The Instigator
Ramos-7
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JayConar
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Atheism Is A Religion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
JayConar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/2/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,393 times Debate No: 64403
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (53)
Votes (2)

 

Ramos-7

Pro

I am arguing for the idea that Atheism is a religion despite the fact people do not consider this to be true. Whoever accepts the challenge may start their argument whenever they please. Time to argue is 1 day & max characters is 7,000.
JayConar

Con

Athiesm is not a religion.

First I would like to take the opportunity to thank my opponent for starting this debate, I'm sure we can have a fun, intellectual time.

All I need to do to win this debate is prove that athiesm does not fall under the required criteria to be classified as a religion.

I will start by defining what a religion is:

A religion is

[1]1. The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

Athiests do not believe in and worship any 'superhuman' controlling power. Thus, atheists do not fit into this classification. Before any attempt is made to say 'what about science or maths' or some-such nonsense, neither of those things can be judged to be a 'superhuman controlling power,' and, even if they were, not all atheists accept science or/and maths unquestionably. I admit, most do, but not all, so it's not possible to say that atheists 'worship' or 'believe' in any subject necessarily.

[1]2. A particular system of faith and worship.

Again, it cannot be said that atheism is a particular system of faith or worship because atheism is the lack of faith (the belief in something generally without proof). Again, atheists do not all worship anything in particular.

[1]3. A pursuit or interest followed with great devotion.

This is the definition which can give Pro most cause for hope. It is possible to suggest that atheists are 'interested' in disproving the existene of a God. However, this is not always the case. A lot of atheists simply do not care what other people believe in. You are allowed to believe in whatever it is that you want to believe in as long as it does not hurt anybody else is the general stance often taken. There's a reason that very few people have ever had atheists knocking on their door trying to destroy their faith. Whereas the religious tend to make it their business to study their religion in depth, atheists simply choose not to believe in a God. Many have reasons for this, others would just quote 'common sense' if asked. So no, atheism does not count as 'a pursuit or interested followed with great devotion' either.

Your turn!

Sources:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...;
Debate Round No. 1
Ramos-7

Pro

Thank you for being an educated Atheist and not replying saying that a religion is nothing more than a worship system for God etc.

Atheism is a pursue/devotion to a belief, the belief that there is no God. Pursue in Merriam-Webster's dictionary means "to be involved in (an activity)" & devotion (the act of being devoted which means to give over or direct (as time, money, or effort) to a cause, enterprise, or activity) : you are involved with the belief system of Atheism (the belief which teaches/proclaims that God does not exist) which you choose to believe in like anyone else who choose to believe in their religion. You could be told that you have no evidence to show that God does not exist, but ignore the person who told you that and mentally tell yourself you're still going to remain an Atheist you apparently are still devoted to your belief that there is no God also like you mentioned before, some of your kind go door to door trying to "destroy their faith", I would think that requires quite a bit of devotion also.
http://www.merriam-webster.com... http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Religion:
1) a : the state of a religious
b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3: archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Atheism :
1) archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2) a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Atheism falls under definition 4 of the Merriam-Webster dictionary's.

Theism : belief in the existence of a god or gods; specifically : belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

To save space, I will past single definitions from the links I provide for. I provided these other definitions to ask you a question. According to your definition as well as mine (#4), on religion, and looking back on both of our definitions of Atheism, how can you think Atheism is not a religion when you by definition do have belief that there is no God (otherwise stated as disbelief) when this can be reconciled with definition 4 of religion according to Merriam-Webster? For Theism, I have the same argument, both Atheism & Theism can be considered principles (from definition 4) also since a "principle" is a basic truth or theory : an idea that forms the basis of something; a comprehensive and fundamental law, doctrine, or assumption. http://www.merriam-webster.com...
If you really want to get technical, lets define a cause too. A cause "something (such as an organization, belief, idea, or goal) that a group or people support or fight for" or "a principle or movement militantly defended or supported" , some people who might be fanatical atheists may fight for this as their firm belief, I can add politics to show that Atheists actually threatened to sue schools, corporations etc. for just or unjust reasons just to get their way for whatever agenda a group of them in countries like America may have like this woman and getting school prayers banned.
http://en.wikipedia.org...'Hair#Atheist_activism Please do not mistaken me for some angry person who is selfish and doesn't tolerate any other religion other than my own, despite we being enemies, you guys have rights and school prayers should not be mandatory especially when we all have the freedom to choose whatever religion we want. Now I ask again, how does Atheism not fall into one of these definitions? If I have to I can involve English linguistics to prove my argument that Atheism is a religion. FYI: This debate has been occurring for many years, but I do not understand why people like you think its not a religion, Debate.org even agrees with me in terms of characterizing you as a person!
-> http://prntscr.com...

