I'm Agnostic to the core...

Meaning I don't know if a god exist but its something nobody can prove.
Then again I'm no believer, but being fully atheist is something impossible unless you're trying to convince yourself.
Since we don't know if theres a god or not... you can't be fully atheist that would go against any logic.

So I'm agnostic.

Written by Guib on 07.04.2011 at 20:05

I'm Agnostic to the core...

Meaning I don't know if a god exist but its something nobody can prove.
Then again I'm no believer, but being fully atheist is something impossible unless you're trying to convince yourself.
Since we don't know if theres a god or not... you can't be fully atheist that would go against any logic.

So I'm agnostic.

Not true on Atheism, atheists simply don't believe in a god.

I'm an "Apatheist" I don't believe in a god, I don't know if it's possible, and I don't care too much as no deity ever interacts with me. lol

Written by Yasmine on 07.04.2011 at 20:08

Written by Guib on 07.04.2011 at 20:05

I'm Agnostic to the core...

Meaning I don't know if a god exist but its something nobody can prove.
Then again I'm no believer, but being fully atheist is something impossible unless you're trying to convince yourself.
Since we don't know if theres a god or not... you can't be fully atheist that would go against any logic.

So I'm agnostic.

Not true on Atheism, atheists simply don't believe in a god.

I'm an "Apatheist" I don't believe in a god, I don't know if it's possible, and I don't care too much as no deity ever interacts with me. lol

No.. Atheist reject the existance of god, that is totally different

Written by Guib on 07.04.2011 at 20:11

Written by Yasmine on 07.04.2011 at 20:08

Written by Guib on 07.04.2011 at 20:05

I'm Agnostic to the core...

Meaning I don't know if a god exist but its something nobody can prove.
Then again I'm no believer, but being fully atheist is something impossible unless you're trying to convince yourself.
Since we don't know if theres a god or not... you can't be fully atheist that would go against any logic.

So I'm agnostic.

Not true on Atheism, atheists simply don't believe in a god.

I'm an "Apatheist" I don't believe in a god, I don't know if it's possible, and I don't care too much as no deity ever interacts with me. lol

No.. Atheist reject the existance of god, that is totally different

Not at all, semantics is all. An atheist lacks belief in god, an agnostic has no knowledge of god.

Atheist, Noun, a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings. Source - Dictionary.com

Disbelief in a diety is all that is required, if you disbelieve in god, you are an atheist.

Written by Yasmine on 07.04.2011 at 20:17

Written by Guib on 07.04.2011 at 20:11

Written by Yasmine on 07.04.2011 at 20:08

Written by Guib on 07.04.2011 at 20:05

I'm Agnostic to the core...

Meaning I don't know if a god exist but its something nobody can prove.
Then again I'm no believer, but being fully atheist is something impossible unless you're trying to convince yourself.
Since we don't know if theres a god or not... you can't be fully atheist that would go against any logic.

So I'm agnostic.

Not true on Atheism, atheists simply don't believe in a god.

I'm an "Apatheist" I don't believe in a god, I don't know if it's possible, and I don't care too much as no deity ever interacts with me. lol

No.. Atheist reject the existance of god, that is totally different

Not at all, semantics is all. An atheist lacks belief in god, an agnostic has no knowledge of god.

Atheist, Noun, a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings. Source - Dictionary.com

Disbelief in a diety is all that is required, if you disbelieve in god, you are an atheist.

Actually in a way you just proved my point thanks

Its going against logic (either you're theist or Atheist) to deny the ''Existence'' of a supreme being. Since you cannot prove its existance, nor prove that it doesn't exist you can't be fully atheist, that is against all logic. Sorry to say it lol but you may not believe in something that doesn't mean you deny its existance. I don't believe in god but it could be something true. Since its not proven I cannot say.

This is being agnostic... not atheist. If you're atheist YOU CLAIM that his existance is untrue. way different but thanks for helping out

No, you're cherry picking the definition, it says disbelief too. Meaning either denying or disbelieving make you an atheist. The definition contains 2 clauses, but either 1 of them makes one an atheist, it's not required to meet both clauses. Disbelief will do. You do notice it says OR Denies OR Disbelieves. Do you believe in a deity? If not you're an atheist. However you can also still be an agnostic by claiming you've no knowledge of any deity as I am clearly both. I disbelieve BECAUSE I have no knowledge of a deity.

