So Neo, did you know that Atheism is a religion?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You should work on your person problems then.

So should you...

I have pompous well under control. Your turn.

You might want to work on delusional first...

You may be right. I do tend to think you will make sense some day.

[egbert]

n the United States, atheism is considered equivalent to religion under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause. In August 2005 the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed previous Supreme Court precedent[12] by ruling atheism was equivalent to a religion for 1st amendment purposes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_and_religion

[Coito ergo sum]

No, it's not. It's a philosophy. Religions have rituals, dieties, leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights.

It's neither a religion, nor a philosophy.

Atheism is the belief that there are not gods, or the lack of any belief in any gods, or at least the position that there is insufficient evidence from which to conclude that any gods exist. No philosophical position is necessitated by atheism - one may be a nihilist, objectivist, existentialist, Epicurean, or whatever, and still be an atheist.

There is no philosophy of atheism.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

n the United States, atheism is considered equivalent to religion under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause. In August 2005 the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed previous Supreme Court precedent[12] by ruling atheism was equivalent to a religion for 1st amendment purposes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_and_religion

If they had meant to say "atheism is considered a religion" I'm sure that's what they would have said.

[Coito ergo sum]

n the United States, atheism is considered equivalent to religion under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause. In August 2005 the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed previous Supreme Court precedent[12] by ruling atheism was equivalent to a religion for 1st amendment purposes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_and_religion

That's true. But, it's not a religion. It's "equivalent" to a religion in the sense that it is akin to a religious view, and that the right to practice any religion you like entails the right to not practice any religion, or not hold any belief. It's the free exercise of non-belief.

[Seth]

No, it's not. It's a philosophy. Religions have rituals, dieties, leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights.

It's neither a religion, nor a philosophy.

Atheism is the belief that there are not gods, or the lack of any belief in any gods, or at least the position that there is insufficient evidence from which to conclude that any gods exist. No philosophical position is necessitated by atheism - one may be a nihilist, objectivist, existentialist, Epicurean, or whatever, and still be an atheist.

There is no philosophy of atheism.

But atheism may be practiced as a religion, and often is.

[Ian]

No, it's not. It's a philosophy. Religions have rituals, dieties, leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights.

It's neither a religion, nor a philosophy.

Atheism is the belief that there are not gods, or the lack of any belief in any gods, or at least the position that there is insufficient evidence from which to conclude that any gods exist. No philosophical position is necessitated by atheism - one may be a nihilist, objectivist, existentialist, Epicurean, or whatever, and still be an atheist.

There is no philosophy of atheism.

But atheism may be practiced as a religion, and often is.

How does one practice atheism?

[AshtonBlack]

No, it's not. It's a philosophy. Religions have rituals, dieties, leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights.

It's neither a religion, nor a philosophy.

Atheism is the belief that there are not gods, or the lack of any belief in any gods, or at least the position that there is insufficient evidence from which to conclude that any gods exist. No philosophical position is necessitated by atheism - one may be a nihilist, objectivist, existentialist, Epicurean, or whatever, and still be an atheist.

There is no philosophy of atheism.

But atheism may be practiced as a religion, and often is.

Example? (I note the little 'a')

I always thought it was a rejection of another's belief or a lack of knowledge of that belief. To me, everything else is word salad.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

No, it's not. It's a philosophy. Religions have rituals, dieties, leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights.

It's neither a religion, nor a philosophy.

Atheism is the belief that there are not gods, or the lack of any belief in any gods, or at least the position that there is insufficient evidence from which to conclude that any gods exist. No philosophical position is necessitated by atheism - one may be a nihilist, objectivist, existentialist, Epicurean, or whatever, and still be an atheist.

There is no philosophy of atheism.

But atheism may be practiced as a religion, and often is.

This is what I mean, Seth.

[Seth]

n the United States, atheism is considered equivalent to religion under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause. In August 2005 the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed previous Supreme Court precedent[12] by ruling atheism was equivalent to a religion for 1st amendment purposes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_and_religion

That's true. But, it's not a religion. It's "equivalent" to a religion in the sense that it is akin to a religious view, and that the right to practice any religion you like entails the right to not practice any religion, or not hold any belief. It's the free exercise of non-belief.

It can't be an "equivalent" to religion, it's either religion or it's not religion, and the Constitution only protects the free exercise of religion, not the free exercise of other liberties unconnected to religion.

The Free Exercise clause does not protect activities that are unrelated to religion.

What the SCOTUS means is that "irreligion" is "religion." In other words, a religiously held belief in the lack of gods and theistic claims is a protected religious exercise, albeit not a theistic one, for the purposes of the First Amendment.

Thus, an implicit atheist may not be compelled to subscribe to a religion against his will, and an explicit atheist can practice his religion just as freely as a Catholic.

But if an atheist claims he has no religion, and no belief, he cannot use the excuse of atheism to claim the protection of the First Amendment for activities unrelated to religion.

Thus, Richard Dawkins can claim First Amendment protection for his speeches and writings on atheism and anti-religious beliefs and practices. But he could not argue that he can weaponize Anthrax in his lab on the basis that it's protected religious expression.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It can't be an "equivalent" to religion, it's either religion or it's not religion, and the Constitution only protects the free exercise of religion, not the free exercise of other liberties unconnected to religion.

Jesus fucking Christ. You don't make the rules. Equivalence, look it up.

[Seth]

No, it's not. It's a philosophy. Religions have rituals, dieties, leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights.

It's neither a religion, nor a philosophy.

Atheism is the belief that there are not gods, or the lack of any belief in any gods, or at least the position that there is insufficient evidence from which to conclude that any gods exist. No philosophical position is necessitated by atheism - one may be a nihilist, objectivist, existentialist, Epicurean, or whatever, and still be an atheist.

There is no philosophy of atheism.

But atheism may be practiced as a religion, and often is.

Example? (I note the little 'a')

I always thought it was a rejection of another's belief or a lack of knowledge of that belief. To me, everything else is word salad.

Little-"a" atheism becomes big-"A" Atheism (the name of the religion) when an individual engages in practices that meet the standards of the definition.

Richard Dawkins is a religious Atheist because his writings and speeches clearly show that his virulent opposition to and criticism of theism is "something [he] believes in and follows devotedly" and is "a point or matter of ethics or conscience" to him.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Bullshit.

[AshtonBlack]

No, it's not. It's a philosophy. Religions have rituals, dieties, leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights.

It's neither a religion, nor a philosophy.

Atheism is the belief that there are not gods, or the lack of any belief in any gods, or at least the position that there is insufficient evidence from which to conclude that any gods exist. No philosophical position is necessitated by atheism - one may be a nihilist, objectivist, existentialist, Epicurean, or whatever, and still be an atheist.

There is no philosophy of atheism.

But atheism may be practiced as a religion, and often is.

Example? (I note the little 'a')

I always thought it was a rejection of another's belief or a lack of knowledge of that belief. To me, everything else is word salad.

Little-"a" atheism becomes big-"A" Atheism (the name of the religion) when an individual engages in practices that meet the standards of the definition.

Richard Dawkins is a religious Atheist because his writings and speeches clearly show that his virulent opposition to and criticism of theism is "something [he] believes in and follows devotedly" and is "a point or matter of ethics or conscience" to him.

Richard Dawkins is an anti-theist, also an atheist.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This is the lamest Sethism yet.