The Religion of Atheism

[Alter2Ego]

I pray to God that that ruling is true! Do you have a link?
Then we Atheists can get the same special tax privileges believers get!!!

ALTER2EGO -to- ED THE CYNIC:
Which God are you going to pray to? By definition an atheist does not believe in any gods.

While we're on the topic of tax privileges, secular humanists aka atheists have used their "religion" status to get tax exemptions that are given to orthodox religions when it suits them to refer to themselves as a religion. Then when it suits their purposes, they claim they are not a religion so they can teach evolution in schools. This point is brought out by the following source quoted below.

IS "SECULAR HUMANISM" A "RELIGION"?

Even the Supreme Court of the United States spoke in 1961 of Secular Humanism as a religion. It was a struggle to get atheism accepted as a religion, but it happened. From 1962-1980 this was not a controversial issue.

In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that Secular Humanism was a religion. Nevertheless, many Humanists deny the significance of the Court's assertion. In order to buttress the claim that the identification of Secular Humanism as a religion in a footnote in the Torcaso case is more than mere "dicta," here is a memorandum prepared "[a]t the request of the staff of the Committee on Education and Labor” by Congressman John B. Conlan....


SECULAR HUMANISM IS A RELIGION
"FOR FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE PURPOSES."
The Court has undeniably defined Secular Humanism as a religion "for free exercise purposes." When Secular Humanists want the benefits of a religion, they get them.


TAX EXEMPTION. Secular Humanism has been granted tax-exempt status as a religion. The Torcaso quote cited the cases.


CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION. Even though Congress originally granted conscientious objector status only to those who objected to war for religious reasons (i.e., because of a belief in God), the Supreme Court turned around and said that Humanists who don't believe in God are "religious" for C.O. purposes. U.S. v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 183, 85 S.Ct. 850, 13 L.Ed.2d 733, 746 (Holding that belief in a "Supreme Being" is not a necessary component of "religion," quoting a Secular Humanist source, "Thus the 'God' that we love . . . is . . . humanity.")

So Secular Humanism is emphatically and undeniably a religion -- "for free exercise purposes."

Any claim that "the clear weight of the caselaw" is against the proposition that Secular Humanism is a religion is a misleading claim. Secular Humanism is a religion ("for free exercise clause purposes").


SECULAR HUMANISM IS NOT A RELIGION
"FOR ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE PURPOSES."

But when Christians attempt to get the religion of Secular Humanism out of the government schools, based on the same emotional frame of mind which atheists had when they went to court against God in schools, then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.

But it explains why so many are confused about whether Secular Humanism is a religion.

Here is the rule: When Secular Humanists want the benefits of religion, Secular Humanism is a religion. When Secular Humanists are challenged for propagating their religion in public schools, it is not a religion. If that sounds insane, it is; but all insane people are still rational. This insanity is cloaked in the rational-sounding rhetoric of constitutional law. Remember:

Secular Humanism is a religion "FOR FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE PURPOSES," and it is not a religion "FOR ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE PURPOSES."

Thus a teacher who wants to tell his students about his religious beliefs is free to do so if his religion is the religion of Secular Humanism, but may not tell his students about his religious beliefs if his religion is Christianity. Christians are not even allowed to discuss Christianity with students during lunch break, while Secular Humanists are allowed to teach the tenets of the religion of Secular Humanism from the blackboard during class.

Secular Humanism is a Religion

As you can see, the above is a classic example of hypocrisy.

 

[uscitizen]

Hmm I have never even visited an atheist site on the net nor gone to any meeting, etc.

 

[dblack]

I pray to God that that ruling is true! Do you have a link?
Then we Atheists can get the same special tax privileges believers get!!!

ALTER2EGO -to- ED THE CYNIC:
Which God are you going to pray to? By definition an atheist does not believe in any gods.

i·ro·ny/ˈīrənē/
Noun: The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.

While we're on the topic of tax privileges, secular humanists aka atheists ...

While secular humanists might be atheists, the vast majority of atheists are not secular humanists. So, secular humanists are "aka" atheist as much as they are "aka" humans. You're not saying much here.

Then when it suits their purposes, they claim they are not a religion so they can teach evolution in schools.

Again, the vast majority of the people teaching evolution in our schools aren't secular humanists, they're just ordinary humans. Most of them are even religious themselves. They're just not douchebags.

 

[rightwinger]

Atheism is not a religion

It merely looks at the bizarre opinions of existing religions and says.......None of that makes sense

That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground.

Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.

Most Atheists just shrug off religion and go about their lives

 

[pinqy]

, then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.

Please give us the links to the courts that ruled that. Thanks.