Another question to you Atheist, is it faith that you have that justifies your belief that God does not exist? Because if so, that is another factor to be considered as possible evidence to convict your belief as a legitimate religion. God people say cannot be proven scientifically/philosophically true nor false, but because you are an Atheist and do not believe your belief is a religion, do you have a comment to add?
JayConar

Con

Round 2

The term 'belief' is one which holds a lot of importance in this debate, so I wish to place more emphasis on it by defining it.

Belief:

1. An acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.

Atheism is not a belief that something exists or is true, it's not, in fact, a belief in anything. Atheism requires proof, whereas religious faith tends to go without proof. Before I'm pointed to the bible as 'proof' by many evangelic Christians, I'd like to point out that the bible does not hold 'proof' of anything. It is a collection of fables that were written by people hundreds of years after they supposedly happened. Jesus may well have existed, we do have more evidence for him than we have for Alexander the Great, but does that mean that he did all the stuff he was supposed to have done? No. It doesn't.

Atheism, however, contains a great amount of proof. Occam's razor suggests that we should agree with the idea that contains the least amount of assumptions. Compared to any religion, atheism certainly contains very few assumptions. Belief in God is an assumption because you are choosing to acknowledge the supposed existence of something that not only has never been seen, heard, smelt, tasted or touched, but has not even seen agreement by the religious community on what form it takes.

Atheism, however, suggests that you should not believe in anything without solid proof of its existence. That is all atheism is, the acceptance of evidence being neccessary before the acknowledgement of an event, being or object can take place.

Atheism isn't just the shunning of God, it's the shunning of belief in anything without evidence. Afterall, many religions, such as [1]Bhuddism, have no God. Instead, one of their main ideas is the idea of enlightenment. Atheists do not believe in that as there is no proof, this is why atheists aren't Bhuddists either.

Thus, the second definition of belief:

2. trust, faith, or confidence in (someone or something).

Also does not apply in the case of atheism. Atheism is not a trust, faith, or confidence. Instead, it is the lack of those things because all of those things suggest a lack of evidence. Atheism is so often paired with science because science, too, refuses to accept things without strong proof. Does this mean that science is the God of atheism or some such nonsense? No, of course not. Atheism does not have a system of belief in any way. Therefore, atheism cannot be a religion.

Unfortunately, this debate has turned into a semantic war on terror. However, due to the nature of the debate, it had to be this way.

Sources:
[1]'http://www.buddhanet.net...


Debate Round No. 2
Ramos-7

Pro

Ramos-7 forfeited this round.
JayConar

Con

Extending the floor to next round.
Debate Round No. 3
Ramos-7

Pro

Ramos-7 forfeited this round.
JayConar

Con

Forfeit again points to me.
Debate Round No. 4
53 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
cheyenne,

You either didn't read or didn't understand almost the entire post.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Again. You are misinformed. When I said people mentally ascend to believe in God, all that means is that it is in their mind, not revealed to their heart.And I have said very little I would ever take back.Like I said, if truth offends someone, what is that to me?
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
cheyenne
I'm mostly referring to our other conversation when I say you are sometimes more offensive than you mean to be. But there are instances of you saying things which you do not truly know to be true, but which imply that others are inferior. For example, you say " I mentally ascended to the belief in God", as if you are certain that those who do not believe in god are mentally inferior. If you can show that this is true, then it is a slightly different story (though maintaining that you are mentally superior or 'ascended' in some way compared to other people, is still neither effective, nor friendly, even if you can prove it to be true).

