Because we can?
I don't get this. If you had some enlightenment and decided that God does not exist more power for you. Why do you feel the need to shove that enlightenment down our throats? Its quite ironic since one of the main arguments atheists have against theists is how they're constantly preaching about God and telling people what and what not to believe in. Yet we're having this topic, just like we've had it for a gazillion time whether on the Internet or in real life. I thought the whole idea of atheism is the absence of a belief in a deity and the subsequent complete disregard for the topic of religion altogether, unless you're a scholar or a theologian which is highly doubtful. I thought preaching is left for the clergy.
I'm not attacking atheism or atheists here, its simply a matter of principle and being consistent. The "doctrine" of atheism revolves around the notion of the complete and utter disbelief and disregard of a wholly unfounded and fictional concept: religion that seeks to establish the fact of the existence of an almighty and omnipotent God that created everything and will take it all back. If the doctrine is about that, how is it possible, for its adherents, with the exception of scholars and theologians of atheist origins, to initiate religious debates and quarrels? I'm not sure if my point is getting through, but can't you see the redundancy and dissonance in it? For an atheist of a firm, rational and well-founded affiliation with atheism, starting any sort of conversation or discussion on religion is like starting a debate on unicorns.
Besides that, what are we trying to achieve? We're obviously not going to convince you otherwise and the same goes to you. Let's just shut up, mind our own business and wait until each one of us finds out for himself eventually.
Log in to comment