Secular Humanists are allowed to teach the tenets of the religion of Secular Humanism from the blackboard during class.

I am not aware of this happening, do you have links. Here's what I suspect though, any such claim will be teachers teaching something that is also to be found in Secular Humanist teachings even if the teach is not a secular humanist and the teaching wasn't part of some over secular humanist program. But that's like claiming that if a teacher says that murder and stealing and lying are wrong and you should respect your parents that they're teaching religion...which is ridiculous.

As you can see, the above is a classic example of hypocrisy.

Actually I've always found the hypocrisy to be those who say there is no separation of church and state and that teachers should be free to lead prayer.....except when it's a prayer or religion they disagree with.

 

[amrchaos]

If Atheism is a religion, then, please,

Outline this belief system that all atheist adhere to.

There is a difference between a belief and a belief system. But the theist try so hard to ignore that fact.

 

[amrchaos]

When a person takes atheism from neutrality towards religon and makes it hostility towards religion, they become part of the equation.

It is similar to the argument over zero really being a number, or not.

One would have to belong to or associate with a group who hold similiar beliefs of non belief to make it a religion.

Not really. a monastic hermit does not associate with anyone (the hermit thing), and while following the basic tenents of a religon may have their own view of exact beliefs. Is this person religous?

More like a heretic. Remember why Jesus was cruxified.

 

[Katzndogz]

Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion. A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons. It is a belief usually held by atheists.

Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State. Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state. Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State. If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.

The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.

Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common. That's worship. It's a matter of who is worshipped. It's how Kings become Gods in the first place. When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God? God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.

 

[dblack]

Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion. A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons. It is a belief usually held by atheists.

Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State. Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state. Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State. If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.

The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.

Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common. That's worship. It's a matter of who is worshipped. It's how Kings become Gods in the first place. When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God? God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.

W
T
F
????

 

[rightwinger]

Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion. A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons. It is a belief usually held by atheists.

Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State. Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state. Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State. If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.

The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.

Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common. That's worship. It's a matter of who is worshipped. It's how Kings become Gods in the first place. When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God? God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.

Completely batshit crazy

Atheists just hear what religions offer as explainations and say.....I don't believe that

Religion is not replaced with anything. It is just placed in the same box with Horoscopes, Voodoo, elves, fairies, fortune telling and Santa Clause

 

[Alter2Ego]

If Atheism is a religion, then, please,

Outline this belief system that all atheist adhere to.

There is a difference between a belief and a belief system. But the theist try so hard to ignore that fact.

ALTER2EGO -to- AMRCHAOS:

The atheist belief system is secular humanism. I elaborated on that at Page 3, Post #41.

 

[uscitizen]

Belief in God is not a prerequisite to having a religion. A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. Take climate change for instance, it is ultimately a religious belief to explain the changing of the seasons. It is a belief usually held by atheists.

Atheistic nations replace belief in God with a belief in the State. Reliance is no longer on one's self to exist but total reliance on the state. Don't pray for guidance or strength, simply ask the State. If the state finds you worthy you will get what you want, like Solyandra got millions of dollars.

The Churches of Atheisim, including the Three Self Patriotic Movement of China recognizes a day of worship (to the state) and teaches members how to best serve the state and conform their thinking to the needs of the state instead of a God.

Atheism and Godly religions have one thing in common. That's worship. It's a matter of who is worshipped. It's how Kings become Gods in the first place. When you are hungry who feeds you, the King or God? God might give someone a skill, a talent, but only the King can give you bread.

So you are saying that our two party political system is religions?

 

[Alter2Ego]

, then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.

Please give us the links to the courts that ruled that. Thanks.

ALTER2EGO -to- PINGY:
I will do better than that. I will provide a partial quotation in addition to the weblink to one of the cases.

The Scopes Monkey Trial was in 1925. That case opened the way for Atheism to be classified as a religion. It was not until 1961 that the U.S. Supreme Court—the most important court in the land—cemented atheism as a religion in the case of Torcaso v. Watkins. In its ruling, the 1961 court mentioned secular humanism, which is the religious ideology of atheism. Specifically, the 1961 Supreme Court said the following, and keep your eyes on the words that I bolded in the entire document. Pay particular note to what I bolded in red.

U.S. Supreme Court
TORCASO v. WATKINS, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)
367 U.S. 488
TORCASO v. WATKINS, CLERK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
No. 373.
Argued April 24, 1961.
Decided June 19, 1961.​

Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public; but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission; but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing without need for implementing legislation and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally invades his freedom of belief and religion guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 489-496.
223 Md. 49, 162 A. 2d 438, reversed.

