Hi, I'm new, and want to bounce some ideas around

I think atheism being called a belief system when there is no spirituality and religious devotion is fine. It'd be just as fine to compare it to philosophy when it excludes complete religious belief. Calling atheism a dogma is a good middle ground.

I think about my place in the world. I think about morals. I think about my relations to others. I think about how we got here. I think about why we are here. Is that existential?

I'm an atheist who has spirituality, but not in a religious manner. I define spirituality as a feeling that comes about as the result of brain chemistry and environment. And I do not fear death because I feel it will bring peace, which I define as a lack of pain, excitement, happiness- an euphenism for complete nothingness.

My dogma does in itself does not bring me misery. I'm unhappy because of life and mental illness. See, there are more variables to life than dogma. An environment can make an atheist unhappy, due to a lack of acceptance and attacks on their dogma.

Why do some atheist attack religion and religious people? For the same reasons some religious people attack atheist. It definitly isn't a one way street. I've personally had to deal with attacks on my belief. I've also seem people denied rights due to their conflict with the majority of believers (homosexuals for example). This is despite a seperation of church from state.
I don't attack religious ones and systems too much. I have religious friends and family. I need to speak my mind though.

shutin wrote:I think atheism being called a belief system when there is no spirituality and religious devotion is fine. It'd be just as fine to compare it to philosophy when it excludes complete religious belief. Calling atheism a dogma is a good middle ground.

Atheism is a lack of belief. It does not define what that person actually believes in. To call it a dogma is inaccurate because it is not an ideology or religious belief. Choosing not to believe in A doesn’t automatically mean you believe in B. What atheists believe varies greatly. There is no doctrine. It simply depends on what that individual believes.

I think about my place in the world. I think about morals. I think about my relations to others. I think about how we got here. I think about why we are here. Is that existential?

I’m sure everyone wonders about these things from both a scientific and philosophical point of view.

Why do some atheist attack religion and religious people? For the same reasons some religious people attack atheist. It definitly isn't a one way street. I've personally had to deal with attacks on my belief. I've also seem people denied rights due to their conflict with the majority of believers (homosexuals for example). This is despite a seperation of church from state.
I don't attack religious ones and systems too much. I have religious friends and family. I need to speak my mind though.

This is definitely a two way street. When people attempt to enact legislation based on religious beliefs or make severely bad choices because of religion, others are going to react. In Minnesota a family used their religious beliefs to deny their son treatments for a very curable form of cancer, the push to teach creationism alongside biology threatens are intellect as a nation (we place very poorly compared to other countries in science and math.), and numerous attempts have been made to sign laws based on religious dogma. The refusal to marry those of different races was partly based in religious ideology just as homosexuality is today.

We make decisions based on our belief systems. It’s one thing if people did no harm and respected each other’s beliefs equally, but that doesn’t happen and in some cases it shouldn’t happen. So this is why people become hostile towards one another.

Dogma does not have to be religious in nature, dogma can refer to a group belief. I can believe something without it being a religion. Belief means acceptance of an idea or an opinion just as much as it means religious conviction. I believe their is no god.
Other people share the view that their is no god, therefore their is a group belief or dogma that there is no god. I do not believe god exists, but I can believe other things instead. Also, there are different forms of religion in general and branches of a Christianity. I can believe in Christ without believing in the necessity of Baptism. Buddists also show belief without having a god, aside from Buddhist who believe Buddha was a god. It isn't, believe in god or nothing.
Theism is defined as a belief in god, so a person can still be a religious atheist if they have a belief in the supernatural (reincarnation or spirits for example).

It is tragic that people will not help their kin due to religion, and that wars may be fought over religion.

On a side note, someone once said I could not be an atheist and an agnostic. What views are there on that?
For instance, I believe their is no god, but I can not prove it, therefor I do not know it. I find it a useful way of saying I lean towards a side without denying it.

shutin wrote:Dogma does not have to be religious in nature, dogma can refer to a group belief. I can believe something without it being a religion. Belief means acceptance of an idea or an opinion just as much as it means religious conviction. I believe their is no god.
Other people share the view that their is no god, therefore their is a group belief or dogma that there is no god.

From the dictionary:

1. a system of principles or tenets, as of a church.
2. a specific tenet or doctrine authoritatively laid down, as by a church: the dogma of the Assumption.
3. prescribed doctrine: political dogma.
4. a settled or established opinion, belief, or principle.

The problem with refering to atheism as dogma is that we're not talking about a belief per se. We're talking about a lack of belief. There are hard atheists who definitively believe there is no god. There are also atheists who simply reject the claim based on a lack of evidence, but don't claim to know with absolute certainty.

As you have pointed out, you can be atheist and still believe in the supernatural. Buddhists are an example of this. So is the belief in ghosts or reincarnation. There is an assumption that if you're an atheist, you believe in nothing or nothing without empirical evidence. This is not entirely true as we can see here. It would seem the only thing shared among atheists is a lack of belief, as what they do believe will vary wildly from person to person.

On a side note, someone once said I could not be an atheist and an agnostic. What views are there on that?

For instance, I believe their is no god, but I can not prove it, therefor I do not know it. I find it a useful way of saying I lean towards a side without denying it.

I'm not sure it's up to you to prove a negative. You're not the one making a claim for God's existence, so the burden of proof is not on you. If I'm not sure that something exists, do I believe in it? No. I do not have belief, but that doesn't automatically mean I have certainty in the other direction.

It's my understanding that Agnosticism refers to whether God is knowable. You can be an agnostic atheist and an agnostic theist. It's not an issue of belief, but knowledge of God.