Splain this one, god loonies

[Svartalf]

I'm not, I'm just going back to the Latin meaning of religio : "that which ties together".
A common religion implied less believing in the same gods (each clan had its own ancestral deities and home deities) than performing the same rites (like the public and state cults).

[Animavore]

Well I'm going by the English, Oxford definition, which, as far as I'm aware, is the language we're all speaking.

[Svartalf]

I vfind the older version more satisfactory and clear

[Animavore]

You find it more convenient to your argument.

[Svartalf]

more satisfying overall... it explains religious phenomena with non soupie idols (trekkies, star wars, elvis, beatles, you name it...) which definitions demanding a soupie deity or set thereof don't.

[Animavore]

No it doesn't. Most of those things lack metaphysical Truth, hierarchy and structure the way religions do. At best you can call it tribalism, of which religion can be a part of.

[mistermack]

Every one of them I've ever met, or for that matter corresponded with, including you, clearly has a very firmly held and vigorously defended belief that God does not exist, and they only deny this obvious fact when it's pointed out that this is a religious belief not founded in any shred of evidence.

Blatant lies don't get you any credit here.

If someone says that they don't believe in god, it's generally with a proviso that they await evidence to the contrary, but don't expect to see it any time soon.
I've said as much on here on many occasions, as have most of the other posters, at one time or another.
To most atheists, that's so obvious, it's a given, that doesn't need to be constantly repeated.
You've seen it stated here many times.
So you're just a liar.

[Seth]

The major usage is what counts.

Only in your desperate attempt to avoid being categorized as religious.

Belief in a supernatural being is the core of religions, as shown by the fact that is what the vast majority of religious people themselves would say...

One word: Buddhism!

There is nothing wrong with identifying aspects of religion which are shared by other organised activities or institutions such as sport, or the NRA; it can be quite illuminating. Finding a number of such parallels does not make them identical categories...

Indeed, but when the practices and intentions meet the standard of the definition then the person is acting in a religious manner and if that person regularly associates with other persons of like mind and practice, the group can be correctly labeled as a religion, like Atheism, to which you belong.

[Seth]

I suspect it wasn't long before a priesthood or proto priesthood which proclaimed exclusive or special knowledge started up and demanded special authority deriving from their special relationship with the supernatural.

Exactly. Religion is, and has always been a method of social control, and that's not a bad thing. In fact, that's why it persists, because it makes people's lives better and more satisfying and it helps to create community, peace and harmony within the community by giving members a strong common bond.

Which is why it's so baffling that Atheist are so anarchistically and nihilistically opposed to religion.

[Seth]

As a matter of fact, godless religions exist... just look at sports, college fraternities, and similar practices where people are made to conform to silly rituals, just because they need to affirm they are part of the tribe.

Utter bollox. You're stretching the definition as to be meaningless. What's the Man U. doctrine? What are the moral precepts for followers of Liverpool. What's the metaphysical Truth to Aston Villa? What's the ground of all being for Chelsea? Do Sheffield Wednesday have a creation myth? Who dishes out cosmic justice to West Ham? Is there an afterlife for Arsenal?

Yes you can follow a team religiously, but to say following a team is a religion is asinine.

The question would be whether the following meets the standard of the definition of being "something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience."

Here are various other secular (ie: non-theistic) definitions of religion:

a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

A pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance:

A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion

a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

something a person believes in and follows devotedly

Strictness of fidelity in conforming to any practice, as if it were an enjoined rule of conduct. (Webster's 1913 definition)

So, if one's activities and beliefs about one's favorite football team meet any of those standards, then yes, one is practicing religion.

And Atheists most certainly meet many of these standards, including the Atheists here in this forum, who argue secularism and science with as much devotion, fervor, faith and, unfortunately, mindless intolerance as any fundamentalist theist zealot.

[Seth]

Well I'm going by the English, Oxford definition, which, as far as I'm aware, is the language we're all speaking.

You mean this one from the Oxford dictionary:

A pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance

[Seth]

Every one of them I've ever met, or for that matter corresponded with, including you, clearly has a very firmly held and vigorously defended belief that God does not exist, and they only deny this obvious fact when it's pointed out that this is a religious belief not founded in any shred of evidence.

Blatant lies don't get you any credit here.

Awwww...poor little thing, are you feeling maligned and oppressed by the big, bad Tolerist™? How sad. How does it feel to be unfairly and irrationally categorized and lumped in with a bunch of others you don't even know? Does it make you feel like you're being treated unfairly? Does it upset you and make you cry? Wah.

Sauce, goose, gander buddy. You can dish it out, but you can't take it.

If someone says that they don't believe in god, it's generally with a proviso that they await evidence to the contrary, but don't expect to see it any time soon.

No it's not. It's generally a cruel and mean-spirited derogation of billions of people who don't believe as Atheists do and it's a ethically fucked up as it gets, and it's the pinnacle of hypocrisy considering the obvious fact that THEIR beliefs and practices are based on even less evidence than those of theists. At least theists have a consistency to their dogmas, whereas Atheists are just nihilistic fuckwits who have no basic principles, no ethical or moral structure and no consistency of belief in anything and mindlessly attack others over differences in opinion.

I've said as much on here on many occasions, as have most of the other posters, at one time or another.
To most atheists, that's so obvious, it's a given, that doesn't need to be constantly repeated.

Yes, it does, particularly when the rhetoric they spew consists of ill-mannered and flatly bigoted uncalled for attacks on other people they don't even know.

You've seen it stated here many times.

And it's always a lie. A blatant, bald-faced lie intended to try to dishonestly weasel out of the fact that Atheists are every bit as irrational and bigoted in their beliefs as any fundamentalist theist. It's a dodge and always has been. The truth is shown by their words and actions, not by their false protestations. You are what you write, and that means you're an Atheist religious believer.

[surreptitious57]

Atheists are every bit as irrational and bigoted in their beliefs as any fundamentalist theist

I am an atheist so do not think that God exists. However I am also an apatheist [ a subset of atheism ] and so do not
care whether he does or not as it is it beyond my control. If he exists that is fine and if he does not then that is fine
too. Now I think you shall find it very hard to describe this as irrational or bigoted. But feel free to do so if you wish

[Hermit]

If someone says that they don't believe in god, it's generally with a proviso that they await evidence to the contrary, but don't expect to see it any time soon.
I've said as much on here on many occasions, as have most of the other posters, at one time or another.
To most atheists, that's so obvious, it's a given, that doesn't need to be constantly repeated.
You've seen it stated here many times.

And it's always a lie..

In your opinion. Where is the critically robust scientific evidence to support it?

[Seth]

Atheists are every bit as irrational and bigoted in their beliefs as any fundamentalist theist

I am an atheist so do not think that God exists. However I am also an apatheist [ a subset of atheism ] and so do not
care whether he does or not as it is it beyond my control. If he exists that is fine and if he does not then that is fine
too. Now I think you shall find it very hard to describe this as irrational or bigoted. But feel free to do so if you wish

As long as you keep your opinion of others beliefs to yourself, then you can be an "Apatheist." It's when you use your beliefs about God as a justification for disparaging and demeaning others and their beliefs that you demonstrate irrational and bigoted behavior because YOUR beliefs about God are no more and no less valid than anyone else's beliefs about God, and therefore you have no standing to criticize others and their beliefs while claiming to be rational.