Written by Yasmine on 07.04.2011 at 20:33

No, you're cherry picking the definition, it says disbelief too. Meaning either denying or disbelieving make you an atheist. The definition contains 2 clauses, but either 1 of them makes one an atheist, it's not required to meet both clauses. Disbelief will do. You do notice it says OR Denies OR Disbelieves. Do you believe in a deity? If not you're an atheist. However you can also still be an agnostic by claiming you've no knowledge of any deity as I am clearly both. I disbelieve BECAUSE I have no knowledge of a deity.

Got those statements from the Atheist Experience?
anyways, sorry about you having to argue with an extreme agnostic

Written by theFIST on 07.04.2011 at 22:51

Written by Yasmine on 07.04.2011 at 20:33

No, you're cherry picking the definition, it says disbelief too. Meaning either denying or disbelieving make you an atheist. The definition contains 2 clauses, but either 1 of them makes one an atheist, it's not required to meet both clauses. Disbelief will do. You do notice it says OR Denies OR Disbelieves. Do you believe in a deity? If not you're an atheist. However you can also still be an agnostic by claiming you've no knowledge of any deity as I am clearly both. I disbelieve BECAUSE I have no knowledge of a deity.

Got those statements from the Atheist Experience?
anyways, sorry about you having to argue with an extreme agnostic

Actually no my friend used to say that a lot, she's like a mother to me (Even though she isn't old enough to be my mom) so I tend to remember her arguments, etc. I think, and I understand that he probably just wants to feel nuetral.

Written by Yasmine on 08.04.2011 at 00:26

Written by theFIST on 07.04.2011 at 22:51

Written by Yasmine on 07.04.2011 at 20:33

No, you're cherry picking the definition, it says disbelief too. Meaning either denying or disbelieving make you an atheist. The definition contains 2 clauses, but either 1 of them makes one an atheist, it's not required to meet both clauses. Disbelief will do. You do notice it says OR Denies OR Disbelieves. Do you believe in a deity? If not you're an atheist. However you can also still be an agnostic by claiming you've no knowledge of any deity as I am clearly both. I disbelieve BECAUSE I have no knowledge of a deity.

Got those statements from the Atheist Experience?
anyways, sorry about you having to argue with an extreme agnostic

Actually no my friend used to say that a lot, she's like a mother to me (Even though she isn't old enough to be my mom) so I tend to remember her arguments, etc. I think, and I understand that he probably just wants to feel nuetral.

I don't wanna feel neutral I am neutral on the subject, since I don't care if there is a god or not... It just doesn't bother me at all
and you cannot say you disbelieve and have no knowledge if you consider yourself atheist lol. You're not both agnostic and atheist its one or the other lol.
If i would disbelieve than I would aknowledge the fact that I believe that there isnt any deity... but anyways.

Written by Guib on 08.04.2011 at 19:00

I don't wanna feel neutral I am neutral on the subject, since I don't care if there is a god or not... It just doesn't bother me at all
and you cannot say you disbelieve and have no knowledge if you consider yourself atheist lol. You're not both agnostic and atheist its one or the other lol.
If i would disbelieve than I would aknowledge the fact that I believe that there isnt any deity... but anyways.

You are wrong. Disbelief is the lack of belief, and not active denial. Even agnostics can be lumped into theist agnostics (known as deists) or atheist agnostics (which usually call themselves agnostics).

If you think of belief as a bolean variable (which it basically is), it can be either true or false. If it is true, there is an active belief. If it is false, there is no active belief (disbelief). By being a fence-sitter you choose not to have an active belief and you are as such an atheist by the definition of the word ("atheism" quite literally means "without theism" and not "rejecting theism").

Having no stance is an atheist stance (a stance without theism). It is the default state of being.

There are, although other atheist variants, like there are many theist variants.

