A Secular Notion

knaveryabounds: videogameguru: I wish feminists would stop...

Wed, 15 May 2013 07:48:48 -0400

videogameguru:

I wish feminists would stop making women victims and men perpetrators. It’s annoying and doesn’t solve anything, not to mention that it perpetuates misandry and misogyny.

Is feminism the cause of domestic violence against men? No, it isn’t, but it’s the reason why so little is done about it.

Thank you, feminism.

The reason so little is done about female-on-male domestic violence is because it is very rarely reported.
Why is that?
Imagine the shame and public belittling a man would have to go through to report that he was being abused by his female partner.
Why the shame and public belittling?
Because this man wasn’t strong enough to ward of the violent outbursts of a woman.
Why is that shameful?
Because women are deemed weaker than men, and men are judged on their masculinity by how well they can keep women in line.
Why is that so?
Because a male-run society deems that men must be dominant in order for men to stay dominant.
How would feminism help domestic violence towards men?
By elevating women to the same standard as men, ideally the stigma of being abused by a female partner will atrophy. Recognizing that women can be just as abusive as men in a relationship will allow for equal protection for people of both sexes.
By blaming feminism for the lack of attention given to female-on-male domestic abuse, you are reinforcing the male-run societal structure that prevents female-on-male violence from being reported, and thusly, taken care of.
You have become the perpetrators of your own persecution.

Straying a bit from the core concept of my atheism blog to make an important point about feminism and the general idiocy of MRA’s

Electric Mayhem: Man there is so much hypocracy on this website. “How dare you laugh at...

Mon, 13 May 2013 08:36:11 -0400

Electric Mayhem: Man there is so much hypocracy on this website. “How dare you laugh at...:

popeahuntis:

Man there is so much hypocracy on this website.

“How dare you laugh at me for fetishising a TV show for young kids, oh you believe in [insert deity here]? then I shall mock you and think you’re an idiot”

I happily stand and fight for gender equality, racial equality etc. I’ve been on marches,…

A gentle reminder from the #atheism page that many people cannot differentiate between when someone attacks their religion and beliefs from a personal attack on themselves.

i.e. “The belief that eating the flesh and blood of someone— even symbolically, is absurd and disgusting” =/= an attack on a religious person. “You are an idiot if you think eating crackers and drinking wine will help you achieve anything,” = a personal attack.

A subtle, but important difference.

Oklahoma High School Has Ten Commandments Displays in Every Classroom… and One Atheist Student is Fighting Back

Sat, 11 May 2013 17:08:55 -0400

Oklahoma High School Has Ten Commandments Displays in Every Classroom… and One Atheist Student is Fighting Back:

flaxenpax:

This would be unbearable. I feel for the non-Christians. I went to the Christian News site to find their article on the matter and they wrote about a similar thing happening in Pennsylvania and this Pastor there gave this great quote about why this monument shouldn’t be moved.

“It’s just the principle of the thing that someone can come in and say something offends them and then have it moved,” Pastor Ewing Marietta of Liberty Baptist Church told the Pittsburgh Tribune. “We need to continue to stand with this.”

So when certain helicopter-parent groups come into schools to remove books or art or anything that they don’t agree with its okay but as soon as someone tries to adhere to the laws in this country, its an attack. Fucking bullshit.

I replied to the original article with the following:

The issue here is not that people want to “…not read the Ten Commandments,” it’s that a government institution is tacitly endorsing a certain religion by having them on display— in violation of the Establishment Clause. Imagine, if you will, that schools across the country decided to put up posters listing the tenets of Sharia Law. Would you stand for that? How about the tenets of Satanism? Both are religions, true and equal in the eyes of the government, and would have such things taken down immediately AND THE SAME MUST BE TRUE FOR CHRISTIAN ARTIFACTS AS WELL. This is a case of Christians bullying non-Christians for upsetting their privileged status quo and justifying it as responding to “oppression” or “A War on Christianity.” However, I’ll leave you with the wise words of Jon Stewart: “You’re confusing oppression with ‘not getting your way all the time.”

Cheers, all.

My National Television Premiere

Tue, 07 May 2013 02:28:25 -0400

Tonight at 9:00 PM on Investigation Discovery. “Nightmare Next Door,” Season 3 Episode 16 “Drinking with the Devil.”

I play a knife-wielding drifter suspected of murder.

Norway: 90% of all violent rapes in Oslo committed by Muslims

Mon, 06 May 2013 03:11:20 -0400

Norway: 90% of all violent rapes in Oslo committed by Muslims:

moralio:

In Oslo all sexual assaults (i.e assault rape committed under violence) involving rape in the past year has been committed by males of non-western background. This was the conclusion of a police report published today. This means that in every single rape assault in the last five years, where the rapist could be identified, he was a man of foreign origin.

http://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/norway-90-of-all-violent-rapes-in-oslo-committed-by-muslims/

Let us question the objectivity, neutrality, and intent of such articles from a website calling itself “the Muslim issue.”

infiltra1t0rn7: inb4 “X IS NOT A RELIGION” I critique this...

