Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article

from Rain Child Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 04:30 (Agree/Disagree?) Anyone still interested in the subject of labels, check it out: http://beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html (reply to this comment)

From AndyH Saturday, August 05, 2006, 10:48 (Agree/Disagree?) I've taken that before, it's mildly amusing. The results may surprise you if you are unsure about your belief stance. If you have a pretty good idea where you stand, you needn't bother with it. I am a Secular Humanist. I've been one for quite some time now , I just hadn't heard what it so well defined. Odds are many of you could also consider yourselves Secular Humanists. If you agree with all or just most of the points of Secluar Humanism. Check it out. http://secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration(reply to this comment)

From Rain Child Sunday, August 06, 2006, 03:07 (Agree/Disagree?) Although I recently declared myself a Humanist (See a few articles down on this page) I was surprised when I took the test to come out as a Liberal Quaker, (Quaker? Me? shock-Horror-Gasp-I'd rather-not-know) and some kind of Unitarian Universal something or other! I only came out 70% Secular Humanist, so who really knows?(reply to this comment)

From AndyH Sunday, August 06, 2006, 09:41 (Agree/Disagree?) Yeah, I'm %100 Unitarian universalism? WTF? Isn't that the moonies? Anyway, I'll trust my %99 Secular Humanism, thank you very much. (reply to this comment)

From Rain Child Sunday, August 06, 2006, 20:32 (Agree/Disagree?) I think the Moonies might be, "Unification", but I can't really remember.(reply to this comment)

From Rain Child Sunday, August 06, 2006, 14:12 (Agree/Disagree?) Maybe the Unitarians made this test, and they put everyone at 100% Unitarians, kind of like the Scientologists do their weird testing, maybe you know how Berg used to say, "Do you believe in Love? Then you believe in God!" (reply to this comment)

From AndyH Sunday, August 06, 2006, 17:58 (Agree/Disagree?) Do you like ice cream? Then you believe in GOd!(reply to this comment)

From Megagroan Sunday, August 06, 2006, 18:17 (Agree/Disagree?) Check this link out: http://godwillkillyou.ytmnd.com/(reply to this comment)

From AndyH Sunday, August 06, 2006, 18:39 (Agree/Disagree?) Yes, God is love, and as we learned from OJ, sometimes you love someone so much you have to kill them. (reply to this comment)

From Rain Child Sunday, August 06, 2006, 18:34 (Agree/Disagree?) Where do you find this shit?(reply to this comment)

From Rain Child Sunday, August 06, 2006, 18:14 (Agree/Disagree?) Yeah, precisely. Then it follows on to, "And the BEST way to believe in love and God and all things good and beautiful like sex, etc..."(reply to this comment)

From Ne Oublie Sunday, August 06, 2006, 14:35 (Agree/Disagree?) Well, I most certainly wasn't 100% Unitarian...(reply to this comment)

From AndyH Sunday, August 06, 2006, 18:00 (Agree/Disagree?) *hands noobly a cookie(reply to this comment)

From Rain Child Sunday, August 06, 2006, 14:00 (Agree/Disagree?) I couldn't find the article where we were discussing the 'rape' conversation on the Family Message Board, and I tried to post the 'only rapists can prevent rape' list. I couldn't figure out why I couldn't see my post, and I tried three times. well, this morning I found out why: Hello, Your message to the FamilyYouth group was not approved. The owner of the group controls the content posted to it and has the right to approve or reject messages accordingly. In this case, your message was automatically rejected because the moderator didn't approve it within 14 days. We do this to provide a high quality of service for our users. A complete copy of your message has been attached for your convenience. Thank you for choosing Yahoo! Groups Regards, Yahoo! Groups Customer Care So, I guess they don't want their boys to know they are responsible for their own actions?(reply to this comment)

From AndyH Sunday, August 06, 2006, 17:58 (Agree/Disagree?) Fuckers! My 2 worst enemies, TF and Yahoo. (reply to this comment)

from AndyH Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - 15:44 (Agree/Disagree?) After going back through the dictionary and re-reading the definitions, I've gotta say I'm with you Mia, the definitions are bullshit, and they really piss me off. Agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God. By that logic I could say that it's impossible to know whether my left testicle is the reincarnation of Mother Theresa. [RIP] They say "you can't prove there is no God." Check it out: I DON'T HAVE TO! The burden of proof is on the people that choose to believe the impossible. So I guess I'm not agnostic, but I've been told that Atheism is a religion. How? I'll tell you how. Because of this popular idea that everyone MUST fit in some religious category. Religion is the biggest flaw of humanity, please stop trying to assign it to me. I would like the word "atheist" to be defined uber-literally: A-THEIST: NO-THESIM: NO-RELIGION. If it were so, I might accept that label. Until then no label fits. (reply to this comment)

