[extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition...

[Technotranscendence]

I'm forced to make some comments on this thread.  Atheism per se is not
a religion.  It's merely the lack of a belief in God/gods.  That's it.
Ditto for theism.  Theism is not a religion either.  It's merely a
presence of a belief in God/gods.

Nor is either necessarily based on faith.  When Mike Lorrey states
either one is, he's conflating belief with epistemology -- ignoring the
distinction between what's believed and why it's believed.  Yes, just
about any particular belief may be held on faith -- in the sense that it
goes against logic and evidence as Tertullian put it, "I believe it
because it's impossible."  (Note: this answers the issue of agnosticism.
Agnosticism is not an alternative to atheism or theism.  It, too,
conflates the What with the Why of belief.  An agnostic either has a
belief or lacks it.  She or he may claim that there's no valid
epistemological method to choose between belief and its lack, but this
doesn't mean she or he is in some middle realm between belief and its
lack.  As Georges H. Smith pointed out, each agnostic is either an
atheist or a theist.  In my own experience, agnostics have really been
atheists who use the label to avoid a heated debate.  This is not the
same with "secular humanist" as that implies more than just atheism,
though I suspect many people using the term don't know the difference so
it probably doesn't matter.)

Now, Christianity is a religion and it's theistic -- and it has a faith
component.  At least, this is true of extent forms of Christianity of
which I'm aware.  (In fact, a Christian who claims not to believe on
faith would not be considered by most Christians today or historically
to be a Christian.)

Deism, since others have brought it up, is not necessarily based on
faith, but it's based on faulty reasoning -- generally an argument from
design or something along those lines.

Morality per se doesn't have a direct link with atheism/theism.  Nor per
se does character.  Now, of course, Christianity and most religions hold
certain moral beliefs and that's part of their practice and, generally,
people see the bond between religion and morality as so strong that most
are unable to believe in morality without religion, but it's not only
possible but actually exists.  Examples include neo-Aristoteleans,
Objectivists, some Existentialists, and Marxists (insofar as they have a
morality; in general Marxist moral precepts are close to Christianity;
no offense, Mike).  Now, one might disagree with the particulars of any
of these philosophies or their moral components, but that doesn't mean
they don't combine morality with atheism.

As for the specific case that brought this up, I don't know the details
of it, but the strict libertarian position is: get rid of public
schooling and the issue of what's taught will no longer be political.
As long as there are public schools, there will always be a chance for
political antagonism if not downright strife over what's taught in them.
Privatizing the schools and abolishing mandatory school laws will do
more to solve this problem than feuding over what should or shouldn't be
taught.

Regards,

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/FamilySOG.html