's the only metric by which you're judging atheism.

Who is judging atheism? If the shoe fits, wear it. From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion?s=t:

religion
[ri-lij-uh n]

...

something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:

...

What else might atheism be, other than philosophy, since God hasn't been disproved, and there are multitudes who believe strongly that God exists?

Let's look at the most relevant definition of religion, because you took the sixth most relevant definition and tried to use it to prove your point:

Definition 1: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.


Atheism has one belief: there is no god. It is not a set of beliefs on the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. It does not subscribe to belief in superhuman agency, ritual observances, or a moral code by which to govern the conduct of human affairs. Definition 1 fails entirely.

As for the rest of the definitions, there are no moral codes, rituals, or a defining theory of beliefs that originate from atheism, because atheism is only the belief in the nonexistence of god. That's the beginning and the end of atheism. To the extent there are patterns you recognize from atheists, it is from something that might more closely resemble a "religion" (like secular humanism), but in all relevant applications of the the word religion, atheism doesn't fit. There is no underlying moral code with atheism. The moral compass comes from other schools of thought, like Natural Rights Philosophy or Secular Humanism, not from atheism. The confluence of these schools of thought with atheism are complimentary, but coincidental.

I would agree that ambiguous definitions are not the best. But that is what we have. If one doesn't like the definitions of his particular religion, perhaps he should change the name of it to something that is less ambiguous. For example. Tis not "atheism," but rather tis "atheism - a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." However, rather a long "word," right?

There's no need to change the word. Atheism means something very specific: belief in the nonexistence of god. There are no other attributes to atheism. That's why it's not a religion. Because atheism is not associated with anything else you said. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs about the creation of superhuman agency. Atheism does NOT involve devotional or ritual observances. Atheism does NOT contain a moral governing code. All those things that apply to religion do NOT apply to atheism.

Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of god. FULL STOP.

That's precisely why atheism is a religion. There is no proof that God does not exist. There is ample evidence that could be attributed to the existence of God. Atheism as a belief is just that, a belief. It is not fact. And it is not very close to fact. Yet there are many people who hold to their belief in atheism very strongly. It is a bare-bones religion

At best, atheism is a philosophy.

Atheism is a belief, nothing more. It lacks every attribute of religion except for a belief in something. You're focusing on the one thing it has to the exclusion of all the things it doesn't. It's still not a religion, the same way that trigonometry is not a religion. Trigonometry has a lot more in common with religion than atheism does (such as rules for orienting knowledge, belief in irrefutable truths and concepts, etc.), but it's not a religion either.

If a person had never heard of trigonometry, then picked up a book that briefly talked about trig, he might be a believer in a religious sense, because he saw how trig could exist, yet had very little personal experience with it After the person learned trig and used it, he wouldn't have to be a believer, because then he knew about trig.

Any strong atheist who is a believer without knowing that atheism is full of holes regarding its truth, is really religious in his belief. If he knew about the holes, he might come away from strong belief in atheism, and atheism might become a philosophy to him.

You're conflating "beliefs" and "religion." Religion is built around beliefs. Beliefs are not religions. Your understanding of religion would necessitate the acceptance that every individual belief in the world is a separate religion. People who believe aliens crashed in Area 51: religion. People who believe in chemtrails: religion. People who believe Obama is a Muslim: religion. People who believe the fluoridation of water is a conspiracy to control the populace: religion.

None of these things are religions because beliefs are not religions.

Wrong. They are not religion when they don't fit the dictionary definitions of the word "religion." When they do, they are.

There is no difference between the belief in the nonexistence of god and the belief in any of the things I just listed. They're all just beliefs. Since none of them fit the dictionary definition, none of them are religions.

Somebody who knows about Islam or Christianity, and from these believes that God exists, but doesn't follow any of the formal religions devotedly, but rather, simply says that he believes in God, and then goes on with his daily life without considering the finer aspects of either religion, he probably is not a religious person regarding these religions.

It has to do with the extent or devotion.

Some folks in this forum adamantly proclaim that they are atheists and that Christians or Muslims are nut jobs. These people seem pretty devoted to atheism. Perhaps it is a religion for them while not for others.

Baseball players are devoted to their team and to team spirit.  Wow cool. I guess baseball is a religion just like atheism and science.