From vixen Thursday, July 20, 2006, 03:15 (Agree/Disagree?) Andy, the definition of atheism is the disbelief in or denial of the existence of a god, gods or a supreme intelligent being. This is a good enough definition for your purpose. Your problem with the label seems to be not its actual definition but the superfluous meanings other people attach to it. But I would venture to guess (and I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong) that most of the people who use the ol' 'atheism is a religion' line with you are in some way religious, and as such you really don't need to be concerned about their opinion, do you? If you've already established that they are, in your view, deficient enough to need the crutch of religion, why pay any attention to their feeble attempts at assigning you a religion? If they want to rationalise it that way, so what? Secondly, I take great offense to your assertion that agnosticism is a cop-out. I don't agree with you at all, in fact I think you are guilty of the very thing you say gets you so pissed off when other people do it - you are attaching a value to that term that is not necessarily correct. Maybe some people who identify themselves as agnostics are sitting on the fence, but I'm certainly not. I'll explain here exactly what I mean and why I have chosen, for the most part, to say that I am agnostic rather than atheist: I am actually what would be better defined, in purist terms, as an atheist, meaning that I don't believe in a god or gods. I don't believe in intelligent design. I don't believe in a reason or purpose to life other than what we ourselves choose to invest it with. I don't believe in an afterlife. I don't believe in ghosts, I don't believe in spirits, I don't believe in a 'benevolent universe', 'force of energy' or any other nebulous term for the same (The only thing I really dabble in that could be considered contradictory to this position is Astrology, but if you were to pin me down I would have to concede that it is really a load of old tosh). I am absolutely certain that I will never again rely on a faith-based belief system. I am one hundred percent opposed to the notion of a Higher Power and this is my final position on the issue. If you EVER hear me say that I have seen the light and testifying of my miraculous conversion, you must find yourself a copy of Nineteen Eighty-four and read it. Pay careful attention to the interrogation/programming experience that the subject of the book goes through and the rationalisation that is employed by his oppressors in convincing him of their superior position. When you read the ending paragraph of the book you'll find the only possible explanation for my conversion, were it ever to happen - You can be sure that if I have chosen to believe, I will have 'won the fight with myself', so to speak, and I will have become, truly, a most debased and pathetic creature. BUT I will NOT go so far as to say that I know for sure that there is absolutely no possibility of the existence of some kind of higher power. This is because I feel that it is a less than honest position to hold, intellectually. The fact is that NO ONE KNOWS for sure. The fact is that there is an infinitesimal chance that there might be something greater than us, that our human minds are incapable of comprehending. Rather than a complete denial of that chance, my stance on the issue is that the existence or non-existence of a god is of absolutely no consequence to me. It has no relevance to my life and therefore, I don't care. Since I don't care, I also don't care much about the need to categorise myself and choose a definitive label for my position. The only time I ever even think about it is when someone else brings it up, and my decision to affix myself a label is mainly for the benefit of others. And since it is mainly for their benefit, I really couldn't care less whether their definition of the label matches mine exactly. They're gonna think what they want anyway and it makes no difference to me. And now that I think about it, it follows quite logically that I'm not actually that bothered that you consider my choice of label a cop-out. Oh damn, that means that this whole episode of excessive wordiness has been a thoroughly pointless exercise! Dear me, whatever shall I do with myself. Hope you'll have a lovely day, luv :-) (reply to this comment)

From I should add that... Thursday, July 20, 2006, 04:29 (Agree/Disagree?) ...there is some legitimacy to the argument that atheism can be classed as a belief. In the absence of definitive proof either way, believing and not believing are simply extremes on the spectrum and one is no more conclusive than the other. This is not to say that the inability to disprove the existence of an intelligent being in any way proves its existence, and it is also very different to calling atheism a religion, which it most certainly is not. (reply to this comment)

From aaaaaand it's me again! Thursday, July 20, 2006, 05:26 (Agree/Disagree?) Yay for me, I have found me a label! As of today I am officially a nontheist. Isn't Wikipedia just the best?! (reply to this comment)

From Oh shit I'm not sure now Thursday, July 20, 2006, 05:37 (Agree/Disagree?) Should I be a nontheist or an agnostic nontheist, I just don't know. (reply to this comment)

From Rain Child Friday, July 21, 2006, 02:04 (Agree/Disagree?) I don't even want to know what I am. I sure as hell hope no-one ever asks me. I once saw one of those tickle tests, "Find out what religion you are" so I think it's a pretty common situation for people not to know what to call themselves. I took the damn test just for the hell of it (figured if a computer could tell me what I am then the whole thing really is bullshit) and it came out, "agnostic" which surprised me, because I don't consider myself quite bitter & twisted enough to be agnostic, but maybe I am. Just because I don't accept any of the theories which have been put forward so far doesn't mean the answer isn't out there somewhere. Whatever 'else' there is, I believe it's pretty individual, to do with the energies carried in the human spirit, so it would be different for each person...maybe. Anyway, I think spirituality is kind of like Quantum Physics - if you're into it and geeky enough you can go there,and it can be amazing for you, but it's not everyone's thing. I think for most of us you just know when you're centred and your life is in harmony, and then you're in the right spiritual place for you. It's not really about anyone else. Is there a label for my religion, Vixen?(reply to this comment)

