20% of americans are athiests

[Atomic_Piggy]

In a world where zealots crash planes into buildings in the name of God and politicians use the Bible to craft public policy, Epstein sees himself as in the vanguard of an emerging movement fueled by the rise of skepticism, advances in science and technology, and a spreading aversion toward radical religious ideologies and traditions. He and other humanists, who also call themselves atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, secularists, or brights, point to a survey published in January by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, which found that 20 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 say they have no religious affiliation or consider themselves atheists or agnostics - nearly double those who said that in a similar survey 20 years ago.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,1649,The-Nonbelievers,David-Abel

At least their is some reason and sanity left in America.

However the idea of a secular church is stupid as hell; however it would be useful for people who are losing their faith.

 

[Krynn72]

Or agnostic. Key point there.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Or agnostic. Key point there.

Basically the same. I prefer the term "weak athiest" to agnostic. An agnostic isn't sure, so he doesn't believe. Making him an athiest, albeit a "weak" athiest.

 

[Krynn72]

Agnostics believe there is no proof either way and thus refrain from making a decision on the subject. An Atheist believes 100% that there is no god. They're very different.

 

[nutcrackr]

only 20% are sane, well it should improve then

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Agnostics believe there is no proof either way and thus refrain from making a decision on the subject. An Atheist believes 100% that there is no god. They're very different.

Still, its a step forward at least. I guess as more athiests come about agnostics will also turn.

 

[Darkside55]

"Ages 18-25." The future looks bright.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

"Ages 18-25." The future looks bright.

I imagine about 3-5% of americans over that age are athiests.

 

[The Monkey]

Compare that to 80% of the entire population in Sweden, and you still have a bit to go, it seems

 

[Cheomesh]

You people should stop being so harsh on those with a religion.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

You people should stop being so harsh on those with a religion.

When athiests aren't the most mistrusted group in America I will.

 

[Tagaziel]

I recall something similiar was happening in Europe.

C.a. 200 years ago.

 

[Ravioli]

The numbers will grow, im convinced that the future will be agnostic/atheistic to 90-100 % of the world population. In a far future that is.

Besides, atleast there are more atheists than blacks, homosexuals etc etc, so we are hardly a minor-minority. Right now the goal is just to separate religion from government COMPLETELY 100%... because if the government gets any more religious then atheism wont stand a chance...

 

[Absinthe]

Agnostics believe there is no proof either way and thus refrain from making a decision on the subject. An Atheist believes 100% that there is no god. They're very different.

How... How could you of all people say this? HAVE I TAUGHT YOU NOTHING?! :flame:

Woe unto thee, for you shall receive my reckoning.

 

[AJ Rimmer]

Besides, atleast there are more atheists than blacks, homosexuals etc etc, so we are hardly a minor-minority.

I'd like to know where you got that bit of information.

 

[Shakermaker]

I recall something similiar was happening in Europe.

C.a. 200 years ago.

To be fair, the US was actually born from the Age of Enlightenment. The Declaration of Independence couldn't have happened without it.

 

[PvtRyan]

Agnostics believe there is no proof either way and thus refrain from making a decision on the subject. An Atheist believes 100% that there is no god. They're very different.

NO NO NO NO! Atheist = someone without a believe in a deity. Atheist literally means non-theist, so anything that doesn't hold a believe in a deity is an atheist, that means agnostics are atheists too. I'm an atheist, but I'm not claiming I'm 100% sure there is no God, I just don't see why there would be one and it's one hell of a redundant assumption to believe in a god for me.

Besides, agnosticism (the position of not-knowing) is a silly one when it comes to a belief in God. Like I said, I'm not 100% sure there is no God, but I don't consider the existence of God to be as likely as his non-existence. Which is what agnostics do, both are equally likely according to them. If you are agnostic towards God, then what stops you from being agnostic towards unicorns? I'm not 100% sure there aren't any unicorns, but I sure don't consider their existence as likely as their non-existence. I'm a-unicornistic, a non-believer. But an agnostic towards God must be agnostic towards unicorns if he wants to stay consistent.

Why would you give something with no good evidence to support it a 50% likelihood of existing? How can you be reasonably sure about anything if you do so?

Consider the following thought experiment that I made up:

At some point you are abducted from your home and thrown into a cell which is completely isolated from the outside world. No sunlight, no contact with people, no clocks, nothing. Just pure blackness. Now, you stay there for 2 years until one morning, a guy comes into your cell and asks "is today a friday or a thursday?". This is where agnosticism is valid, both options are equally likely. There really is no way to know, so sitting on the fence is the best choice here.

However, the belief in God is more like:

You are abducted on a monday and thrown into the same cell. On tuesday, a guy comes into your cell and asks "is today a friday?". Well, it could be, it could be that you lost track of all time, but you don't consider that option to be very likely. It sure doesn't feel like it has been so long so unbelief ("atheism") is the best option, not "well it's as likely that today is tuesday as it is that today is friday".

See where I'm getting at?

 

[Tagaziel]

To be fair, the US was actually born from the Age of Enlightenment. The Declaration of Independence couldn't have happened without it.

Except we're talking about the citizens, not the state. Who were, in a large part, escaped religious minorities.

 

[Top Secret]

Every single friend/affiliation I have, is either Atheist or agnostic.

I am mostly agnostic or I'm athiest. I go back and forth every day. I seriously doubt there is a God, and I have yet to see a shred of proof. As far as I'm concerned, he was probably invented by a day-dreaming prick 3500 years ago. However, that does not mean it is false. It's the same as someone just happening to guess the lotto numbers.

Atheists might say agnostics are idiots, but I think a REAL scientist would be agnostic. So you know what, I consider atheists just as stupid as religious people. Which is why I find myself coming back to agnostic again and again. It's like what the guy above me said about the guessing the day of the week. YOU DO NOT KNOW. I DO NOT KNOW. NOBODY KNOWS. SO SHUT UP. :thumbs:

 

[Baal]

Did you guys hear the one about the agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac?

Spoiler

He couldn't sleep at night trying to figure out whether or not there is a dog

 

[<RJMC>]

in the future politics will replace religions

instead of going into a church to see a jesus naked in a cross it will be to see a giant lenin

 

[Geogaddi]

NO NO NO NO! Atheist = someone without a believe in a deity. Atheist literally means non-theist, so anything that doesn't hold a believe in a deity is an atheist, that means agnostics are atheists too. I'm an atheist, but I'm not claiming I'm 100% sure there is no God, I just don't see why there would be one and it's one hell of a redundant assumption to believe in a god for me.

Besides, agnosticism (the position of not-knowing) is a silly one when it comes to a belief in God. Like I said, I'm not 100% sure there is no God, but I don't consider the existence of God to be as likely as his non-existence. Which is what agnostics do, both are equally likely according to them. If you are agnostic towards God, then what stops you from being agnostic towards unicorns? I'm not 100% sure there aren't any unicorns, but I sure don't consider their existence as likely as their non-existence. I'm a-unicornistic, a non-believer. But an agnostic towards God must be agnostic towards unicorns if he wants to stay consistent.

Why would you give something with no good evidence to support it a 50% likelihood of existing? How can you be reasonably sure about anything if you do so?

Consider the following thought experiment that I made up:

At some point you are abducted from your home and thrown into a cell which is completely isolated from the outside world. No sunlight, no contact with people, no clocks, nothing. Just pure blackness. Now, you stay there for 2 years until one morning, a guy comes into your cell and asks "is today a friday or a thursday?". This is where agnosticism is valid, both options are equally likely. There really is no way to know, so sitting on the fence is the best choice here.

However, the belief in God is more like:

You are abducted on a monday and thrown into the same cell. On tuesday, a guy comes into your cell and asks "is today a friday?". Well, it could be, it could be that you lost track of all time, but you don't consider that option to be very likely. It sure doesn't feel like it has been so long so unbelief ("atheism") is the best option, not "well it's as likely that today is tuesday as it is that today is friday".

See where I'm getting at?

/me applauds

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Atheists might say agnostics are idiots, but I think a REAL scientist would be agnostic.

So you know what, I consider atheists just as stupid as religious people.

No, I think a REAL scientist would analyse the information he has got and say "well, there is no evidence, and no experiment can prove it, so it proboaly doesn't exist." Because thats what science is about.

So you know what, I consider atheists just as stupid as religious people.

Athiests are stupid? Agnostics have to be uncertain about whether unicorns exist. I'm 99% certain they don't, an agnostic has to be 50% certain.
How can you say agnostics are smarter when they attribute a 50% proboality to every myth and legend?

 

[Muffin Man]

We should just change from HalfLife2.net to Dawkins.net, honestly..

 

[Absinthe]

Every single friend/affiliation I have, is either Atheist or agnostic.

I am mostly agnostic or I'm athiest. I go back and forth every day. I seriously doubt there is a God, and I have yet to see a shred of proof. As far as I'm concerned, he was probably invented by a day-dreaming prick 3500 years ago. However, that does not mean it is false. It's the same as someone just happening to guess the lotto numbers.

Atheists might say agnostics are idiots, but I think a REAL scientist would be agnostic. So you know what, I consider atheists just as stupid as religious people. Which is why I find myself coming back to agnostic again and again. It's like what the guy above me said about the guessing the day of the week. YOU DO NOT KNOW. I DO NOT KNOW. NOBODY KNOWS. SO SHUT UP. :thumbs:

I'm really shocked people are still this clueless when it comes to atheism and agnosticism.

 

[poo poo head]

Seriously. Thats all i can say about these "atheists, agnostic, religious argument" threads.

Why doesn't anybody just respect one another's beliefs and stop babbling on and on about who is dumber, and who is right and wrong.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Why doesn't anybody just respect one another's beliefs and stop babbling on and on about who is dumber, and who is right and wrong.

Because, for absoutly no good reason, athiests are the least trusted group in america. I never used to debate before I heard that, but now...religious people bought this on themselves.
And the reason? Because athiests are "immoral" and "have no reason to be good". Look the **** at sweden, 80% athiest and one of the most peaceful countires there is (or japan, 4th most athiest country, when was the last time they fought a war after ww2?).

 

[Absinthe]

Seriously. Thats all i can say about these "atheists, agnostic, religious argument" threads.

Why doesn't anybody just respect one another's beliefs and stop babbling on and on about who is dumber, and who is right and wrong.

Because quite a few of the differing views are flat-out wrong or inane. This is an objective statement.

But what do I know? I worship a magic marmot on the moon that shoots life lasers from his eyes to populate barren planets with his intelligent design. You cannot tell me I'm wrong and if you look at me with even a hint of intellectual contempt I shall label you a petty bigot. Nyah.

 

[poo poo head]

Because, for absoutly no good reason, athiests are the least trusted group in america. I never used to debate before I heard that, but now...religious people bought this on themselves.
And the reason? Because athiests are "immoral" and "have no reason to be good". Look the **** at sweden, 80% athiest and one of the most peaceful countires there is (or japan, 4th most athiest country, when was the last time they fought a war after ww2?).

In this world, unfortunately, everybody is a dickhead. I think everyone brought everything to themselves, whether your and atheist, or a religious person, and we can't do dick about it because there is always another dick and another dick so we all might as well kick back and watch everyone argue and go nowhere, or we can just unite and respect beliefs. Maybe i'm wrong, but thats just the way i see it. Flame me now.

 

[Beerdude26]

But what do I know? I worship a magic marmot on the moon that shoots life lasers from his eyes to populate barren planets with his intelligent design. You cannot tell me I'm wrong and if you look at me with even a hint of intellectual contempt I shall label you a petty bigot. Nyah.

It's true! I'm a follower. The Great Marmot also asks us to rob banks and use the money to live a glamorous life so we can live and serve longer. It's not our choice! D:

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

In this world, unfortunately, everybody is a dickhead. I think everyone brought everything to themselves, whether your and atheist, or a religious person, and we can't do dick about it because there is always another dick and another dick so we all might as well kick back and watch everyone argue and go nowhere, or we can just unite and respect beliefs. Maybe i'm wrong, but thats just the way i see it. Flame me now.

http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/top100.aspx

"I honestly don't care about your rights. If it were up to me, all Atheists would be burnt at the stake and or cast into a river with weights tied to their ankles and or placed before the firing squad, etc etc etc."

Yeah, I so deserve that - I am not uniting with such an inhuman animal who is barely fit for even a zoo.

 

[poo poo head]

http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/top100.aspx


Yeah, I so deserve that - I am not uniting with such an inhuman animal.

By unite i mean peacefully. I in no way support violence against anyone. I know that sounds hypocritical because i said respect one another's beliefs and some peoples beliefs push it to the violent extreme, but i meant respect the "good" beliefs. Yes there are fundementalists out there who do that, but that is because often times they are taught things out of context, they, unfortunately, have corrupted beliefs, if they can get rid of the violence and "infidel" thought than things would be better. I was raised in a religious family, but i was taught to respect and help my fellow human no matter what they believe, or what they are, not hurt those who aren't "followers".

I mean respect original religious beliefs, the ones that support your fellow man, the ones that bring peace, the ones that weren't corrupted by violent thought. Again, i know it sound hypocritical, and i probably will get flamed, but that is just what i think. I think i should just shut my mouth before this gets worse for me...

 

[Tagaziel]

Actually, reading those Fundie quotes make me shiver.

I agree, we really need to start nuking people. That's the only way to be sure.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

By unite i mean peacefully. I in no way support violence against anyone. I know that sounds hypocritical because i said respect one another's beliefs and some peoples beliefs push it to the violent extreme, but i meant respect the "good" beliefs. Yes there are fundementalists out there who do that, but that is because often times they are taught things out of context, they, unfortunately, have corrupted beliefs, if they can get rid of the violence and "infidel" thought than things would be better. I was raised in a religious family, but i was taught to respect and help my fellow human no matter what they believe, or what they are, not hurt those who aren't "followers".

I mean respect original religious beliefs, the ones that support your fellow man, the ones that bring peace, the ones that weren't corrupted by violent thought. Again, i know it sound hypocritical, and i probably will get flamed, but that is just what i think. I think i should just shut my mouth before this gets worse for me...

I know what your saying, but unfortunatly its a utopian fantasy. Sorry. EG. Religious people will never allow human genetic engineering (such as life extension, improving humans, etc.) . Athiests would. Its simply not possible to work togethor with such radically different ideas.

 

[theotherguy]

Every single friend/affiliation I have, is either Atheist or agnostic.

I am mostly agnostic or I'm athiest. I go back and forth every day. I seriously doubt there is a God, and I have yet to see a shred of proof. As far as I'm concerned, he was probably invented by a day-dreaming prick 3500 years ago. However, that does not mean it is false. It's the same as someone just happening to guess the lotto numbers.

Atheists might say agnostics are idiots, but I think a REAL scientist would be agnostic. So you know what, I consider atheists just as stupid as religious people. Which is why I find myself coming back to agnostic again and again. It's like what the guy above me said about the guessing the day of the week. YOU DO NOT KNOW. I DO NOT KNOW. NOBODY KNOWS. SO SHUT UP. :thumbs:

Again.



ATHEISM AND AGNOSTICISM ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE

You can be an agnostic atheist, a gnostic atheist, an agnostic theist or a gnostic theist.

Agnosticsm is about a state of knowledge, and the atheist-theist spectrum is about a state of belief.

An agnostic atheist does not believe on the basis of not having any evidence. An agnostic theist admits not knowing, but believes anyway. A gnostic atheist claims to have knowledge about the existence of god, and does not believe based on this knowledge. A gnostic theist claims to have knowledge about the existence of god, and believes based on this knowledge.

