[feeshyLew]

They´re usually lurking around schoolyards and address little school children with:
"Have you ever heard about the theory of evolution?"

[offinoNem]

They are too busy fornicating.

[BadbarmrapBef]

It's simple... they don't believe it's right to cram their own personal beliefs down other people's throats, like morons that belong to silly cults/religions.

Im not sure I agree with you Ming. Ive had plenty of drunken conversations with militant atheists who would put firebrand preachers to shame with the strength of their conviction. Ive been backed into a corner defending the right to freedom of choice in personal belief, and its atheists that have put me there.

I guess this is why we dont talk about politics, religion or money at the dinner table or bar etc

[crycleascentyv]

Proselytizing is more than standing on street corners and giving out gospel tracts (or non-gospel tracts if you wish). I have no problems calling Richard Dawkins a proselytizer.

[dodsCooggipsedebt]

It's simple... they don't believe it's right to cram their own personal beliefs down other people's throats, like morons that belong to silly cults/religions.

Jesus still loves you.

[aburva.org]

Yeah, I've had the same experiences.

I don't really care what people believe in as long as it's not hurting anyone else.

Damn, I believe in hurting people.

[SpyRemo]

I'd include things like homophobia, racism, intolerance, anti-science lies/misinformation, restriction of personal freedoms etc. under the "hurting anyone else" bracket though. Quite a wide area. There aren't many religions that don't fail in some of those failings.

I like to separate the ritual and dogma of religious institutions from the religious practice of reaching out to God. Religious institutions suffer pretty much equally from the same malady that afflicts any other group that is formed around an ideology - lazy thinkers falling in love with an idea that makes them feel good.

[ErubTiereedig]

I like to separate the ritual and dogma of religious institutions from the religious practice of reaching out to God. Religious institutions suffer pretty much equally from the same malady that afflicts any other group that is formed around an ideology - lazy thinkers falling in love with an idea that makes them feel good.

its organized religion vs personal belief.

The millennia of persecution and destruction under the name of god can be put down to organized religion.

[Machater]

I mean it's only Christians, Muslims, and their bizarro sects (Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, NoI, Black Israelites, etc.) that will try to bother you on the subway about their beliefs or stand on street corners preaching. Have never seen an atheist say, "Excuse me, I have some Richard Dawkins I'd like you to read."

Where are these insistent atheists I keep hearing about?

It's because they don't have any game.

[HarryMet]

There are occasionally personal consequences from others believing in religion, c.f. the teaching evolution in schools debate.

[KojlinMakolvin]

Is this another "atheism is a religion" troll? If not, BK will make it that way. Let me get the popcorn, or possibly the pepto-bismol.

[evennyNiz]

2) Atheists don't believe you will face horrible consequences in some afterlife if you don't believe the same as they. Therefore, it's not vitally important that you do so.

Lots of religious people reject that idea too.

[putza]

What personal consequences?

Er, your kids being taught pseudoscience at school?

Also, I made a typo, I meant FROM others believing in religions.

[shashaffff]

What I'm saying is that the negative actions associated with mainstream organized religion should not also be associated with the religious desire to seek God. Just because organized religions have committed heinous acts in the name of God, does not mean that the act of seeking God should be discarded.

No, there are plenty of other reasons to discard the concept of god/gods.

Seriously though, if there were gods the ideas where there are multiple gods do seem more likely don't they? Why would there be only one?

[offinoNem]

No, there are plenty of other reasons to discard the concept of god/gods.

Seriously though, if there were gods the ideas where there are multiple gods do seem more likely don't they? Why would there be only one?

The trinity concept could be seen as being somewhat pantheistic. Why do multiple gods make more sense to you? And would I be correct in assuming that you wouldn't force on others your belief that God/god concepts should be discarded?

[AnthonyKing]

theres only one of you Mike. If we are gonna get all metaphysical then why wouldnt gods mates have ****ed off and created their own universe.

[soitlyobserty]

You can't force someone to believe something. You can only force them to pretend to believe something, what's the point of that?

Adding force to your belief that the rejection of the God concept is a good thing wouldn't necessarily entail an attempt to change the minds of those who believe. It could take the form of oppressing all religious groups - perhaps you think they are a bunch of crazies who should be locked up. Let's say you are emperor of the world...what practical policies would you enact that would affect religious groups?

If there's one of something then the conditions exist for it to exist, why can't the conditions exist for another one to appear? Seems against the laws of physics that we understand that if one thing exists that you couldn't have a similar object/being existing somewhere else where the same conditions were fulfilled. This wouldn't necessitate having another one of course those conditions could be very rare, but the universe is very big. Interesting thoughts. Personally, I think the answer to that is at a level that is currently beyond our ability to comprehend.

[FourEsters]

maybe god smells, or hes got a really bad sense of humour, or an obnoxious accent. the deeper we try to analyse this **** the more we realise we are debating the finer points of something no one can prove. its like physics, we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority

I agree. If we are going to discuss things without evidence, we shouldn't do so with an attitude of superiority.

"we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority"

I like that...that's sig material.

[Bwvapays]

well you cant prove theres is a god either. i know that arguements full of holes but that the crux of the arguement right there

[Sheefeadalfuh]

Why is "you can't prove there isn't a god!" allowed to be accepted as a reasonable argument in favour?

Yeah, I don't get why some people insist that you need a reason to not believe in something. You need a satisfying reason to believe something exists, so if there isn't one then you don't believe in it.