Why are Atheists proud?

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

I'm proud, but not to the point of arrogance. I'm glad I have the ability to defeat just about any theist in a debate. Instead of being hidden from evidence, like I once was, I'm eager to examine it and use it; it's quite amazing now.

Chrypt22

I am more of a string theorist christian if that makes any sense. Im just curious how you can disprove a faith, you cant disprove a faith nor can anyone prove it. You say you are not arrogant, though you claim to be able to prove things you cant. Someone saying its true because the Bible or whatever says so is trying to prove something on faith... its not evidence. Just as I would expect you would cite the evolutionary process and probably the big bang theory which I believe in, though it still does not disprove god.

I claim to prove things I can't? Where did you see that in my post? I can't disprove faith? Sure, but that gives it no credibility. I really don't know what you're trying to say, honestly. One last point: One does not "believe" in the evolutionary process. One can only accept or deny it, for it's based on factual evidence.

Astrapsody

What...I don't even. I think you got the names mixed up. We're still working on String Theory; don't act like it has any serious credibility to it. Energy put out is "nothing". What?

Thoughts affect water molecules. You say it's been proven, but people don't know why. I'm not trying to sound condescending, but I think that post was fail.

The string theory doesnt have seriouscredibility?? You serious or making a joke?

Maybe I should be a little clearer on my point, I was insinuating that there are other forces at work that we do not fully understand, be it the string theory or whatever and to prove that point I used that thoughts do emit a type of energy that has been proven to affect water molecules. Why that is of significane is because 60% of the human body is water... hopefully you can make the connection from there.

[QUOTE="Chrypt22"]

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

I'm proud, but not to the point of arrogance. I'm glad I have the ability to defeat just about any theist in a debate. Instead of being hidden from evidence, like I once was, I'm eager to examine it and use it; it's quite amazing now.

Astrapsody

I am more of a string theorist christian if that makes any sense. Im just curious how you can disprove a faith, you cant disprove a faith nor can anyone prove it. You say you are not arrogant, though you claim to be able to prove things you cant. Someone saying its true because the Bible or whatever says so is trying to prove something on faith... its not evidence. Just as I would expect you would cite the evolutionary process and probably the big bang theory which I believe in, though it still does not disprove god.

I claim to prove things I can't? Where did you see that in my post? I can't disprove faith? Sure, but that gives it no credibility. I really don't know what you're trying to say, honestly. One last point: One does not "believe" in the evolutionary process. One can only accept or deny it, for it's based on factual evidence.

You said "I can defeat just about any theist in a debate." I am saying you can't nor can he defeat you. Debating someones faith is an argument no one wins. You say you use the evidnce you were once hidden from, I took that to mean that there is evidence that disproves someones faith and I am saying there is no evidence that disproves it... so your basically making s*** up. Nor can a Theist prove you wrong on the same basis...

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

Chrypt22

What...I don't even. I think you got the names mixed up. We're still working on String Theory; don't act like it has any serious credibility to it. Energy put out is "nothing". What?

Thoughts affect water molecules. You say it's been proven, but people don't know why. I'm not trying to sound condescending, but I think that post was fail.

The string theory doesnt have seriouscredibility?? You serious or making a joke?

Maybe I should be a little clearer on my point, I was insinuating that there are other forces at work that we do not fully understand, be it the string theory or whatever and to prove that point I used that thoughts do emit a type of energy that has been proven to affect water molecules. Why that is of significane is because 60% of the human body is water... hopefully you can make the connection from there.

Of course there are other forces at work! That's what science constantly aims to do; to understand these forces. Saying God did it because we don't understand that force yet is ridiculous. And no, it doesn't have any serious credibility; at least not yet. It's still a work in progress in the scientific community.

Okay, so I'll (for the sake of argument) say that thoughts affect water molecules. So? In what way? What significance does this have?

I'm proud, but not to the point of arrogance. I'm glad I have the ability to defeat just about any theist in a debate. Instead of being hidden from evidence, like I once was, I'm eager to examine it and use it; it's quite amazing now.

Astrapsody

How do you know you can defeat almost any theist in a debate? I'm sure you may know only a handful of theists that are living. I'm sure you do not know even close to half of them so then how do you know you have this ability todefeat most?