Personally, I will not reject the concept of something outside of our plane of existance myself, but I will actively reject the notions presented by today's organized religion (which agnostics also do). The stance that I will take when debating these notions and social structures would be something resembling what is known as strong atheism (complete active rejection of faith). Why is this? Because the worldview they present doesn't go together with the reality I have seen with my own eyes.

The main problem for me with today's organized religions is the "mind over matter" mindset that they all propose to be the foundational law of existance. Wether it be through the perspective of the mind of a god over matter, or the mind of humans over matter, I reject this thesis because it is untrue. I instead propose the thesis of "matter over mind". If a religion can follow this thesis (see some types of pantheism), I will not go as hard on it and adapt a more neutral stance similar to that of what you refer to as agnostic (a dose of healthy skepticism and disbelief without any active denial).

"You are wrong. Disbelief is the lack of belief, and not active denial. Even agnostics can be lumped into theist agnostics (known as deists) or atheist agnostics (which usually call themselves agnostics)."

Exactly.

Atheist, 'nuff said.

"Dont vote and mention satanism here othervise its be spam"

My respect, You have it.

I voted Muslim. I believe that there's no god but God (Allah), the judgement day is inevitable and that we're all equal.

I'd vote shamanism if I could. I guess the spirit world doesn't think I'm qualified or something. >>

Written by Mindheist on 12.08.2011 at 23:49

I voted Muslim. I believe that there's no god but God (Allah), the judgement day is inevitable and that we're all equal.

Written by Mindheist on 12.08.2011 at 23:49

I voted Muslim. I believe that there's no god but God (Allah), the judgement day is inevitable and that we're all equal.

I am European muslim...

...yes,we are equal but we are different.God was clearly separate races and folks.That is beauty of his Creation and there is a beauty of humanity.But besides our difference,our belief is essentially.

We are all children of this planet, religion is just another stupid way to divide us

Well I guess I'm Protestant....don't really care about it much last time I was in church was.....ehm....hmmm when I was like 14 or 15 when I did the confirmation thing....I did it for the money and the presents

Written by arwestromen on 11.12.2011 at 00:43

I did it for the money and the presents

I see we have one material boy here.

I would like to say money doesn't matter but one needs to pay the rent and buy the foodstuff and also give the money to the lady. Therefore even I have to think about it constantly. I keep money and church apart tho...

Written by Ernis on 11.12.2011 at 00:57

Written by arwestromen on 11.12.2011 at 00:43

I did it for the money and the presents

I see we have one material boy here.

I would like to say money doesn't matter but one needs to pay the rent and buy the foodstuff and also give the money to the lady. Therefore even I have to think about it constantly. I keep money and church apart tho...

oh yeah totally....but getting stuff from your family and freiends when your 15 for just eating white cardboard and drinking non alcoholic wine....is kind of awesome....and the $300 made it worth it

Written by arwestromen on 11.12.2011 at 14:33

oh yeah totally....but getting stuff from your family and freiends when your 15 for just eating white cardboard and drinking non alcoholic wine....is kind of awesome....and the $300 made it worth it

Reminds me of the quinceanhera tradition of Mexico which is there celebrated as an initiation rite for girls. They all get dressed up as if getting married and the family and relatives throw a huge and fancy party for her which requires lots of money and the girl receives loads of presents.

The confirmation thing in Estonia used to be a similar big event as well before WW2. It was like marriage or something and the youngsters purportedly went through the ceremony all at the same time. That turned it into some teen festival. As you might imagine, it had little or none to do with religion at all.

Even nowadays I see the attitude of some Estonian lutherans that they're usually not religious but instead regard the lutheranism as some kind of "club thing". "We're Lutherans. We're the true Estonians, we've always been Lutherans and will always be. Every true and patriotic Estonian should be Lutheran."

It's a perfect example of hive-mind. Before reformation, Estonians were Roman Catholics. Nowadays many Estonians are atheists because in the Soviet Union atheism was considered to be the way to go. Estonians are rather hive-minded. They always follow the general trend. It's like you don't follow a religion because you actually believe in it or find anything spiritually significant for yourself but because everyone else is doing it, it's normal and it makes your group stand out among others. A Lutheran cleric wrote an article lately where he stressed that "Estonians should turn back to their roots, abandon atheism and take back the religion that is essentially Estonian, LUTHERANISM. This is the essentially Estonian religion that represents all our beliefs and way of life. It's perfect."