From vixen Friday, July 21, 2006, 02:46 (Agree/Disagree?) Bitter, twisted? Moi??? Surely not! Jaded and angry, maybe just a little bit... ;-) Eh, I don't really think agnosticism can be automatically equated with bitterness. There are as many different reasons for espousing that particular group of views as there are individuals that do so, I should think. (reply to this comment)

From Hang on, I found it! Friday, July 21, 2006, 02:16 (Agree/Disagree?) I'm a HUMANIST! Woo Hoo! A Label! Though the dominant forms of humanism are agnostic (and typically reject the existence of a supernatural), not all forms of humanism are. However, humanism denies the importance of the supernatural in human affairs, regardless of whether or not it exists. In this way, humanism does not necessarily rule out some form of theism or deism, and there are many humanists who consider themselves religious, some of whom are members of (typically, liberal) religious organizations. What humanism clearly rejects is deference to supernatural beliefs in resolving human affairs, not necessarily the beliefs themselves. For that matter, agnosticism or atheism on its own doesn't necessarily entail humanism. Indeed, many different and incompatible philosophies are atheistic in nature. According to humanism, it is up to us to find the truth, not wait for it to be handed to us through revelation, mysticism, tradition, or anything else that is incompatible with the application of logic to the evidence. In demanding that we avoid blindly accepting unsupported beliefs, it supports scientific skepticism and the scientific method, rejecting authoritarianism and extreme skepticism, and rendering faith an unacceptable basis for action. Likewise, humanism asserts that knowledge of right and wrong is based on our best understanding of our individual and joint interests, rather than stemming from a transcendental or arbitrarily local source. That pretty much sums it up for me! (That was from the Wikipedia)(reply to this comment)

From vixen Wednesday, July 19, 2006, 15:47 (Agree/Disagree?) Sigh. How can a definition piss you off??? (reply to this comment)

From AndyH Wednesday, July 19, 2006, 15:49 (Agree/Disagree?) Don't tell me what I can be pissed off about!(reply to this comment)

From vixen Wednesday, July 19, 2006, 15:51 (Agree/Disagree?) Well I never! I don't recall telling you what you can or can't be pissed off about. (reply to this comment)

From AndyH Wednesday, July 19, 2006, 16:19 (Agree/Disagree?) I do believe your question was rhetorical, and it implied that it didn't make sense to be pissed at a definition. Since anger is an emotion, it doesn't really have to make sense, does it? Besides, I elaborately explained why I was pissed. (reply to this comment)

From vixen Wednesday, July 19, 2006, 16:48 (Agree/Disagree?) Okay, I'll give you that, dear. (reply to this comment)

from trix Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - 15:18 (Agree/Disagree?) As long as we're discussing labels, let's try, if we can, to properly define them. http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/agnostic (reply to this comment)

from solemn Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - 14:44 (Agree/Disagree?) Tell her what I tell the Jehovah’s Witnesses: If I wanted to know "anything" about your beliefs I would go to your church. (reply to this comment)

from loch Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - 13:22 (Agree/Disagree?) I get people trying to wittness to me all the time too. Now that I am set in what I believe, I find it easy to argue their stupid points. It's an adrenaline rush actualy. I do feel for you though, there is nothing like your own mother coming at you with that stuff. I know it leaves me with that sick feeling in my gut, the one that comes with knowing your own mother is insane. (reply to this comment)

From afflick Thursday, July 20, 2006, 06:26 (Agree/Disagree?) Since most Christians don't KNOW the bible (lower case intentional), it is easy for me to question their stock answers when they attack me. But, this is usually a furtile measure since Christianity is not based on logic but sheer belief. I cannot counterpoint blind faith. And about mothers...I have a similiar issue with mine, who still clings wildly to her religious zeal, even out of TFI. Looking at my mother with an adult perspective, I can see that she is mentally unstable in many aspects of her life, unwavering belief in Christ's personal interest in her life being only one of them. She doesn't have a lot of close friends, she is unable to focus long on topics that don't immediately affect her. She is spacey, disconnected...kinda strange. Every teenager thinks their mother is a wierdo, of course, but it was a revalation to me as a 31 year old to realize that she really was a bit of a freak.(reply to this comment)

From Don't tell Thursday, July 20, 2006, 15:58 (Agree/Disagree?) I would have to say that your last, paragraph sums up my mother perfectly. I feel a profound pity for her, and the fact that she lives her life in fear and denial. (reply to this comment)