Well, let's be honest. This thread is another with which to promote your hate and intolerance.
It's been explained to you both repeatedly and tediously that atheism is not a religion. Yet, you continue to screech it is, while unwilling to acknowledge that rational and reasoned conclusions that your polytheistic gods as well as gods of others are inventions of man's imagination.
You really appear quite desperate.
We've been here before, Hollie. I am not attempting to argue in this thread whether or not Atheism is a religion. I keep getting interrupted by adolescent assholes trying to hijack the thread. If you don't understand what is in the OP, don't post in this thread. It is that ******* simple.
I have no hate or intolerance for Atheists. I do think your incessant attacks on those that believe in God are reprehensible, but I do not hate you....and I fail to see how you can interpret
a request for a list of benefits to Atheism attributed to its being considered not a religion can be inferred by you to embody hatred.
You see, Hollie, the motive for all the threads started in this forum by Atheists appears to be hatred of religion. I think that's why you may consider this one to be based upon hatred. It is not. I am merely looking for information to help me understand why you object to Atheism being called a religion. What good will come of its being redefined not to be? That you and NYC cannot fathom that simple fact tells me you are seriously lacking in the intelligence so touted by leading Atheists. You two appear to have less intelligence than any 3 year old child.
For someone who claims that he not attempting to argue whether or not Atheism is a religion, you're spending an inordinate amount of time repeating the same nonsense that atheism is a religion.
And BTW way, why are you suggesting that I'm "attacking " your polytheistic gods? I no more attack gods than I attack leprechauns or Bigfoot. If you feel so intimidated by those who conclude your gods are inventions of man, find some better gods.
The mistake theists make is to incorrectly perceive faith as 'fact,' and those free from faith 'rejecting' that 'fact,' manifesting an 'aberration,' when actually the opposite is true: theism is the aberration. Theists such as the OP compound their error by contriving the lie that those free from faith are engaging in a 'belief' that constitutes a 'religion,' which has been demonstrated to be completely false.
Moreover, unlike those free from faith, theists must labor to adhere to sanctioned religious doctrine and dogma, eschew facts and evidence that conflict with that doctrine and dogma, and adhere blindly to that religious doctrine and dogma lest one lapses into 'sin.'
Last, and again, we see the arrogance common to most theists, particularly when their errant and subjective beliefs are challenged by those free from faith, where the theist presumes to dictate to those free from faith that they 'practice' a 'religion,' when those free from faith in fact do not.