Until you can prove any of this to be true, for everyone else, you're simply expressing an opinion. You should take care to be sensitive to the fact that this is just your opinion to others, until you show them the truth of it. And so, if you were making the attempt to treat others as your fellow humans without belittling them, you wouldn't be nearly as condescending, regardless of how sure you were in your beliefs.

Finally being diligent with your words also means trying to express things in a way which is easily understandable to the people you are talking to. You should try to say precisely what you mean, instead of using metaphorical language which may be confusing or ambiguous to other people, and which may lead to misunderstandings. Here I am referring to your usage of the word 'heart'. It's fine to use it metaphorically if you make it clear what you mean. I don't come from a community where 'heart' is often used in the way that you later revealed you meant it, and so perhaps you shouldn't assume that I share the same metaphorical language as you without making it clear.

I'm only nitpicking because you made such a big deal of being wise with your words and the power of the spoken word. If you really believe that, you might want to practice it more carefully as well.
Posted by JayConar 2 years ago
JayConar
You think that it doesn't matter if people are offended by the truth? Ok then.

God does not exist. The Bible was written by a load of easily led individuals who had heard twisted stories about a guy called Jesus whose Mother had cheated on her husband and therefore pretended God had given her a son so she wouldn't be punished for adultery.

The bible totally contradicts itself as it was written by people who lacked the required intelligence to avoid such mistakes. The morality of the bible is not the word of some higher power. Instead, it is an irrelevant set of personal archaic moral judgments based lightly upon what was considered acceptable at the time of writing, as well as the uninspired ideas of the simple people who did the writing at the time.

Christianity is based on a simple set of archaic moral tenets that the church chooses to keep alive so that it can oppress people and keep its power. This is the reason that the pope will, every now and then, change his mind about what is moral and what's immoral, or what's right and wrong, in order so that they do not fall so far behind the ideas of modern times that the powers of the church are completely diminished.

It is not only wrong that religious institutions can wield any political power, it is ridiculous that the morality of such an archaic institution should even be taken into consideration when it comes to things like human rights and law, or anything, in fact.

There, have your truth. And stop scaremongering people. You don't go to hell or heaven when you die, your body is absorbed back into the Earth. Everything that you were, all the nutrients, proteins etc are broken down and you return to the Earth, allowing new life to exist.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
And tell me when I have been offensive? If someone is offended by the truth, why should that be a concern of mine?
Posted by JayConar 2 years ago
JayConar
Then Jesus was wrong. It's still the brain.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
When I say the heart, I am not addressing the blood pump. It is the core of a man. Where all of his believing takes place. And it is the origin of his words. Jesus said " out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks".
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
cheyenne
I doubt that people's beliefs are in their heart. There aren't many neurons in the heart, and they don't do very high level processing.

I think you need to be more diligent with your words in particular. You're sometimes more offensive than you mean to be, I think.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
tweak.... Your words are confusing. Are you saying God said something, but didn't mean what he said? That would be a lie. And if that ever happened all creation would be destroyed. No. God said what he meant and meant what he said.

The moment Adam ate that fruit, he died. Spiritually. Faith was now fear. Love became hate. He showed that when he blamed Eve and God.Soiritual life is now spiritual death.And he passed that death nature to all mankind.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
undeniable.......I believed in God, but I did not believe God.I did not believe what he said. I mentally ascended to the belief in God, but it was not down in my heart. In my very core. That is where peoples believer is.

Of course we should be diligent about the words we speak.And how we think. Jesus said, " take heed what you hear. What goes inside your mind. Because as a man thinks in his heart, so is he.If you are diligent and responsible for your words, then your feelings will get in line, as also your actions.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Tweka 2 years ago
Tweka
Ramos-7JayConarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Mr.Lincoln 2 years ago
Mr.Lincoln
Ramos-7JayConarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF