There is no rational evidence for a god, therefore there is no reason for me to believe in god. This is a rational statement. Statements such as "there might be" and "who knows, maybe I'll go to church sometimes" aren't rational. You can make a similar statement about all made up things - there is no evidence that my brother is an alien, therefore I have no reason to believe that my brother is an alien. A - theism is the state of not having a god. Not attempting to provide evidence that there is no god, that would be more accurately anti - theism perhaps. But atheism and a - my - brother - is - alienism go hand in hand. The extent to which I believe in things that are not rational (i.e. the extent to which I believe my brother is an alien) should be the same as the extent to which I believe in god. So in short, yes, atheism must be a consequence of rationalism.
Most religions fall apart under close speculation. Atheists that believe in science use rational thought and homophobia, and aspect of many religions is linked with low IQ. Atheists are perfectly fine with homosexuals for the most part, and atheist bigots are much rarer than religious bigots. Atheism often happens when somebody uses rationalism to study the bible.
Many have brought up that atheism can't be considered rational because, just like any other religion, that worships a "god", it can't be proven. I think many things can't be proven, but I still think that it is OK to accept something rationally without providing absolute proof. Nothing can be proven absolutely, therefore if you are going to say, "since it can't be proven, it can't be rational". That would mean that nothing could be rational.. And that just doesn't seem rational to me..
but to the indoctrinated mind their delusions are quite rational
atheism is very rational but also objective
whereas religion is very subjective and full of bias
i think the often touted statement by theists sums it up nicely
christian - "no evidence will change my mind"
whereas if given sufficient evidence an atheist would gladly believe in god
If someone has done a crime in town and I get accused of it and taken to court, there has to be proof that I was the one who did the crime. If there is no proof that I did the crime then I would not be guilty. Saying that there is lack of proof that there is god, but he can still be real is like saying there is lack of proof that I was the one who did the crime so there may be a possibility that I may have actually done the crime? Makes no sense to me at all. And science has a logical answer to everything "God" was supposed to be about. God created the world? How about the big bang? God created people? How about micro organisms? Science has answered just about everything God was supposed to be there for, so I don't believe in God anymore, because there's a logical reason to everything.
Atheism isn't automatically rational, but in most cases it is. Atheism rejects the clams of religions on the ground that they lack evidence. Basic logic dictates that any party making a claim holds the burden of proof. Any claims without proof must be rejected until they are proven. This is rationalism.
Rationalism does not have to go hand in hand with atheism. Atheism, like the belief in god is also a belief. There is no way to prove or disprove the existence of a being that is not here. I would say that many of atheism's largest proponents hold a religious belief that there is no god, and that seems irrational to me.
Atheism is the belief that there is not a God. This is not rational due to the fact that there is no proof one way or the other that there is a God. No one has ever come back from the dead to say there is, or is not a God. Therefore, to say there is not a God would be irrational because there is lack of proof that there is not.
(Please note: rationality is different than rationalism-- I suggest everyone familiarize themselves with these concepts)
Early rationalists were largely theists. Rationalism opposes observation believing that thought was the path to truth-- not observation.
There is a high relation between atheism and *empiricism*, and a negative relation between atheism and rationalism.