Wait a minute...

This group has become a place for "atheists" to vent about their daily lives without the fear of criticism or persuasion to change their believes.  Whether you like it or not, atheism has evolved from its dictionary definition to mean it what it does to millions of people all over the world (or least where the word is used), if that just so happens to fit the description of what an anti-theist should be, so be it.  If you would like to put the "memo" out go for it, until I get it, I'll just call my self godless, if, of course that's o.k. with you.  So if you are "highly considering" leaving the group, please do.  How is that for positivity?

"Why do we care so much about disproving God?"

Because 1) we don't let people get away with lies, and 2) For religious people, the belief that there is a god comes with a lot of nasty, harmful doctrines that have limited man's freedom for thousands of years, caused power struggles (wars) and have severely hindered progression on this planet.

"Wouldn't that make us as "bad" as the various religious groups out there that go preaching what they think is right an we know (believe) is wrong?"

I don't preach to people, but if challenged I will happily give them my share.
But the main thing is that the main religions are hateful. Their starting point is that humans are bad (or "sinful" as they like to put it) and it goes on with that humans will face infinite punishment after death for finite actions in life. This breeds fear, especially in the minds of young children, and that's something that should be stopped in my opinion.

"It's no wonder religious types don't often listen to some of the reasoning I've read; they're tired of constantly being shot down."

When religious types start making claims based on their belief and push it as truth, and shove their beliefs down other people's throats, do you expect people with other (or no) beliefs to simply submit to them?
I would become tired of being shot down if I kept claiming 1+1 = 3 and I didn't want to listen to people who kept explaining me it isn't true. The audacity with which some religious types make claims (like that the earth is 6,000 years old) is hilarious, but at the same time disturbing.

"Do we truly have anything nice to say, other than complimenting meditation?"

I will compliment a christian, or muslim, or jew, etc. if he does a good deed, if he shows some excellent reasoning, or something of the like. I do not judge based on someone's religion; some of my family is christian and they're great people. But those who are loud about their religion tend to lack wisdom and intelligence.

"If you're confident in what you believe in, then there's no need for going and starting an argument about it."

Not necessarily, no. But as I said, religion has been a major problem in several ways on this planet. So in a sense, there has been a battle for thousands of years, and it's still going on - but the balance is slowly tipping in our favor.

"An atheist isn't "Godless".  That would mean there used to be a god which is now gone, and that kind of doesn't fit with the belief."

I don't know about that, seems to me to just be a little jab at those who are definitely not 'godless' (like red cloth to a bull). I'm not going to argue definition of "godless" vs "atheist", seems a bit silly to me to leave a group because of that.

The atheist argument is not about god, it's about humanity. The whole point is about how we "are" in the world, it's not a theological issue.

The name of the group makes a stand against the existence of any god and, since we cannot name something that does'nt exist, we use the negative of that which defines us.

One more thing, the religious people are the intolerant ones. They keep pushing their beliefs on everyone else.

you're right, lets focus on bigger things. Like Origami, anchovies, that tea pot, and the universe...

There is a lot to address in EV13's post. I will just address two points here and leave the rest to the other comments.

EV13 writes, "If you're confident in what you believe in, then there's no need for going and starting an argument about it"

As a general principle, the above is just wrong. For example, imagine that it was commonly supposed that it is SAFER to drive under the influence of alcohol. You certainly wouldn't want to remain quiet in your confidence you are right about this. Surely, it would be a good idea to "start an argument" about it. Many atheists believe that religion is positively harmful and this explains there negativity towards believers. The situation is analogous to my example here.

The second point I want to make is why should religion be immune from criticism. You wouldn't hear someoone say we should be confident in our political beliefs and be quiet about them. Healthy debate is what a democracy is all about. Why shouldn't religion be a part of the market place of ideas like anything else?

I haven't tried to disprove God.  I believe pretty strongly the burden of proof is on those who claim existence.  However, I am willing, prepared, motivated to disprove the concrete ideas that are advanced by the religious community when they are in clear contradiction to the evidence surrounding us.  Especially when the religious community tries to legislate those ideas or teach them to impressionable children. 

So I call myself atheist because of what I believe, and I consider myself strong for standing up to those who would deny my right to trust my own observations of the world.

The reason I would not call myself anti-theist is because I would be willing to change my mind if enough empirical evidence were presented to me.  I am anti-ignorance and it infuriates me when someone closes their eyes to evidence that is right in front of them and would help them understand the world, such as the age of the Earth or the progression of life without divine intervention.

I also want to point out that many of us have already expressed in earlier forum threads that we join groups like this precisely because we are more interested in finding like-minded individuals than we are in starting arguments with those who disagree with us.

If the religious can congregate and discuss their beliefs (and attack ours), we have the right to do the same, as long as we are peaceful and don't advocate violence; Which we don't, and that more than we can say for the "theists".

"placeholder for response"

You forgot CHOCOLATE!!!!!!!!!

As for EV13's comments -- oh, please, please don't leave the group! I agree with most of what you said and I appreciate your saying what you said. Yes, a great many comments from our group have been negative against various systems of belief that did not coincide with the writer's. But we are here to discuss our feelings about these matters, and for some, this may be one of few places where they can freely vent. To balance the negativism, we need a calming force, too, and you, EV13, could be one such.

Get some chocolate, everyone, and let's air our feelings without spitting on anyone or anything.

I personally hate ignorance. It's probably one of the reasons I'm a professor. I feel the fact that many people are getting their moral base from lies, misinformation  and fantasy is a rather big deal. It makes it imperative that I try to help educate them as others have and continue to help educate me.