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

[QUOTE="Chrypt22"]

I am more of a string theorist christian if that makes any sense. Im just curious how you can disprove a faith, you cant disprove a faith nor can anyone prove it. You say you are not arrogant, though you claim to be able to prove things you cant. Someone saying its true because the Bible or whatever says so is trying to prove something on faith... its not evidence. Just as I would expect you would cite the evolutionary process and probably the big bang theory which I believe in, though it still does not disprove god.

Chrypt22

I claim to prove things I can't? Where did you see that in my post? I can't disprove faith? Sure, but that gives it no credibility. I really don't know what you're trying to say, honestly. One last point: One does not "believe" in the evolutionary process. One can only accept or deny it, for it's based on factual evidence.

You said "I can defeat just about any theist in a debate." I am saying you can't nor can he defeat you. Debating someones faith is an argument no one wins. You say you use the evidnce you were once hidden from, I took that to mean that there is evidence that disproves someones faith and I am saying there is no evidence that disproves it... so your basically making s*** up. Nor can a Theist prove you wrong on the same basis...

I'll simplify.

1) As a Christian, I was taught that certain scientific facts were false. I now no longer pursue evidence with this mindset, or any other bias. This makes me a better scientist. I neversaid I use this evidence to "disprove" someone's faith. It's not even necessary to disprove something for which there is no evidence.

2) I don't have to "disprove" someone's faith to defeat someone in an argument. As long as I make a point that they cannot refute, I consider it a "win".

3) A theist can't prove me wrong because I assert no claim.

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

I'm proud, but not to the point of arrogance. I'm glad I have the ability to defeat just about any theist in a debate. Instead of being hidden from evidence, like I once was, I'm eager to examine it and use it; it's quite amazing now.

stepnkev

How do you know you can defeat almost any theist in a debate? I'm sure you may know only a handful of theists that are living. I'm sure you do not know even close to half of them so then how do you know you have this ability todefeat most?

From my experience, I have been able to "defeat" most theists. I guess I should have said, any theist I know, sorry.

Why do I have to believe in an Invisible man in the sky that will condemn me to an eternity of fire, suffering, and anguish if I don't take the church at their word that he exists to be happy?

[QUOTE="Chrypt22"]

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

What...I don't even. I think you got the names mixed up. We're still working on String Theory; don't act like it has any serious credibility to it. Energy put out is "nothing". What?

Thoughts affect water molecules. You say it's been proven, but people don't know why. I'm not trying to sound condescending, but I think that post was fail.

Astrapsody

The string theory doesnt have seriouscredibility?? You serious or making a joke?

Maybe I should be a little clearer on my point, I was insinuating that there are other forces at work that we do not fully understand, be it the string theory or whatever and to prove that point I used that thoughts do emit a type of energy that has been proven to affect water molecules. Why that is of significane is because 60% of the human body is water... hopefully you can make the connection from there.

Of course there are other forces at work! That's what science constantly aims to do; to understand these forces. Saying God did it because we don't understand that force yet is ridiculous. And no, it doesn't have any serious credibility; at least not yet. It's still a work in progress in the scientific community.

Okay, so I'll (for the sake of argument) say that thoughts affect water molecules. So? In what way? What significance does this have?

Granted its not a theory that is widely accepted into the ranks of the scientific community because it is a very complex theory that is hard to grasp. Part of the theory that is under heavy scruntity is that the string theory in a way says it can prove outcomes on choice via dimensions. Weird stuff.

There is a guy named Masaru Emoto that studied the affects of thoughts on water molecules and found that if someone thought in a positive manner the molecules would align in a particular order. Positive thoughts were found to form the water into snowflake like arrangements where negative thoughts formed them into distorted blobs. Here is where the heavy part comes in, and this hasnt been proven, its just a theory. Assuming that the water molecules form in a certain way the body itself can react to that. Negative thoughts clearly affect the polarization so it could have a negative affect on the body and organs, which over time, could affect ones health.

Its funny, and this obviuosly does not prove anything but interesting none the less. I work with a guy thats about as negative as you can get, I have never heard him say one positive thing about anything, and he has been that way a loooonnnnggg time accordint to people taht are close to him. He looks about 10 years older, has serious health problems, and nothing right ever happens to him. On the other hand I work with a guy thats the opposite, he looks younger than he is, things tend to go well for him, and he has no health problems. Could the "attitude" of each of them affect how they are today health and life wise? I believe so... the whole notion behind this is a small part of the string theory...

