It's one thing to speculate or try to guess things about the unknown, but to so confidently base your entire life on it, and worse, try to impose it on others, either by force or by law, is simply not a rational way of doing things.

When you don't know if something is true and you have no good evidence to think that it's true, the rational position is to work on the assumption that it is false until proven otherwise. This is a basic principle we apply in every day life, the burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim, not on the one making the negative claim. Religion should be open to the same scrutiny that say politics, philosophy, science, art etc. can be subjected too.

Faith is no justification.
"Culture and tradition" is no justification.
Argument from ignorance is no justification.
"Parents said so" is no justification.
"I was baptized Orthodox so I'm Orthodox for life" is no justification.
"Bible/Qu'ran says so, therefore it's true" is no justification.

Not all theists have this mentality of course, in fact some believe they have "logical" and "inescapable" reasons to believe their particular religion is true. But it is a trend I noticed as it's easy to see considering the geographical distribution of religion. Most people simply go along with what their family or culture believes. They do not give any real consideration to other religions or the possibility that you can have no religion at all.


The purpose of this channel is to promote secularism (complete separation of church and state) and discourage religious thinking (dogmatic and intolerant religious thinking in particular).


Secularism

While some countries are more secular than others, there are very few (if any) that are TRULY secular. (Some people are quick to point towards communist North Korea, but its dogmatic personality cult / Juche philosophy and persecution of theists is just as bad as a theocracy. A secular country implies freedom OF and FROM religion, it goes both ways.)

Romania is no different. It's not a theocracy, but it's not 100% secular either. The Orthodox church is unjustifiably tax exempt while at the same time gets funded by the state. Prostitution is illegal for religious reasons which creates a dangerous black market where kidnapping of young women and tax evasion run rampant. We have blasphemy laws (whether they are enforced or not is irrelevant). Religious education in Romania is confessional rather than neutral and objective and is heavily biased in favor of Orthodox Christianity. Children are taught the 6-day creationism in PRIMARY school and being a Romanian myself I can CONFIRM this is what I was taught as well. The ministry of education also "mysteriously" removed Evolution and philosophy critical of God a few years ago from High School curriculum. Coincidence? You decide.

I am an atheist and naturalist, I don't believe in any gods, magic, afterlife or any other things that would qualify as "supernatural".

Even if such things exist, I believe there's no way one could rationally justify belief in them, so you might as well just assume they are false until proven otherwise. In fact, there is often evidence against supernatural claims.

For example we know for a fact that humans have a wild imagination and make up gods and religions all the time in an attempt to explain things. Our natural perception of reality is imperfect and we have a tendency to attribute agency where there is none, like say natural phenomena (thunder, lightning, volacano eruptions, earthquakes etc.) We even make up gods to account for social phenomena (god of love, god of war, god of trade etc.)

Today we KNOW there is no magic man responsible for these things, science gives us satisfactory natural explanations. The only place where gods and magic can hide now, is in the realm of the unknown, such as the beginning of the Universe (at least as we know it) or the origin of life. Given the poor track record of supernatural explanations and the success of science, what are the odds that theists are yet again mistaken?

Even the absence of evidence itself is evidence (though not proof) of absence. Why would the creator of Earth go to such great lengths to hide himself from mortals if he wants any kind of "personal relationship" with us? Why does he always act in subtle undetectable ways, for example why is he said to help heal chronic diseases but never heals amputees? It is simply unproductive and 1-sided 1-way communication type of "relationship". (Basically a delusion. Like trying to be friends with someone who doesn't even acknowledge your presence.)

There are two kinds of supernatural claims:
- those that are neither provable nor disprovable (basically unfalsifiable hypotheses like the deist god)
- those that have been proven wrong (such as Santa Claus)

NONE that have been proven beyond reasonable doubt, and even if they have, they have only been experienced by a very small fraction of the population, making them impossible to verify objectively.

Some have tried to prove God "logically" and "inescapably" using various "air tight" philosophical arguments such as Ontological, Kalam, Design, Fine-Tuning, but they have simply failed to deliver.

As far as "objective morality" goes, it all depends on how you define it. "Morality" is simply a word, if we cannot agree on a clear definition then the concept is neither subjective nor objective, it is simply meaningless. However if you wanna talk about what sort of rules and principles make for a prosperous, stable and safe society, then clearly not all opinions are equal. How to enforce these rules is an entirely different matter though, the lack of a celestial omniscient cop does not mean the principles aren't valid.


Ultimately, believe what you want if it makes you feel good, just stop being so damn dogmatic about it. Thank you.