I once had a Christian ask me this very same question "Why do you feel the need to talk about this." I told her what I've just told you and ended by saying "If I were wrong about something, I'd want to be told about it. If I had a friend who knew better about something than I did, but didn't correct me, I'd wonder why they didn't help me. Isn't that the way it is with you?"

Her answer? "No".

We left it at that. I was very sad for her.

Some people prefer ignorance and are happy to let others remain ignorant. I'm not one of them. Atheism is simply the non-belief in a god. You can't have "converts" we don't have a big book we all look to with all the answers, we don't have prophets, we don't have "holy" places, we don't have sacred rights, and we encourage open debate. We don't agree on many things. The only thing we all do agree on is that there isn't a god. I'm not an "antitheist" and would leave the group if that were it's title. I'm not any more anti-theist than I am anti-unicorn. I am pro-rationalism. I am anti-ignorance.

That's my 2c.

Interesting thread - don't have much to add that hasn't been said already, except to say that I don't see how the name "Godless" would imply that there used to be a god, and now there being none. 

If an idea is "senseless", does the word imply that the idea used to have sense, but somehow lost it? If someone is "fearless" does it mean that they used to be fearful, but lost that fear?

I don't simply don't see how "something"-less would in any way even suggest the prior existence of that something.

As for religion, I think there can be practical benefits in religion, but I do also think that the dangers and negative aspects outweigh the positive; I am also not convinced that the benefits of religion could not be achieved through more benign, less dogmatic social movements. I also think that religion is, for some reason, dealt with kid gloves, when every other aspect of human interaction is open game.

Just look at the language and harshness of critique that is seen as entirely appropriate, and even expected in discussions on politics. Even the most ardent critiques of religion from the likes of Harris and Hitchens are more kind than what supporters of political ideologies have to say about opposing political movements - yet the atheists who argue against religion are all too easily labled "militant" for expressing critical views.

I AM open, always, to being shown wrong though - which is another reason to argue my case, and to present it to be scrutinized and criticized by those who disagree with me. I think critical discussion of religion isn't necessarily "negativity", as any idea that is truly concerned with what is true and what is not, can only benefit from being challenged with reasonable argument.

I also don't believe that attacking a religious idea that you find unsound with reasoned arguments means attacking the person holding those views.

EV13 - I hope you'll stick around, and perhaps, if you think the forums could benefit from a change, post something about what positive you find to say about religion. I'm sure it would spark interesting discussion, and might even challenge people to look at the issues from a new perspective.

Re:

Stegocephalian's "I don't see how the name "Godless" would imply that there used to be a god, and now there being none." -- isn't there a philosopher (Nietze?) who claimed that God, who once existed, is now dead? I know there is a philosophical thought that God once existed, set everything in motion, and then left (died?). I can't say I subscribe to that idea, but it's an interesting one to mull over now and then.

And regarding your "If an idea is "senseless", does the word imply that the idea used to have sense, but somehow lost it? If someone is "fearless" does it mean that they used to be fearful, but lost that fear?" -- oh, yes, one can certainly be fearful and then lose that fear (e.g., I used to be TERRIFIED of driving on turnpikes and other high-speed roads, but I finally got over it, though I still don't enjoy it), and some ideas may well have been "sense-full" and then, with the passage of time and circumstances, become senseless (e.g., licking postage stamps was the sensible thing to do before they were self-adhesive).

The important thing is to remain open to all ideas and discard what we recognize as being foolish or senseless or downright stupid.

I really enjoy reading what you-all write. Thank you.

The "hell" it isn't a contest. When laws stop being made based on religion I will stop being negative. These arguments are not merely hypothetical. They are being born out around us in our everyday life. This stuff isn't merely some personal choice that has no effect on others.

 I have no intention of going door to door handing out the atheist equivalent to the WatchTower, but I also refuse to let silliness parade around infront of me disguised as the truth and intended to rule my life. Live and let live does not work when dealing with theists.

I think it is almost presumptuous for anyone to say that they actually know what Nietzsche meant concerning anything, but when he said, "God is Dead" I understand it to mean not that there was ever a god,but that the emotional need for god is dead. The other material I have read of Nietzsche lead me to believe that he didn't believe in a literal god either.

I also disagree that the group has been overly negative. I think there has been fairly good discussion without resorting to merely negative comments that have no basis other than distaste.

Anda - my point regarding "senseless" and "fearless" was that while it indeed is possible to lose sense that existed before, or to lose fear that existed before, nothing in the words implies that this is the case.

In other words, when I say that something is senseless, I am not automatically implying that there used to be sense in that which I am referring to.

The point the original author was trying to make was that the word "godless" implied the prior existence of a god which is now non-existent, and my analogous "-less" word examples were meant to show that this was not the case, no such implication is contained in the word.

Likewise, of course, while it is possible to believe that there was a god who is now dead, the word "godless" does not contain that idea - one can be "godless" without lending any support, implicit or explicit, to that idea.

I agree with Stegocephalia. We're actually pretty civil here. If you want to see truly vicious attacks on theism, etc. head over to the Pharyngula Blog. There you'll see what negativity really looks like. 

I'm not saying that's good or bad, just that we're very mild here.

It appears that EV13 has decided to leave the group, may god have mercy on his soul

*makes a catholic cross thingy over his chest*

That's to bad. I wish the best to him. I can't agree with his "Neville Chamberlain" sort of attitude, but I still wish the best to him.