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

I'm proud, but not to the point of arrogance. I'm glad I have the ability to defeat just about any theist in a debate. Instead of being hidden from evidence, like I once was, I'm eager to examine it and use it; it's quite amazing now.

stepnkev

How do you know you can defeat almost any theist in a debate? I'm sure you may know only a handful of theists that are living. I'm sure you do not know even close to half of them so then how do you know you have this ability todefeat most?

Well, because you arn't held down by beliefs you belive to be as false. And you also feel better because you can enjoy life with out having to conform to relgious views. Well, that's my perspective at least.

[QUOTE="Chrypt22"]

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

I claim to prove things I can't? Where did you see that in my post? I can't disprove faith? Sure, but that gives it no credibility. I really don't know what you're trying to say, honestly. One last point: One does not "believe" in the evolutionary process. One can only accept or deny it, for it's based on factual evidence.

Astrapsody

You said "I can defeat just about any theist in a debate." I am saying you can't nor can he defeat you. Debating someones faith is an argument no one wins. You say you use the evidnce you were once hidden from, I took that to mean that there is evidence that disproves someones faith and I am saying there is no evidence that disproves it... so your basically making s*** up. Nor can a Theist prove you wrong on the same basis...

I'll simplify.

1) As a Christian, I was taught that certain scientific facts were false. I now no longer pursue evidence with this mindset, or any other bias. This makes me a better scientist. I neversaid I use this evidence to "disprove" someone's faith. It's not even necessary to disprove something for which there is no evidence.

2) I don't have to "disprove" someone's faith to defeat someone in an argument. As long as I make a point that they cannot refute, I consider it a "win".

3) A theist can't prove me wrong because I assert no claim.

Fair enough, but that is easy. When I was young I was told that dinosaurs never existed because they were not in the bible and that the grand canyon was there because of the great flood.

Its easy to defeat someone of that belief based on factual evidence. However, a lot of Christians such as myself believe in hard science, which some say you cant believe in both. All Christians do not believe a certain way, there is a Christian based group called Science of Mind.. NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH SCIENTOLOGY... I have to make that point because its commonlygrouped with those people. They believe in hard science and faith...

You are correct that a theist cannot prove you wrong, but you do have a claim to some belief be it scientific or whatever.

[QUOTE="stepnkev"]

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

I'm proud, but not to the point of arrogance. I'm glad I have the ability to defeat just about any theist in a debate. Instead of being hidden from evidence, like I once was, I'm eager to examine it and use it; it's quite amazing now.

MgamerBD

How do you know you can defeat almost any theist in a debate? I'm sure you may know only a handful of theists that are living. I'm sure you do not know even close to half of them so then how do you know you have this ability todefeat most?

I'm shocked that you assume that beating someone in a debate means that I've "proven" my view right or theirs wrong. When I make points in an argument that they are unable to counter, I take it as a victory. Does it mean I'm right or their wrong? Of course not. I'd be stupid to think so. I'm not arrogant because I don't parade around claiming to have the right view, and you stating otherwise is somewhat insulting to my nature.

[QUOTE="PistolGripPump"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

Atheism isn't a religion. It's just someone who does not believe in god. Not everyone has the same reason for not believing, so it's hard to group all them into one category.

Wolf-Man2006

"Religion - A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."

Atheists do not believe in the supernatural, they cannot be considered a religion. Atheism should be best considered as a philosophy

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

[QUOTE="Chrypt22"]

You said "I can defeat just about any theist in a debate." I am saying you can't nor can he defeat you. Debating someones faith is an argument no one wins. You say you use the evidnce you were once hidden from, I took that to mean that there is evidence that disproves someones faith and I am saying there is no evidence that disproves it... so your basically making s*** up. Nor can a Theist prove you wrong on the same basis...

Chrypt22

I'll simplify.

1) As a Christian, I was taught that certain scientific facts were false. I now no longer pursue evidence with this mindset, or any other bias. This makes me a better scientist. I neversaid I use this evidence to "disprove" someone's faith. It's not even necessary to disprove something for which there is no evidence.

2) I don't have to "disprove" someone's faith to defeat someone in an argument. As long as I make a point that they cannot refute, I consider it a "win".

3) A theist can't prove me wrong because I assert no claim.

Fair enough, but that is easy. When I was young I was told that dinosaurs never existed because they were not in the bible and that the grand canyon was there because of the great flood.

Its easy to defeat someone of that belief based on factual evidence. However, a lot of Christians such as myself believe in hard science, which some say you cant believe in both. All Christians do not believe a certain way, there is a Christian based group called Science of Mind.. NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH SCIENTOLOGY... I have to make that point because its commonlygrouped with those people. They believe in hard science and faith...

You are correct that a theist cannot prove you wrong, but you do have a claim to some belief be it scientific or whatever.

Science requires no amount of faith or belief. It's purely factual. It must be tested, repeatedly, by many different people. I do accept the fact that one can be a person of faith and of science. I don't accept the fact that they can be used at the same time, it just doesn't work.

[QUOTE="Wolf-Man2006"]

[QUOTE="PistolGripPump"] Atheism IS a religion. Look at this link - http://www.mwillett.org/atheism/sects1.htm Notice the different sects of Atheism. Now take a look at Christianity - http://www.religioustolerance.org/christ7.htm Now take a look at how many separate sects are within. Now tell me why Atheism can't be a religion because of your statement?12345678ew

"Religion - A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."

Atheists do not believe in the supernatural, they cannot be considered a religion. Atheism should be best considered as a philosophy

[QUOTE="Wolf-Man2006"]

[QUOTE="PistolGripPump"] Atheism IS a religion. Look at this link - http://www.mwillett.org/atheism/sects1.htm Notice the different sects of Atheism. Now take a look at Christianity - http://www.religioustolerance.org/christ7.htm Now take a look at how many separate sects are within. Now tell me why Atheism can't be a religion because of your statement?12345678ew

"Religion - A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."

Atheists do not believe in the supernatural, they cannot be considered a religion. Atheism should be best considered as a philosophy

Atheism has nothing at all to do with accepting science, so I wouldn't use "we". It's simply a lack of a belief in the supernatural, as the above poster stated. One either accepts scientific fact or doesn't, there is no belief involved.

[QUOTE="12345678ew"][QUOTE="Wolf-Man2006"]

"Religion - A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."

Atheists do not believe in the supernatural, they cannot be considered a religion. Atheism should be best considered as a philosophy

Atheism has nothing at all to do with accepting science, so I wouldn't use "we". It's simply a lack of a belief in the supernatural, as the above poster stated. One either accepts scientific fact or doesn't, there is no belief involved.

Granted its not a theory that is widely accepted into the ranks of the scientific community because it is a very complex theory that is hard to grasp. Part of the theory that is under heavy scruntity is that the string theory in a way says it can prove outcomes on choice via dimensions. Weird stuff.

There is a guy named Masaru Emoto that studied the affects of thoughts on water molecules and found that if someone thought in a positive manner the molecules would align in a particular order. Positive thoughts were found to form the water into snowflake like arrangements where negative thoughts formed them into distorted blobs. Here is where the heavy part comes in, and this hasnt been proven, its just a theory. Assuming that the water molecules form in a certain way the body itself can react to that. Negative thoughts clearly affect the polarization so it could have a negative affect on the body and organs, which over time, could affect ones health.

Its funny, and this obviuosly does not prove anything but interesting none the less. I work with a guy thats about as negative as you can get, I have never heard him say one positive thing about anything, and he has been that way a loooonnnnggg time accordint to people taht are close to him. He looks about 10 years older, has serious health problems, and nothing right ever happens to him. On the other hand I work with a guy thats the opposite, he looks younger than he is, things tend to go well for him, and he has no health problems. Could the "attitude" of each of them affect how they are today health and life wise? I believe so... the whole notion behind this is a small part of the string theory...

Chrypt22

I don't know that all Athiests are proud, generalizations like that will always lead to misunderstanding. To me, there is no reason not to be proud of being a rational and curious thinker, which a lot of athiests are. Some might view a lack of belief or religious faith as being necessarily depressing, but others might argue it could be even more depressing to believe in a traditional fantasy that often attempts to dictate how one should live one's life but has no basis in science or fact and sometimes seems to result in over zealous people who attempt to inflict their beliefs on everyone else, and who ironically often do not practice what they preach.

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

[QUOTE="12345678ew"] we believe that the universe was created by the big bang or some other scientific explanation.mattbbpl

Atheism has nothing at all to do with accepting science, so I wouldn't use "we". It's simply a lack of a belief in the supernatural, as the above poster stated. One either accepts scientific fact or doesn't, there is no belief involved.

It's not replaced, definitely not now. We've established things in science that will not be refuted since they've been tested so much. Especially laws and many theories. It requires no amount of belief on my part to accept the theory of gravitation, the law of thermodynamics, and so forth since I have seen the evidence for these facts.

[QUOTE="scorch-62"][QUOTE="Vfanek"] I used to say "Butbut they do it too! They started!" back in the day. Though that was in pre-school. Vfanek

[QUOTE="Chrypt22"]

[QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

I'll simplify.

1) As a Christian, I was taught that certain scientific facts were false. I now no longer pursue evidence with this mindset, or any other bias. This makes me a better scientist. I neversaid I use this evidence to "disprove" someone's faith. It's not even necessary to disprove something for which there is no evidence.

2) I don't have to "disprove" someone's faith to defeat someone in an argument. As long as I make a point that they cannot refute, I consider it a "win".

3) A theist can't prove me wrong because I assert no claim.

Astrapsody

Fair enough, but that is easy. When I was young I was told that dinosaurs never existed because they were not in the bible and that the grand canyon was there because of the great flood.

Its easy to defeat someone of that belief based on factual evidence. However, a lot of Christians such as myself believe in hard science, which some say you cant believe in both. All Christians do not believe a certain way, there is a Christian based group called Science of Mind.. NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH SCIENTOLOGY... I have to make that point because its commonlygrouped with those people. They believe in hard science and faith...

You are correct that a theist cannot prove you wrong, but you do have a claim to some belief be it scientific or whatever.

Science requires no amount of faith or belief. It's purely factual. It must be tested, repeatedly, by many different people. I do accept the fact that one can be a person of faith and of science. I don't accept the fact that they can be used at the same time, it just doesn't work.

I am a little confused on your last sentence. If someone believes strictly in the bible and how things "are" and was created youre right, you cannot believe both at the same time. However, how life actually became what it is today on earth, even through evolution you can believe in both. Even though it can be explained in part by science there are still a lot of questions. If someone were to believe that a higher power influenced the evolutionary process that cannot be disproven. Granted it is not what you would believe in and that totally acceptable. I more believe that humans, and we are clearly not alone in this universe, are a small part in a very large puzzle that is connected in a way that we may never be able to figure out. Call it god, science or whatever... this notion that certainhumans of "insert faith"are the only one with an afterlife I think is nonsense.

To sound a little nutty, how many civilizations do you or anyone thinks there are in the universe? I would probably say hundreds of millions if not billions throughout the entire universe. A lot of people throughout all religions believe we are it and only the select few go to "heaven". It will be proven far in the future that life has existed/exists on other planets, and religion, even my faith, will really have to look at a wider picture. I say to them why would god be so arrogant just to allow "insert religion" into an afterlife? My whole problem with typical religion i.e. a lot ofBaptists for example (what I was raised in), believe if it wasnt written in theBible then its not true... sigh. There is no open minded-ness which I think why religion gets attacked quite a bit from Aethiests and others.

Anyways, my whole point is that religion as its still believed today in general does not fit in well with what we know as fact. Doesnt mean that its wrong, just means that things are much different than assumed.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="Astrapsody"]

Atheism has nothing at all to do with accepting science, so I wouldn't use "we". It's simply a lack of a belief in the supernatural, as the above poster stated. One either accepts scientific fact or doesn't, there is no belief involved.

Astrapsody

It's not replaced, definitely not now. We've established things in science that will not be refuted since they've been tested so much. Especially laws and many theories. It requires no amount of belief on my part to accept the theory of gravitation, the law of thermodynamics, and so forth since I have seen the evidence for these facts.

I don't have as much faith that our current, limited perception of reality won't invalidate some of our current theories. Discredited theories that were once widely accepted are a dime a dozen.

[QUOTE="Chrypt22"]

Granted its not a theory that is widely accepted into the ranks of the scientific community because it is a very complex theory that is hard to grasp. Part of the theory that is under heavy scruntity is that the string theory in a way says it can prove outcomes on choice via dimensions. Weird stuff.

There is a guy named Masaru Emoto that studied the affects of thoughts on water molecules and found that if someone thought in a positive manner the molecules would align in a particular order. Positive thoughts were found to form the water into snowflake like arrangements where negative thoughts formed them into distorted blobs. Here is where the heavy part comes in, and this hasnt been proven, its just a theory. Assuming that the water molecules form in a certain way the body itself can react to that. Negative thoughts clearly affect the polarization so it could have a negative affect on the body and organs, which over time, could affect ones health.

