Question

How has religion been a common thread in the region? ( Latin America )

Answer 1

Religion has always been common in the world. Since the world has be created, everyone has wondered how the world was created, if there is a God and etc. Everyone has a religion weather it's Christianity (like myself) - Islam - Hinduism - Buddhism - Atheist - Satanist - Everyone has some sort of religion and people share their religions with others, that's one reason for Holy War, battles, wars, of the world.

Answer 2

Atheism is \(\textbf{not}\) a religion.

Answer 3

Atheism3 will be defined in the contemporary western sense: not just the lack of belief in a god, but the assertion about the non-existence of any gods, spirits, or divine or supernatural beings. Atheists in this sense are metaphysical naturalists, and as will be shown, they DO follow a religion.

Answer 4

I am not an atheist, but even I, am not mentally incompetent to the degree where atheism becomes a religion.

Definition of the word: Religion.
The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

Definition of the word: Atheism.
Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

@iRespect these two definitions are incompatible. "Metaphysical naturalists" is incorrect, as not all atheists are naturalists, nor do all of them regard the branch of philosophy called metaphysics any worth. Do you have some obsession with trying to make atheism fit the definition of religion?

Be honest, you have some sort of agenda, no thinking person would see atheist as followers of a religion. Hence where there "freethought" term comes from.

Answer 5

Atheism is not a religion it is classified as a non spiritual belief. But you can have the Spiritual belief in no higher power, and that is a religion. There is also Apathism which is not caring about a religion, spiritually, which itself is a religion.

Answer 6

"Spiritual belief in no higher power, and that is a religion."

Actually, that is not a religion. Notice the definition:
The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

"Spiritual belief in no higher power, and that is a religion."
No higher power, ergo not a religion.

Answer 7

\(\Huge\cal\color{magenta}{Atheism~Is~A~Religion!}\)

Answer 8

@iRespect burden of proof is on you, as far as the world go all academic credited schools would see that statement as false.

Answer 9

Atheism IS a religion. I know that some have made that statement without much evidence. And I know that atheists themselves heatedly deny it. I’ve heard their rejoinders: If atheism is a religion, then not playing baseball is a sport. Or, atheism is to religion what bald is to hair color. Clever. I guess I don’t blame them for denying it, but denying something doesn’t prove it is not there. (I would advise any atheist readers to re-read the previous sentence until BOTH meanings sink in.) A religion doesn’t have to posit a god who must be identified or worshiped. Some religions are polytheistic (Hinduism, Mormonism), some monotheistic (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), some non-theistic (Buddhism). I’d say the new atheists and their religion are “anti-theistic.” But their atheism is religious nonetheless. Consider this:

- Atheist have their own worldview. Materialism (the view that the material world is all there is) is the lens through which atheists view the world. Far from being the open-minded, follow-the-evidence-wherever thinkers they claim to be, they interpret all data ONLY within the very narrow worldview of materialism. They are like a guy wearing dark sunglasses who chides all others for thinking the sun is out.

- They have their own orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is a set of beliefs acceptable to a faith community. Just as there are orthodox Christian beliefs, there is an atheist orthodoxy as well. In brief, it is that EVERYTHING can be explained as the product of unintentional, undirected, purposeless evolution. No truth claim is acceptable if it cannot be subjected to scientific scrutiny.

- They have their own brand of apostasy. Apostasy is to abandon one’s former religious faith. Antony Flew was for many years one of the world’s most prominent atheists. And then he did the unthinkable: he changed his mind. You can imagine the response of the “open-minded, tolerant” New Atheist movement. Flew was vilified. Richard Dawkins accused Flew of “tergiversation.” It’s a fancy word for apostasy. By their own admission, then, Flew abandoned their “faith.”

- They have their own prophets: Nietzsche, Russell, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx. Just as any other religion.

- They have their own messiah: He is, of course, Charles Darwin. Darwin – in their view drove the definitive stake through the heart of theism by providing a comprehensive explanation of life that never needs God as a cause or explanation. Daniel Dennett has even written a book seeking to define religious faith itself as merely an evolutionary development.

- They have their own preachers and evangelists. And boy, are they “evangelistic.” Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens (Speaking of which, our prayers goes out to Christopher Hitchens in hopes of a speedy recovery for his cancer, we need more time with him Lord) are NOT out to ask that atheism be given respect. They are seeking converts. They are preaching a “gospel” calling for the end of theism.

- They have faith. That’s right, faith. They would have you believe the opposite. Their writings ridicule faith, condemn faith. Harris’s book is called The End of Faith. But theirs is a faith-based enterprise. The existence of God cannot be proven or disproven. To deny it takes faith. Evolution has no explanation for why our universe is orderly, predictable, measurable. In fact (atheistic) evolutionary theory has no rational explanation for why there is such a thing as rational explanation. There is no accounting for the things they hope you won’t ask: Why do we have self-awareness? What makes us conscious? From what source is there a universal sense of right and wrong? They just take such unexplained things by … faith.

There are days when evil and suffering are hard to explain, even for the most ardent follower of God. There are questions we cannot answer. There are days when every honest Christian will admit doubt. But we don’t become atheists. It is because our soul JUST KNOWS that God is there. And maybe because atheism is a religion that requires too much untenable faith. Not only is Atheism a religion, the entire premise is a negative proof fallacy.

Answer 10

You fail to counter anything I put forth, as well as the text you wrote is mainly capturing the New Atheism movement not atheism itself.

@iRespect you blatantly wrong, as you have provided nothing that supports your statement of atheism being a religion.

Answer 11

Alright. So - I'm wrong? In one paragraph I talked about the New Atheism. Every religion has those characteristics (Faith - Preachers - Messiah - Prophets - Etc). If Atheism wasn't a religion then why would they have those things? I have provided everything that proves Atheism is indeed a religion, it's up to you to decide weather or not you agree or disagree. The proof and facts are there. May I ask a question? Are you an atheist?

Answer 12

Apologists frequently assert that atheism is a religion. Whether this is true or not depends greatly on what definitions of atheism and religion are being used. The argument is most effectively made against strong atheism, in which positive assertions are made that no gods exist, but even in that case there are real problems with applying the label of religion to something that is explicitly denying a central belief of almost all religions. Further muddying the issue is the purely legal notion that, for the purposes of the First Amendment's free exercise clause, atheism should be considered a form of religion worthy of protection.

If you truly believe that there is no god, how is that different from believing that there is a god? Both are positions on a fundamentally religious question that must ultimately rest on faith. Therefore, atheism is just another form of religion.

Frequently, atheism is equated to religion by using non-differentiating definitions, meaning, aspects of a concept that do not distinguish the concept from others, are used for comparison. For example:

- Religion is a group of people.
- Atheists are a group of people.
- Therefore, atheism is a religion.

Now that religion is based on groups of people, everything from baseball teams to people sitting in a waiting room, are now religions. Few would find the argument compelling: "Oranges are made of matter. Stars are made of matter. Therefore, oranges are kinds of stars." Whether something is made of matter is not what distinguishes a star from a non-star. Other non-distinguishing comparisons that commonly come up:

- Getting together in groups / socializing
- Having a set of beliefs
- Having tax-exempt status
- Having a belief about gods
- Voicing our concerns/opinions ("proselytizing" or "evangelizing")

While most religions do these things, they aren't religions because of these aspects - but rather by a set of attributes that distinguish it from other concepts, such as belief in supernatural events or beings.

"If I'm not buying what you're selling, it doesn't mean I'm selling something else."

According to dictionary.com, the primary definition of religion is: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

There's a lot of wiggle room in those "especially"s and "usually"s. Does atheism (strong or not) consider the universe as a creation of superhuman agency? Of course not; just the opposite (in that atheists do not believe in such a superhuman agent in the first place). Must atheism in all cases involve devotional and ritual observance? No. Must atheism in all cases prescribe a moral code? No. Of course, there are systems of morality that atheists would be comfortable calling their own (see the article on secular morality), but atheism in itself does not suggest which moral system one should follow.

More to the point, is atheism a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe? No. Atheism is a lack of one specific belief, not a set of beliefs. Even strong atheism is simply a position on one particular issue: there is no god. Thus, even assuming strong belief in this point, that doesn't say anything at all about the actual cause, nature or purpose of the universe, except in the negative ("it's not God").

Some people claim that atheism is a religion based on later definitions of the word, such as: something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: [for example] to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

Technically, atheism could be considered a religion in this sense, but this wanders very far from what theists imply when they call atheism a religion, and can thus be considered equivocation. As the entry itself mentions, under this definition "fighting prejudice" is a religion. If this is true, then so are capitalism, football, and Star Trek. It is surely not much of an insult to be included under such a broad definition. (On the other hand, many religious people would likely be insulted if this were taken to be the only meaning of the term when applied to their own religion!) Atheism would be a religion in the same sense that golf is a religion but not in the sense that Catholicism is a religion.

If atheism is a religion, then... (or: Atheism is a religion like...)

...not collecting stamps is a hobby.
...not playing golf is a sport.
...not believing 13 is unlucky is a superstition.
...bald is a hair color.
...nudity is an outfit.
...off is a TV station.
...being healthy is a disease.

Words are hidden inferences. By calling atheism a religion, the person wants to come to some conclusion using a syllogism such as:

Religions force people to wear silly hats.
Atheism is a religion.
Therefore, atheism forces people to wear silly hats.

These syllogisms don't work. Humans have ten fingers; but if I lose a finger in a chainsaw accident, I am still a human.

Since you are talking about a very specific instance, there's no need to go through the generalization for any specific questions about atheism. However, this might have come up when the atheist in the conversation made a point about religion. In this case, talk about the specific aspect of religions that fits your argument, and stop using the word 'religion' (or synonyms). For example, when saying that religion is harmful, you might want to switch to saying that dogmatic movements are harmful -- an argument that might exclude a small number of religions and include some political movements used in dictatorships.

Answer 13

Again you attempt to change the definition of religion.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/religion
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion

All credited and respected dictionaries disagree with you.

Answer 14

Again - you don't fully read what I said. I'm not changing the definition of religion. There are many definitions for each term including Religion and Atheism. I've studied world religion for over 5 years and I'm still in the process of studying. The reason YOU don't believe Atheism is a religion is probably because you are an atheist yourself. Which would completely make sense.

Answer 15

1. Um, all academic fields do not associate religion with atheism.
2. There is ONE definition of religion. (That is accredited academically.)
3. I am not an atheist, as I have stated in my posts, which most likely you do not read.

Conclusion:
Atheism does not fit the bill to be a religion.

Answer 16

\(\Large\cal\color{magenta}{Athiesm~Is~A~Religion!~Case~Dismissed.}\)

Answer 17

I once thought there was a limit to how far bigotry could go, seems I am wrong.

Answer 18

it's like talking to a wall