I could ask? Why not Catholicism? Why not a religion that existed before Catholicism? It's like "Persians are muslims. It's the perfect religion for Persians."
Ok, why not Christianity, Zoroastrianism or Buddhism. All of those religions having been practised in these areas centuries before Islam.

But that's normal because anyone will always be glad to promote his club. I'm Catholic, however, I try not to say that Catholicism is the best way to go. It's my own choice but it is impossible to presume that it automatically suits another person's life philosophy.

Written by Ernis on 11.12.2011 at 21:17

Nowadays many Estonians are atheists because in the Soviet Union atheism was considered to be the way to go.

say what?
the USSR doesn't exist any more and therefore does not force people to do things they don't want to. I believe it's their choice whether to baptise their children or not. why is that such an issue? is the Latvian example* better? (* baptising children just to have them baptised; no going to church, reading the Bible or actually believing in God) most of us are atheists too, just baptised. so what?

Not only in Estonia but in Sweden I was suprise when I heard maybe 10% are beliving in God here, so it was shocking, because O thought its 40/50%.

Written by Ernis on 11.12.2011 at 21:17

I could ask? Why not Catholicism? Why not a religion that existed before Catholicism? It's like "Persians are muslims. It's the perfect religion for Persians."
Ok, why not Christianity, Zoroastrianism or Buddhism. All of those religions having been practised in these areas centuries before Islam.

Because those people have a competitive state of mind and wants their family, city, country, way of life, religion to be the best, and the best thing to prove that is to promote it I guess. "MY religion is the best because it's awesome and it's the only one I know"

In my opinion children should not be allowed to practise any religion before the age of 13. Why? because that way the brainwashing might be a little bit harder.

Written by arwestromen on 12.12.2011 at 11:52
Why? because that way the brainwashing might be a little bit harder.

Fuck it, make it the age of majority. 18, 19, 21, whatever. Let adults decide for themselves.

I know it'd be impossible to enforce it as a law, but still. It'd be interesting to see how many people convert to a religion given a choice as an adult without anyone telling them what they should believe for the first 20 years or so of their life. And it'd be interesting to see which religion the majority chooses (of those who do choose one).

I think there would be far less religious people in the world, if children were not indoctrinated into a religion at an early age, and had it instilled in them by family and elder peers that their religion is the only right way in the world. Kids only learn what they are taught, and so if a certain religion wasn't pretty much forced on them at an early age, there is a very decent chance a child will grow up not being religious. A lot of people also, even if they internally struggle with the religion they were brought up as, they would find it hard to turn their back on it, at the risk of ostracising themselves from family, and sometimes friends too. So many feel pressure to remain within a certain religion, even if deep with their heart, they have doubts about it.

To me, spiritual belief is a deeply personal thing, and something that everyone should be allowed to discover (or not, as the case may be) on their own. I do think it is wrong to force a religion onto a child before it is old enough to think for itself and come to their own conclusions about it. Religion is a thing someone should go to voluntarily, not have it forced on them.

I'm an atheist becasue there is no proof or any argument for the existence of any god that doesn't sound completely insane... on the other hand science has some pretty good arguments and explanations, which is safe to call facts. For Example evolution, fossils etc, etc.. but the biggest reasons why i'm an atheist is reason.
I feel sorry for every kid who is brought up to belive while they still belive in santaclause..

Written by RockeRoy on 13.12.2011 at 12:04
I feel sorry for every kid who is brought up to belive while they still belive in santaclause..

When I have kids, I'm straight up telling them "There is no Santa Claus. I buy you presents because I love you."

Well, that's assuming I have kids and don't live alone in a trashed up apartment like I see myself in the next 12 years. And if I do have kids from some fucked up drunk encounter, that's assuming I don't hacksaw them and their mother because I get sick of paying welfare.

Nice Facebook post though.