The appellant Torcaso was appointed to the office of Notary Public by the Governor of Maryland but was refused a commission to serve because he would not declare his belief in God. He then brought this action in a Maryland Circuit Court to compel issuance of his commission, charging that the State's requirement that he declare this belief violated "the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States . . . ." 1 The Circuit Court rejected these federal constitutional contentions, and the highest court of the State, the Court of Appeals, affirmed, 2 holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing and requires declaration of belief in God as a qualification for office without need for implementing legislation. The case is therefore properly here on appeal under 28 U.S.C. 1257 (2).

"We are all agreed that the First and Fourteenth Amendments have a secular reach far more penetrating [367 U.S. 488, 494] in the conduct of Government than merely to forbid an `established church.'. . . We renew our conviction that `we have staked the very existence of our country on the faith that complete separation between the state and religion is best for the state and best for religion.'"

[ Footnote 11 ] Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopaedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47.

FindLaw | Cases and Codes

 

[dblack]

If Atheism is a religion, then, please,

Outline this belief system that all atheist adhere to.

There is a difference between a belief and a belief system. But the theist try so hard to ignore that fact.

ALTER2EGO -to- AMRCHAOS:

The atheist belief system is secular humanism. I elaborated on that at Page 3, Post #41.

You elaborated incorrectly.

 

[onecut39]

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:

1. Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."

In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and Jehovah's righteous standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.

"See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)


2. Atheism is itself a religion. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in having ANY sort of belief system. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."


3. Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Court—the highest court in the land.

Again, a reference made to something the poster does not understand or has not bothered to read. The court ruled that atheism was a religion "for Kaufman", only.

The word religion is in quotation marks. Nice try.

Wisconsin: Equal Rights for Atheists in Prison

 

[FA_Q2]

Of course atheism is a religion. That's why atheists want atheist chaplains in the military.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?pagewanted=all

It's why atheists want and got a religious temple.

Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of 'Worship' In UK

Atheists have followed non-religion right around the circle and become a religion.

Chaplains in the service do more than just hold religious services. They provide valuable counseling to soldiers, are advocates with command and provide a ready ear to talk to

You shouldn't have to believe in god to recieve help

The military has plenty of pyschologists and pychiatrists for those who want help from a non relgious source, although to be honest, I would love to see what the hell an atheist chapain looks like.

No, there is a clear difference in the reporting requirements and the type of help that is rendered from chaplains and psychiatrists. There is the point that religion is not required to speak to the Chaplin and that is likely why such an asinine call has not been answered.

 

[FA_Q2]

It is actually laying the foundation for a state religion. The state religion of atheism. People who don't follow the state religion cannot hold political office or own businesses. The state religion must be taught in school. All competing religions have to be scrubbed from the public eye. There is to be only the state religion.

And here we are dblack. The reason that you were asking for.

What you are essentially saying is that you should be able to supplant ‘science’ because that is somehow connected to your perceived ‘atheist’ religion with your own religious teachings. That is complete bullshit by the way. There is no atheist religion just as there is no atheist agenda in the schools. Even if there were, that does not give you a free hand to push your religion on others anyway.

It all comes down to this in the end: you NEED to call atheists religious in order to justify your need to push your agenda. Sorry, it is not going to fly.

 

[martybegan]

Atheism is not a religion

It merely looks at the bizarre opinions of existing religions and says.......None of that makes sense

That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground.

Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.

Most Atheists just shrug off religion and go about their lives

Again, to me more agnosticism. If most just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.

 

[rightwinger]

That to me is more agnosticsim. Most of the people you see in the news called atheists are hostile to any religous expression in public, and 100% so if it takes place on public ground.

Think the whole cross thing in San Diego, or the usual "You cant put a manger in the town square" dust-ups.

Most Atheists just shrug off religion and go about their lives

Again, to me more agnosticism. If most just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.

There are radical, in your face Atheists who see religion as the enemy. Most Atheists are just indifferent to religion. Agnostics still believe in a higher power. It is not the same

All most Atheists want is to be left alone. Respect that we do not believe what you do, leave us alone and don't force your religious beliefs on us

 

[dblack]

Again, to me more agnosticism.

Then you're misunderstanding the terms. Agnosticism has to do with whether we can know for sure if God exists, and is not (as is popularly misconceived) "weak atheism". Agnostics merely say that God's existence can't be proven one way or another. Some atheists are agnostic, some true-believers are agnostic.

Atheism is nothing more than lacking a belief in God.

If most [atheists] just shrug religon off, then your viewpoint is poorly represented by those who speak in your name, and piss people off by trying to get mangers taken out of town squares.

That's fair to say. It's also fair to say that bigoted religious zealots give religions a bad name. But it wouldn't be fair to judge either group by a minority of loudmouth assholes, would it?