re: #214 redc1c4

if you have an absence of belief, you are an agnostic. if you are sure there is no god, and you are willing to argue about it, your religion is atheism, and, at the basic level, you’re the same as any other religious believer. claiming to be for “religious freedom” while using that claim to eradicate any and all mentions of other established religions in public life is intellectually dishonest.

Ah. It’s a confusion of terms then.

I usually refer to this chart when I talk about atheism and agnosticism. I understand that a lot of people consider it a linear scale from theist - agnostic - atheist, but I think there’s a strong case for the separation in two axes made by the chart. I know a lot of atheists who agree that it better represents what they intend. The “weak” and “strong” atheism (and theism) terms have existed independently of this illustration, and I think it’s as unfair to claim all atheists are “strong atheists” as it is to say Deism is the same thing as Christianity.

Realizing that people who call themselves atheist in the literalist sense (not-theist) fit pretty much in your “agnostic” view can save both you & others a lot of flared emotions & discussion. :)

I would like to think this viewpoint can be put forth as any philosophical viewpoint, without falling into “religion”.

As for your second claim, I agree to some extent. However, I think that letting public life have a neutral ground of secularism is a good rule of thumb (I really hope you don’t think secularism is some atheist agenda also). Note that I’m from Sweden, where (generally) your beliefs are your business.