You can not "sort of" believe in a god, you either do or do not. You are either theist or atheist concerning any particular god, and you are either claim to be gnostic or agnostic concerning this belief. If you do not believe there is a god, you are atheist. If you believe there is a god, you are theist. There is no middle ground concerning belief.

 

[Tagaziel]

*grabs popcorn*

Atheists arguing on terms they denote themselves as always yield incredible lulz.

 

[evil^milk]

No wonder everyone loves Bush...

Shit, I was hoping to go to New York for college, but I think Canada is a better option...

 

[Absinthe]

Pretty much.

"Why can't people be nice and respect each others' beliefs?" is the mindset responsible for getting into this bizarre chrono-clash when technologically advanced nations still house people mired in first-century ideas.

People either have good reasons for their beliefs or they don't. If you don't have good reasons, you are subject to criticism. Now you might argue that harboring these beliefs is a victimless crime and that they don't effect you. You might say that it's simply a personal choice and it doesn't matter because it's not being imposed on you. I strongly disagree with this assessment. These "harmless" beliefs are what impedes equality in same-sex marriages, substitutes evolution for pseudoscience in school programs, halts critical scientific research, and sometimes influences whether or not your country goes to war. It doesn't need to be through some insidious abuse of executive power. The sheer power of voting - the process that allows these irrational beliefs to help shape society - is enough.

Imagine if the majority of your country believed that Asia didn't exist and was then given a vote over whether or not to include it in educational fields such as history or geography. Now you see the problem with pleas for respect.

It irks me so much that instead of adopting a position of honest criticism (like telling people they are wrong or have no credibility) has been passed over for this candyass pipedream where everybody's just nice to each other and all religious problems will eventually cease.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

What absinthe said.

 

[Krynn72]

How... How could you of all people say this? HAVE I TAUGHT YOU NOTHING?! :flame:

Woe unto thee, for you shall receive my reckoning.

Forgive me master! I shall not fail you again!

NO NO NO NO! Atheist = someone without a believe in a deity. Atheist literally means non-theist, so anything that doesn't hold a believe in a deity is an atheist, that means agnostics are atheists too. I'm an atheist, but I'm not claiming I'm 100% sure there is no God, I just don't see why there would be one and it's one hell of a redundant assumption to believe in a god for me.

Besides, agnosticism (the position of not-knowing) is a silly one when it comes to a belief in God. Like I said, I'm not 100% sure there is no God, but I don't consider the existence of God to be as likely as his non-existence. Which is what agnostics do, both are equally likely according to them. If you are agnostic towards God, then what stops you from being agnostic towards unicorns? I'm not 100% sure there aren't any unicorns, but I sure don't consider their existence as likely as their non-existence. I'm a-unicornistic, a non-believer. But an agnostic towards God must be agnostic towards unicorns if he wants to stay consistent.

Why would you give something with no good evidence to support it a 50% likelihood of existing? How can you be reasonably sure about anything if you do so?

Consider the following thought experiment that I made up:

At some point you are abducted from your home and thrown into a cell which is completely isolated from the outside world. No sunlight, no contact with people, no clocks, nothing. Just pure blackness. Now, you stay there for 2 years until one morning, a guy comes into your cell and asks "is today a friday or a thursday?". This is where agnosticism is valid, both options are equally likely. There really is no way to know, so sitting on the fence is the best choice here.

However, the belief in God is more like:

You are abducted on a monday and thrown into the same cell. On tuesday, a guy comes into your cell and asks "is today a friday?". Well, it could be, it could be that you lost track of all time, but you don't consider that option to be very likely. It sure doesn't feel like it has been so long so unbelief ("atheism") is the best option, not "well it's as likely that today is tuesday as it is that today is friday".

See where I'm getting at?

Isnt that basically what I said? Well, I said 100% sure whereas I should have said 95% sure. But still, I was trying to make the same point as you, only with a lot fewer words. I guess I should have stated that I understand Agnostics are technically Atheists also, but I was trying to say that they're still quite different in what they believe when compared to someone who is a true Atheist.