Oh, what was that you were saying before about how Christianity *is not* a religion?

By the way, I was serious about making a thread of your contradictory posts.  From the first 2 pages of your post history, I already have close to two-dozen contradictions.

Here's a sneak peak:

"C'mon you guys. This topic is serious."
vs.
""

"Atheists and theists use the same things. The only difference is their focus."
vs.
"Christianity is not really religion...science is one of the biggest religions out there, surpassed only by atheism."

"...the fact that science the scientific method are failed sciences."
vs.
"The scientific method is perfect with regard to itself. No limitations. But that is all it has."

"...Science is one of the biggest religions out there..."
vs.
"Science will never get to the goal it is looking for. Why not?...Only religion can do that."

"The point is, both atheists and theists don't know for a fact that God exists or doesn't exist, or that God can or can't affect things outside or inside the minds of any people."
"Christianity is not really religion. It is reality."

Bravo! You are finally getting the picture. Constant arguing and debate becomes a religion among those who partake of it willingly. Look at how many informal religions there are in the world!

All you're doing is applying the word "religion" to everything and anything where it loses all relevance to this discussion.

I don't need to argue or debate against you.  You defeat yourself over and over by your own statements.  You lose to yourself.

The way you live your life IS your religion. If you make a change to your lifestyle once in a while, and don't do it very often, the contents of the change may possibly not be part of your religion.

Because of this, everything we do in life as part of our lifestyle is our religion.

Is atheism part of our personal religion? It might not be if we barely ever consider it, even though we believe it in a general way. The dividing line between religion and not religion is unclear.

You're wrong BADecker and frankly every statement there makes absolutely no sense.

[BADecker]

Atheism is a religion because atheists don't know that God doesn't exist. They simply believe it.

Doesn't follow logically. If the only attribute of religion was believing in something that can't be known, it might be accurate, but that's hardly the only attribute to religion. However, it's the only metric by which you're judging atheism.

Who is judging atheism? If the shoe fits, wear it. From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion?s=t:

religion
[ri-lij-uh n]

...

something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:

...

What else might atheism be, other than philosophy, since God hasn't been disproved, and there are multitudes who believe strongly that God exists?

Let's look at the most relevant definition of religion, because you took the sixth most relevant definition and tried to use it to prove your point:

Definition 1: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.


Atheism has one belief: there is no god. It is not a set of beliefs on the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. It does not subscribe to belief in superhuman agency, ritual observances, or a moral code by which to govern the conduct of human affairs. Definition 1 fails entirely.

As for the rest of the definitions, there are no moral codes, rituals, or a defining theory of beliefs that originate from atheism, because atheism is only the belief in the nonexistence of god. That's the beginning and the end of atheism. To the extent there are patterns you recognize from atheists, it is from something that might more closely resemble a "religion" (like secular humanism), but in all relevant applications of the the word religion, atheism doesn't fit. There is no underlying moral code with atheism. The moral compass comes from other schools of thought, like Natural Rights Philosophy or Secular Humanism, not from atheism. The confluence of these schools of thought with atheism are complimentary, but coincidental.

I would agree that ambiguous definitions are not the best. But that is what we have. If one doesn't like the definitions of his particular religion, perhaps he should change the name of it to something that is less ambiguous. For example. Tis not "atheism," but rather tis "atheism - a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." However, rather a long "word," right?

There's no need to change the word. Atheism means something very specific: belief in the nonexistence of god. There are no other attributes to atheism. That's why it's not a religion. Because atheism is not associated with anything else you said. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs about the creation of superhuman agency. Atheism does NOT involve devotional or ritual observances. Atheism does NOT contain a moral governing code. All those things that apply to religion do NOT apply to atheism.

Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of god. FULL STOP.

That's precisely why atheism is a religion. There is no proof that God does not exist. There is ample evidence that could be attributed to the existence of God. Atheism as a belief is just that, a belief. It is not fact. And it is not very close to fact. Yet there are many people who hold to their belief in atheism very strongly. It is a bare-bones religion

At best, atheism is a philosophy.

