Athiesm, Agnostisism, and Ingrid's Mom

oh, very definitely! lol

coco

There is a stretch of a freeway in southern California that has been "adopted" by Atheists United, which I find hilarious.

What do Atheists United do at meetings? Talk about how there isn't a God?

It reminds me of a baseball hat I had made for my boyfriend that had stitched into it "Boat Haters of America".

definatly

Atheists groups are usually somewhat of a mix between activism and group therapy. When 90% of the people on the planet think you're going to hell, and at least half of those are happy about it, it's nice to be around your own kind now and then.

What does the agnostic, dyslexic insomniac do before he goes to sleep at night?

That's exactly it. I am against belief more than anything. I have very little issues with people seeing christ as a philosopher or a sage, seeing wisdom in his words, and wanting to follow them.
I have lots of issues with people blindly believing that he is divine or supernatural or something, and that the bible is true because it was written by god and god says its true.
It makes about as much sense to me as believing in fairies and santa.

It's FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER time!

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

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?

I am a Pastamancer! My brother is a Sauceror! We go great together, just like Cain and Abel!

Irie Pastafarii!

Hahaha...

Somewhere, Chef Boyardee comes to play in all this.

Answer: He lies awake at night wondering if there really is a dog.

coco

Oh, there is a dog, believe me.

let me guess, you had a hangover that day too?

Having studied structuralism et al, I rather like Jauani's all-things-spring-from-the-great Boolean-Logic-Tree approach. However, I have some reservations on this topic (and to quell speculation ahead of time, I am an atheist):

Even though the lynchpin between an atheist and a theist in this argument seems to be belief, regardless of belief in the possibility of future belief, there is still a potential problem. The problem, as I see it, stems from not from the question, but the linguistic root of the question. From the data set. In order to come to the point where we can agree to ask the same question, we have to have the same preliminary data set.

One person's "knowledge" can mean an entirely different thing from another person's. For example, When Juan Matus speaks of a "man of knowledge," he certainly isn't talking about a man who has read many books or even all the books in the world (what he is talking about in grossly simplified terms, is a man who can apprehend our external reality without the use of the literal mind- or to put it in binary terms, able to perceive while switched to the "off" position, unlike the majority of the populous who is stuck in the "on" position). Words are not things themselves, only labels, so two or more people have to agree on the same denotations in order to be asking the same question even if the signifiers appear to be the same. Unfortunately (but thankfully, comically!), many people rely on connotations instead of denotations. Denotations also change with popular use, which is another porcupine in the dolphin hole (I'll be watching to see if this meme propagates ).

So this question of atheist versus theist is askable only through a clearly delineated gnosis of sorts...but whether the answer is unknowable or not depends on the nature of that gnosis.

So: Bigots of a feather flock together, so don't go stoning the crows.

As far as that whole "absence doesn't prove non-existence" argument goes that people keep bringing up:
Nothing is absolutely provable (we can't even apprehend reality without the semiotic mediums- shadows on the wall of the cave), but consistent absence can provide enough evidence to BELIEVE or DISBELIEVE. If that weren't true, then nobody would believe anything. Belief/Disbelief != Absolute knowledge
Google: "The Dragon in My Garage" by Carl Sagan.

*Oh yeah, and anyone should be able to believe anything without caveats. Action should be punishable, not ideas. ...Except for the idea of freedom, because that's just stupid.