Its funny, and this obviuosly does not prove anything but interesting none the less. I work with a guy thats about as negative as you can get, I have never heard him say one positive thing about anything, and he has been that way a loooonnnnggg time accordint to people taht are close to him. He looks about 10 years older, has serious health problems, and nothing right ever happens to him. On the other hand I work with a guy thats the opposite, he looks younger than he is, things tend to go well for him, and he has no health problems. Could the "attitude" of each of them affect how they are today health and life wise? I believe so... the whole notion behind this is a small part of the string theory...

BumFluff122

Granted, but parts of the theory, or hypothesis, have been proven. The string theory, god theory, theory of everything... its called different things. Anyways, youre right, until we get much more advanced in quatum mechanics and even heavier quatum chromodynamics it will bedifficult to prove the bulk of it.

Granted, but parts of the theory, or hypothesis, have been proven. The string theory, god theory, theory of everything... its called different things. Anyways, youre right, until we get much more advanced in quatum mechanics and even heavier quatum chromodynamics it will bedifficult to prove the bulk of it.

Chrypt22

Seriously, I would think that not beleiving in anything is depressing.

I am not trying to troll, mock out Atheist's way of thinking or undermine them in any way. Just looking for an answer.

turtlethetaffer

Yeah, I agree. Not having anything to look forward when you die? It seems like a bummer to me. I'd be depressed all the time :(

Athiests reject God. Nothing to be proud of.basia77

I'm not proud to be an Atheist no more than I am proud to be an eater of toast in the morning; I'm simply an Atheist because there is no proof of god's existence and I find organized religion abhorrent.

Atheism != nihilism...spazzx625

Athiests reject God. Nothing to be proud of.basia77

...but they're rebels. Rebels can be proud, right? ;_;scorch-62

[QUOTE="scorch-62"]...but they're rebels. Rebels can be proud, right? ;_;Genetic_Code

You must hang around some vocal atheists.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I almost never tell people I work with, or general acquaintances of mine, that I'm atheist because I don't want to be labeled as such. To me it's not an issue one way or the other. I think most people just want to be treated equally and with respect. I could care less what people believe in, as long as they are not pushing it on me.
The worst is when someone who is a theist finds out, and they then assume that you are not capable doing or knowing what is 'good', as if I'm lacking morality.
I then just ask them this:
Who is the more pious person: those who do good for the sake of doing good, or those who do good because they are afraid of the wrath of an omnipotent father figure?
I tell you what, I donate several hours each week to charity, and I have automatic fund withrawls from my paycheck to 3 different charities, far more than most of my god fearing brethren.
I don't do this for the sake of appeasment, or for acknkowledgement from others(most of my friends don't even know I do this). I do it because I feel sympathy and can empathise with others in unfortunate situations.

Because they think they are right and don't have the moral code to not be a dick to everybody who believes differently.

Flame Shield: Equipped

It's the same concept with nationality; are you proud of your nationality? both are central elements that define and imply who you are.

Athiests reject God. Nothing to be proud of.basia77

People have pride for many reasons - some of which may seem incredibly silly and/or outlandish to others. Theists and atheists alike....

That said, I do not consider my state of belief to be an achievement borne out of my own capacity save my logical skills and/or personal circumstances. In that regard, I'm not proud of being an Atheist, just as I'm not proud of being Chinese, being a Malaysian Citizen, being part of a family capable of supporting itself or being a relatively functional human in biological respects. I would think pride reasonable in a situation where I built a strong house or brought a thousand people out of poverty, but not reasonable just because of my perception of the universe.

[QUOTE="basia77"]Athiests reject God. Nothing to be proud of.Gunslinger_1988

God is more or less an idea; a concept. You can reject God in that sense.

[QUOTE="Gunslinger_1988"][QUOTE="basia77"]Athiests reject God. Nothing to be proud of.Astrapsody

God is more or less an idea; a concept. You can reject God in that sense.

[QUOTE="spazzx625"]Atheism != nihilism...hillelslovak

Athiests reject God. Nothing to be proud of.basia77

And really... I thought pride was one of the SEVEN DEADLY SINS (*ominous music*)

I would also like to mention that atheists do not reject "God," they reject the theist claim that "there is a God." Most atheists are open to the idea of there being a God, but just don't have enough reason to accept that there is one.

As has been stated before, you are mistaking Atheism for Nihilism, and that kind of religious superiority complex is one of the many reasons I am an atheist. Do you really think there is no source of truth or intrinsic good besides religion? What then is Humanism, Ethical Behavior, and Morality? That is simply not true.