Atheism is a belief, nothing more. It lacks every attribute of religion except for a belief in something. You're focusing on the one thing it has to the exclusion of all the things it doesn't. It's still not a religion, the same way that trigonometry is not a religion. Trigonometry has a lot more in common with religion than atheism does (such as rules for orienting knowledge, belief in irrefutable truths and concepts, etc.), but it's not a religion either.

If a person had never heard of trigonometry, then picked up a book that briefly talked about trig, he might be a believer in a religious sense, because he saw how trig could exist, yet had very little personal experience with it After the person learned trig and used it, he wouldn't have to be a believer, because then he knew about trig.

Any strong atheist who is a believer without knowing that atheism is full of holes regarding its truth, is really religious in his belief. If he knew about the holes, he might come away from strong belief in atheism, and atheism might become a philosophy to him.

You're conflating "beliefs" and "religion." Religion is built around beliefs. Beliefs are not religions. Your understanding of religion would necessitate the acceptance that every individual belief in the world is a separate religion. People who believe aliens crashed in Area 51: religion. People who believe in chemtrails: religion. People who believe Obama is a Muslim: religion. People who believe the fluoridation of water is a conspiracy to control the populace: religion.

None of these things are religions because beliefs are not religions.

Wrong. They are not religion when they don't fit the dictionary definitions of the word "religion." When they do, they are.

There is no difference between the belief in the nonexistence of god and the belief in any of the things I just listed. They're all just beliefs. Since none of them fit the dictionary definition, none of them are religions.

Somebody who knows about Islam or Christianity, and from these believes that God exists, but doesn't follow any of the formal religions devotedly, but rather, simply says that he believes in God, and then goes on with his daily life without considering the finer aspects of either religion, he probably is not a religious person regarding these religions.

It has to do with the extent or devotion.

Some folks in this forum adamantly proclaim that they are atheists and that Christians or Muslims are nut jobs. These people seem pretty devoted to atheism. Perhaps it is a religion for them while not for others.

Baseball players are devoted to their team and to team spirit.  Wow cool. I guess baseball is a religion just like atheism and science.

Oh, what was that you were saying before about how Christianity *is not* a religion?

By the way, I was serious about making a thread of your contradictory posts.  From the first 2 pages of your post history, I already have close to two-dozen contradictions.

Here's a sneak peak:

"C'mon you guys. This topic is serious."
vs.
""

"Atheists and theists use the same things. The only difference is their focus."
vs.
"Christianity is not really religion...science is one of the biggest religions out there, surpassed only by atheism."

"...the fact that science the scientific method are failed sciences."
vs.
"The scientific method is perfect with regard to itself. No limitations. But that is all it has."

"...Science is one of the biggest religions out there..."
vs.
"Science will never get to the goal it is looking for. Why not?...Only religion can do that."

"The point is, both atheists and theists don't know for a fact that God exists or doesn't exist, or that God can or can't affect things outside or inside the minds of any people."
"Christianity is not really religion. It is reality."

Bravo! You are finally getting the picture. Constant arguing and debate becomes a religion among those who partake of it willingly. Look at how many informal religions there are in the world!

All you're doing is applying the word "religion" to everything and anything where it loses all relevance to this discussion.

I don't need to argue or debate against you.  You defeat yourself over and over by your own statements.  You lose to yourself.

The way you live your life IS your religion. If you make a change to your lifestyle once in a while, and don't do it very often, the contents of the change may possibly not be part of your religion.

Because of this, everything we do in life as part of our lifestyle is our religion.

Is atheism part of our personal religion? It might not be if we barely ever consider it, even though we believe it in a general way. The dividing line between religion and not religion is unclear.

You're wrong BADecker and frankly every statement there makes absolutely no sense.

The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.

If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.

[the joint]

Atheism is a religion because atheists don't know that God doesn't exist. They simply believe it.

Doesn't follow logically. If the only attribute of religion was believing in something that can't be known, it might be accurate, but that's hardly the only attribute to religion. However, it's the only metric by which you're judging atheism.

Who is judging atheism? If the shoe fits, wear it. From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion?s=t:

religion
[ri-lij-uh n]

...

something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:

...

What else might atheism be, other than philosophy, since God hasn't been disproved, and there are multitudes who believe strongly that God exists?

Let's look at the most relevant definition of religion, because you took the sixth most relevant definition and tried to use it to prove your point:

Definition 1: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.


