Atheism is NOT a religion

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
687 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Jan 2, 2009

As it says, this is primarily a response to geerup, but is applicable to anyone that things Atheism is a religion, or can become a religion!.

Peace.

Eternal Winter you tube account:-
http://uk.youtube.com/user/Eternalwinteruk

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (121)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I call bull shit right back acha!.

    not believing in gods can never be a religion, as this video unequivocally proves!.

    I don't have faith that atheism is true, that doesn't even make sense!

  • I call it bullshit.

    Not collecting stamps and no playing sports fall under the "Shit I don't Do" category

    Bald falls under the "HairSTYLE" category (Color being irrelevant, especially considering the color of eyebrows and body hair)

    And Atheism falls under the "Faith" category (You have faith that Atheism is true; and you practice it religiously by doing nothing)

  • they are exactly comparable!

  • THESE ARE HARDLY COMPARABLE!

    "Is not playing a sport a sport?" - It's what you don't do

    "Is Bald a hair color?" - It's a hair style.

    "Is not collection stamps a hobbly?" - see the first answer

  • IE, not a religion.

    Is not playing golf a sport?

    Is bald a hair colour

    Is not collecting stamps a hobby?

  • Athiesm: Unique but still falls in the circle of "How many God do you worshiping your religion?" Many? One? or None?

    Tradition: None, "the tradition of no tradition" (paradox!!)

    Schisms: Neglectors (weak atheists), rejectors (strong atheists), anyone in between, etc

  • My bad, I meant the put 'theory' next to the scientific part only ;P

  • Oh, and scientific theories have a demonstrable hypothesis that makes reliable predictions, has been through as pear review system and published in a journal, it is a body of work encompassing many facts to explain how something works like a system or process, using the word 'theory' in context of science is fine, but then slapping it next to philosophy in the same context is just insulting, not to mention just plain wrong!.

    Look up 'fallacy of equivocation'

    back in your box ;p lol

  • More like your point was convoluted and lacked any real sense of conclusion?.

    Ambling your way through a labored point and not actually saying anything of worth is hardly an argument!.

    state your point again, and this time think about what you have to say before saying it!

  • I'm sorry. did I throw in too many big words? Or is there just something you don't understand?

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more