hmm

[juldea]

Well, Attorney General John Ashcroft made a speech yesterday to some religious broadcasters group that has a lot of people in an uproar (at least according to CNN today at lunchtime). Certainly I understand why. Apparently I'm not a civilized person. :(

For further giggles, check out the Concerned Women for America. I found them because one of their spokesMEN (it was a woman, but I'm being difficult on purpose) was talking on CNN about Ashcroft's speech.

I wonder if I'll be shot for being an atheist somday.

Comments

[withlyn.livejournal.com]

I totally missed the argument over this yesterday, and now I feel left out...

I do agree with all the people who claim that the existene or nonexistence of God is unprovable. However, I don't think that an atheist is defined as someone who is 100% sure that god doesn't exist, and can prove it... Certainly deists are not people who are 100% sure that god exists and can prove it. (Well, either or both can be 100% sure, but that doesn't mean they can prove it.) Deists are people who believe in god, atheists are those who don't. There are very few things that can actually be proven or disproven without a shadow of a doubt, outside of the realm of pure mathematics; even there, things are problematic. But I think it's generally healthy to go ahead and believe or not believe in things anyway. In particularly, having seen what deists and atheists have each wrought upon the world, I think it's healthier not to believe in god. That meshes quite nicely with the fact that I have seen no evidence for god that isn't (at least) equally well-explained by other things, which each have other evidence for them. So those things are what I believe in. I do admit the possibility that I'm wrong... But that doesn't make me an agnostic, I don't think, unless you want to argue that everyone is an agnostic in every way, at which point I think the term has been overgeneralized into uselessness.

But for other people, who honestly do wonder whether there is a God, I think it's fine to be an agnostic. There are lots of cases where I hear about something, but can't decide whether I believe it's true or not. This just doesn't happen to be one of them.

Re:

[juldea.livejournal.com]

Brendan just said everything I've been trying to say, but in a different way. Probably in a better way. If you don't like the way I put it, put the words he just said in my mouth (unless he has them copyrighted, cuz then he'll sue me if he thinks I'm stealing his intellectual property). ;) If you don't like either way of saying it, well, bite me. :)

Re:

[juldea.livejournal.com]

That would indeed explain it, heh. I don't consider myself 100% sure, just convinced. ;)

[vambot5.livejournal.com]

I would say the same things about god as you. but given the understanding I've always had of the words "athiest" and "agnostic" I've always thought myself an agnostic. I suppose that would explain my seemingly very contrary opinion.