Atheism has one belief: there is no god. It is not a set of beliefs on the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. It does not subscribe to belief in superhuman agency, ritual observances, or a moral code by which to govern the conduct of human affairs. Definition 1 fails entirely.

As for the rest of the definitions, there are no moral codes, rituals, or a defining theory of beliefs that originate from atheism, because atheism is only the belief in the nonexistence of god. That's the beginning and the end of atheism. To the extent there are patterns you recognize from atheists, it is from something that might more closely resemble a "religion" (like secular humanism), but in all relevant applications of the the word religion, atheism doesn't fit. There is no underlying moral code with atheism. The moral compass comes from other schools of thought, like Natural Rights Philosophy or Secular Humanism, not from atheism. The confluence of these schools of thought with atheism are complimentary, but coincidental.

I would agree that ambiguous definitions are not the best. But that is what we have. If one doesn't like the definitions of his particular religion, perhaps he should change the name of it to something that is less ambiguous. For example. Tis not "atheism," but rather tis "atheism - a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." However, rather a long "word," right?

There's no need to change the word. Atheism means something very specific: belief in the nonexistence of god. There are no other attributes to atheism. That's why it's not a religion. Because atheism is not associated with anything else you said. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs about the creation of superhuman agency. Atheism does NOT involve devotional or ritual observances. Atheism does NOT contain a moral governing code. All those things that apply to religion do NOT apply to atheism.

Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of god. FULL STOP.

That's precisely why atheism is a religion. There is no proof that God does not exist. There is ample evidence that could be attributed to the existence of God. Atheism as a belief is just that, a belief. It is not fact. And it is not very close to fact. Yet there are many people who hold to their belief in atheism very strongly. It is a bare-bones religion

At best, atheism is a philosophy.

Atheism is a belief, nothing more. It lacks every attribute of religion except for a belief in something. You're focusing on the one thing it has to the exclusion of all the things it doesn't. It's still not a religion, the same way that trigonometry is not a religion. Trigonometry has a lot more in common with religion than atheism does (such as rules for orienting knowledge, belief in irrefutable truths and concepts, etc.), but it's not a religion either.

If a person had never heard of trigonometry, then picked up a book that briefly talked about trig, he might be a believer in a religious sense, because he saw how trig could exist, yet had very little personal experience with it After the person learned trig and used it, he wouldn't have to be a believer, because then he knew about trig.

Any strong atheist who is a believer without knowing that atheism is full of holes regarding its truth, is really religious in his belief. If he knew about the holes, he might come away from strong belief in atheism, and atheism might become a philosophy to him.

You're conflating "beliefs" and "religion." Religion is built around beliefs. Beliefs are not religions. Your understanding of religion would necessitate the acceptance that every individual belief in the world is a separate religion. People who believe aliens crashed in Area 51: religion. People who believe in chemtrails: religion. People who believe Obama is a Muslim: religion. People who believe the fluoridation of water is a conspiracy to control the populace: religion.

None of these things are religions because beliefs are not religions.

Wrong. They are not religion when they don't fit the dictionary definitions of the word "religion." When they do, they are.

There is no difference between the belief in the nonexistence of god and the belief in any of the things I just listed. They're all just beliefs. Since none of them fit the dictionary definition, none of them are religions.

Somebody who knows about Islam or Christianity, and from these believes that God exists, but doesn't follow any of the formal religions devotedly, but rather, simply says that he believes in God, and then goes on with his daily life without considering the finer aspects of either religion, he probably is not a religious person regarding these religions.

It has to do with the extent or devotion.

Some folks in this forum adamantly proclaim that they are atheists and that Christians or Muslims are nut jobs. These people seem pretty devoted to atheism. Perhaps it is a religion for them while not for others.

Baseball players are devoted to their team and to team spirit.  Wow cool. I guess baseball is a religion just like atheism and science.

Oh, what was that you were saying before about how Christianity *is not* a religion?

By the way, I was serious about making a thread of your contradictory posts.  From the first 2 pages of your post history, I already have close to two-dozen contradictions.

Here's a sneak peak:

"C'mon you guys. This topic is serious."
vs.
""

"Atheists and theists use the same things. The only difference is their focus."
vs.
"Christianity is not really religion...science is one of the biggest religions out there, surpassed only by atheism."

"...the fact that science the scientific method are failed sciences."
vs.
"The scientific method is perfect with regard to itself. No limitations. But that is all it has."

"...Science is one of the biggest religions out there..."
vs.
"Science will never get to the goal it is looking for. Why not?...Only religion can do that."

"The point is, both atheists and theists don't know for a fact that God exists or doesn't exist, or that God can or can't affect things outside or inside the minds of any people."
"Christianity is not really religion. It is reality."

Bravo! You are finally getting the picture. Constant arguing and debate becomes a religion among those who partake of it willingly. Look at how many informal religions there are in the world!

All you're doing is applying the word "religion" to everything and anything where it loses all relevance to this discussion.

I don't need to argue or debate against you.  You defeat yourself over and over by your own statements.  You lose to yourself.

The way you live your life IS your religion. If you make a change to your lifestyle once in a while, and don't do it very often, the contents of the change may possibly not be part of your religion.

Because of this, everything we do in life as part of our lifestyle is our religion.

Is atheism part of our personal religion? It might not be if we barely ever consider it, even though we believe it in a general way. The dividing line between religion and not religion is unclear.

Hey, when you care to start using the same language everyone else is using, come back and try again, okay?  I never know what you say because it will never remain the same.

[the joint]

The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.

If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.

But I have you quoted as saying:

Christianity is not really religion.

Care to explain that hilarious insight?

[celestio]

The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.

If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.

But I have you quoted as saying:

Christianity is not really religion.

Care to explain that hilarious insight?

He attempts to somehow propel Christianity to an imaginary status above that of religion, as he deems Atheism a religion(Which it is not), and likely doesn't want his own beliefs to be in the same "league" as that of an Atheists.

Either way, everything BADecker has said here is wrong. I'm still chewing on the prospect of there being a god based on what you previously said, but reading BADecker's posts is making me realize why so many are Atheists. His posts are so nonsensical that it has a comedic effect.

[BADecker]

The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.

If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.

But I have you quoted as saying:

Christianity is not really religion.

Care to explain that hilarious insight?

Christianity is reality. Other religions are not. Even the religion of your own life is not reality, because once you are gone, it will never be remembered by you or brought to your mind again.

This is difficult to conceive of, because we live as though there is no end of tomorrows.

[the joint]

The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.

If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.

But I have you quoted as saying:

Christianity is not really religion.

Care to explain that hilarious insight?

Christianity is reality. Other religions are not. Even the religion of your own life is not reality, because once you are gone, it will never be remembered by you or brought to your mind again.

This is difficult to conceive of, because we live as though there is no end of tomorrows.

But, you just contradicted yourself again.  This was the definition of religion that you recently quoted:

something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience

Can you help me understand what you mean?  Oh wait, I have an idea -- pick one definition of religion and stick with it.  I don't care if its your own, but pick one and stick with it.

[BlitzandBitz]

There is no God, so your statement means that atheists tinks we are nobody, Sorry try again. and what ignorant people wrote in books means nothing for people that dont think the books are holly

Keep in mind BD has been brainwashed as a child - he cannot look at the proof we provide because his head is in the sand.

His parent's did not love him enough as a child to let him choose his own beliefs.  In turn, he will not love his own children enough to let them choose their own beliefs.  That is how fairly tales spread - by taking advantage of the innocent and vulnerable.

Thank goodness people are moving away from his religion in droves.  I don't think BD has the intelligence to join us, however.  

ah I see someone has a differing opinion then you so they must be "wrong" right!

[Muhammed Zakir]

I am not disproving you but bolded part suggests the god in your heart to have superpowers.

I liked this - "God doesn't have a face or shape but he is in my heart."

I believe in Adam and Eve but I am not talking about the superpowers like since God is unhappy with the world, he causes an earthquake, tsunami and so on.

I believe that he is the creator of humans though. I would like to know what atheists believe about Adam and Eve. Don't they believe that there was first one man and woman created on this earth? How were they created according to science?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution


They weren't the first modern humans on the planet, but instead just the two out of thousands of people alive at the time with unbroken male or female lineages that continue on today. - http://livescience.com/38613-genetic-adam-and-eve-uncovered.html

The people researched certainly have false information.

"Those two people didn't know each other," said Melissa Wilson Sayres, a geneticist at the University of California, Berkeley, who was not involved in the study.

[cryptodevil]

I believe in corporal punishment of children at the proper time, in the proper way, and for proper reasons.

So you're clearly just of the "nasty bastards using religion to excuse their desire to beat children into submission" school of thought.

Do you know it is possible to raise perfectly well-balanced, psychologically healthy children without inflicting pain on them or abusing them in any way whatsoever, including verbally?

My two children are marvellous little human beings who have not been shaped by being assaulted whenever they make a mistake, because there are ways one can be a responsible parent without abusing the position of power we have and betraying the trust they put in us to care and nurture them in a healthy and functional way.

But, then, you are so staggeringly ignorant and astonishingly dishonest in how you present your position and attempt to defend it, it does not surprise me that you think beating a child is a 'good' thing.

[Paya]

I am an atheist (actually, I am more inclined to agnosticism but never mind). I don't hate religion and I do respect religious people, those who aren't crazy zealots I mean. Same kind of militant atheism can be found on the other side too, btw, which I put more or less in the same place as religious fanatism.

What I don't like are generalisations like in the title of this thread.

[Beliathon]

I'm a woman and not married. I will turn to my mother as I see God in her as well.

God is the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority. For me this is the definition but I don't believe he has super powers because I haven't seen them nor do I believe in miracles.

I do believe that this earth also is a form of God, rain is a form of God, and the food I eat also is a form of God. I live on this earth, I get water from the rain, I am alive because of the food I eat. They keep me alive and for me, even my books are a form of God as I gain knowledge from them. God doesn't have a face or shape but he is in my heart.

Call my crazy or anything but I believe in God and not his super powers or magical powers.

Praise Jibbers Crabst! Seriously though you guys are a joke. What relevance will religion have in a world where medical science has solved aging? Science is zeroing in on that shit, you better believe it. Please stop violating the fragile and precious minds of your children with formative year religious indoctrination. It's hideously unethical you know, deliberately stunting the critical thinking abilities of a child, rewiring their impressionable little minds in ways hostile to scientific thought. Stop doing that, it's bad, you're bad and you should feel bad.

[cryptocoiner]

Why do Atheists hate Religion ?

LOL. What kind of question is that? I am an atheist, but i don't hate religion. I don't hate any religion and I respect people who believe in god. Religion and faith is a part of this world. People should have the freedom of choice. Hatred will not lead you anywhere. I think you just should reconsider something.

[Vod]

I believe in corporal punishment of children at the proper time, in the proper way, and for proper reasons.

So you're clearly just of the "nasty bastards using religion to excuse their desire to beat children into submission" school of thought.

Do you know it is possible to raise perfectly well-balanced, psychologically healthy children without inflicting pain on them or abusing them in any way whatsoever, including verbally?

My two children are marvellous little human beings who have not been shaped by being assaulted whenever they make a mistake, because there are ways one can be a responsible parent without abusing the position of power we have and betraying the trust they put in us to care and nurture them in a healthy and functional way.

But, then, you are so staggeringly ignorant and astonishingly dishonest in how you present your position and attempt to defend it, it does not surprise me that you think beating a child is a 'good' thing.

No surprise to me that he abuses them physically.  He has already abused them spiritually, and put them in a position of disadvantage for their entire life.  

[celestio]

In my personal experience, it's always the religious folk that beat their children senseless. I know a married couple and they're both Atheist, and they don't hit their kids(Only going so far as a slap on the wrist), and there children are the most well-behaved I have ever seen.

When I was growing up, you'd hear horror stories of my friends Italian parents beating them with broom sticks and belts, and half of those guys are on drugs or entirely broke now. Don't even mention the various nuns in Ireland that worked the girls sent to their monasteries to death. Religious people are the worst example of parents in my experience(At least concerning Christianity, don't know about other religions in that personal regard).

[Vod]

In my personal experience, it's always the religious folk that beat their children senseless. I know a married couple and they're both Atheist, and they don't hit their kids(Only going so far as a slap on the wrist), and there children are the most well-behaved I have ever seen.

When I was growing up, you'd hear horror stories of my friends Italian parents beating them with broom sticks and belts, and half of those guys are on drugs or entirely broke now. Don't even mention the various nuns in Ireland that worked the girls sent to their monasteries to death. Religious people are the worst example of parents in my experience(At least concerning Christianity, don't know about other religions in that personal regard).

I'm a good example of a christian child brainwashed and beaten as a child.  Luckily I was into computers early (1983) and forcing my mind to think in new ways, I eventually overcame my brainwashing.

As a result, I think I have an extremely high sense of morality and ethics - I feel stronger than someone who was never brainwashed to begin with.  Why?  Because I have seen the evil on the other side, and I understand why people are evil - religion.

[celestio]

In my personal experience, it's always the religious folk that beat their children senseless. I know a married couple and they're both Atheist, and they don't hit their kids(Only going so far as a slap on the wrist), and there children are the most well-behaved I have ever seen.

When I was growing up, you'd hear horror stories of my friends Italian parents beating them with broom sticks and belts, and half of those guys are on drugs or entirely broke now. Don't even mention the various nuns in Ireland that worked the girls sent to their monasteries to death. Religious people are the worst example of parents in my experience(At least concerning Christianity, don't know about other religions in that personal regard).

I'm a good example of a christian child brainwashed and beaten as a child.  Luckily I was into computers early (1983) and forcing my mind to think in new ways, I eventually overcame my brainwashing.

As a result, I think I have an extremely high sense of morality and ethics - I feel stronger than someone who was never brainwashed to begin with.  Why?  Because I have seen the evil on the other side, and I understand why people are evil - religion.

Count me as a 2nd example. My parents were and are extremely religious. I grew up not to exercise reason, but to obey without question or forced to pray the rosary and others as punishment. I kind of steered away on my own, especially because of the hatred and downright stupidity I've seen among religious people(Even my parents). For ex: They'd act as if they were all high and mighty, such as looking down on people that had divorced, single women with children(Parents were into the mentality that men were the main leader of the household), homosexuals and thinking the universe was made in 6 days.

[Falconer]

In my personal experience, it's always the religious folk that beat their children senseless. I know a married couple and they're both Atheist, and they don't hit their kids(Only going so far as a slap on the wrist), and there children are the most well-behaved I have ever seen.

When I was growing up, you'd hear horror stories of my friends Italian parents beating them with broom sticks and belts, and half of those guys are on drugs or entirely broke now. Don't even mention the various nuns in Ireland that worked the girls sent to their monasteries to death. Religious people are the worst example of parents in my experience(At least concerning Christianity, don't know about other religions in that personal regard).

Every person has the difference stories and experience in his life. I think there is a atheist family who hit their kids and there is who don't. Like atheist family, religions family have same condition. I think you just got the example from worst parents. There are so many best parents from religions.

[Hamuki]

Religion:

Its for people who can not think for themselfs and are not able to think further than looking up at the stars and think its heaven..
And look down into the vulcanos and think that is hell.

Religion was made by some smart people to control a large amount of people.
And even today its being used as a weapon (ISIS, Al-Shabab, Taliban, Al-Queda and all the others)

[erikalui]

Seriously what has religion got to do with children get beaten by their parents? My grandmother was never beaten up by her atheist parents. My mother was also born to theists but she was never beaten up by them nor was I beaten up by my parents for no reason. When I started playing mischief in school, my mom used to scold me and punish me but that's the parent's right. If they think that their scolding can improve their child, they have a right to punish them before they go on a wrong path.

Praise Jibbers Crabst! Seriously though you guys are a joke. What relevance will religion have in a world where medical science has solved aging? Science is zeroing in on that shit, you better believe it. Please stop violating the fragile and precious minds of your children with formative year religious indoctrination. It's hideously unethical you know, deliberately stunting the critical thinking abilities of a child, rewiring their impressionable little minds in ways hostile to scientific thought. Stop doing that, it's bad, you're bad and you should feel bad.

I really pity you. If you think that all those who believe in God are bad nobody can help you.
 

And others who say evil means religion. I have already mentioned about a person who was an atheist and killed a person for dropping his paint bottle. that might be not considered as evil?

Evil = Religion. Then I hope the atheists who believe in this don't work in offices of theists or have them as neighbors. Why to work or live with evil people.