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:41:53 -0400

infiltra1t0rn7:

inb4 “X IS NOT A RELIGION”

I critique this study, as one person on one sidewalk for an unspecified amount of time does not encounter a large enough sample size in order to deduce these results. Also, the prompt does not necessarily ask people to donate based on their religion, but may be interpreted as to donate to which religion is perceived to care the most about the homeless (i.e. A Christian may donate money to the Buddist bowl because he thinks they’re more generous.)

All in all, a fun little graphic, but nothing to place any weight on.

Who be you? :U: Friendly reminder:

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:37:13 -0400

Who be you? :U: Friendly reminder::

the-kiku-honda-civic:

It’s okay to be atheist or agnostic.

It’s okay to be religious.

It’s okay to just be searching for a religion, finding one that’s right for you.

It’s not okay to degrade, insult, belittle, or mock a person based on their personal beliefs.

Being religious doesn’t necessarily make someone…

Another reminder that there is a stark difference between criticizing religion and criticizing the religious. Unfortunately, some of the religious have their identities so wholly wrapped up in the religion itself, they cannot identify the differences.

It took me a second to understand. Now I’m sad.

Sat, 20 Apr 2013 23:06:35 -0400

It took me a second to understand. Now I’m sad.

So...

Thu, 18 Apr 2013 21:23:33 -0400

knaveryabounds:

Apparently it’s “Ask an Atheist Day,” so I’m opening my inbox to any questions, comments, etc. regarding my atheism. Have at it!

What on Earth is this supposed to demonstrate? That only...

Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:20:20 -0400

What on Earth is this supposed to demonstrate? That only liberals and scientists get abortions? That atheists and liberals are the cause of homosexuality?

This chart means nothing because there’s no data upon which it was made. All you’ve posted is unfounded fear-mongering and demonizing tactics.

Devout Bioshock Infinite Player Demands & Receives Refund

Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:46:32 -0400

Devout Bioshock Infinite Player Demands & Receives Refund:

lurtzoforthanc:

Murder - OK
Abduction - OK
Destruction of the fabric of space and time - OK
Baptism - NOOOOOOOO!!!

My random thoughts: If there's "no such thing as God"

Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:56:16 -0400

My random thoughts: If there's "no such thing as God":

wolflover1994:

backyardskills:

wolflover1994:

Then I should every right to kill myself or start to self-harm right? Or no?

Sorry for being the idiot that I am and having a learning disability, I can’t understand what is being said up in the screenshot,so are you saying that I shouldn’t…

Nobody has the right to tell you what to do with your body but yourself.

However, there are people in the world who care about you, and I’m certain that there are people in the world you care about. I’d like you to imagine the fear, worry, and sadness you’d put them through if you started self-harming, or worse.

Please, before you do anything, please visit the sites or call the number listed below. This is your one life, and I want you to make the most of it.

NSPL: 1-800-273-8255
http://www.suicidehotlines.com
http://www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org
http://www.selfinjurysupport.org.uk
http://www.selfinjury.com/
1-800-DONTCUT

Or send me a message. I would love to talk to you.

Currently discussing why “In God We Trust” on US currency is a breach of the...

Fri, 12 Apr 2013 02:47:13 -0400

Currently discussing why “In God We Trust” on US currency is a breach of the Establishment Clause and an example of Christian privilege on Facebook. Does anyone have any short, concise examples of how these things are true, since my fully-rounded and detailed explanations don’t seem to be sinking in?

Should I post here?

Thu, 11 Apr 2013 02:44:23 -0400

christianengineer:

I know lots of different people use tumblr for lots of different things. Some people have said that since I post from a Christian perspective they don’t want to see my posts on the #atheist or #atheism tag, even if what I’m posting is related to that. Personally I enjoy discussions from people of various backgrounds, but I want to be respectful of everyone’s space. So what do you think? Should I continue to post under the #atheism tag (when it’s relevant), or just stay away?

Most atheists on #atheism don’t mind you posting here on two conditions:

1- You don’t start spouting anti-atheist nonsense, that’ll put you on the hit-list fairly quickly.

2- Be prepared for dissemination of your posts and ideas contrary to your own.

Mind, I don’t speak for everyone here, and there will always be one or two idiots who will try to get in your grill over simply being theistic, but on the whole if you’re willing to express and LISTEN TO ideas here in a calm, productive manner, I don’t see why anyone should have a problem with it.

Shades of Gray: Convenient Faith

Wed, 03 Apr 2013 22:31:33 -0400

Shades of Gray: Convenient Faith:

liberalchristian:

theneighborhoodatheist:

liberalchristian:

theneighborhoodatheist:

liberalchristian:

What we’ve arrived at, in this instance, are the very human flaws of subjectivity and confirmation bias. With humanity’s limited and flawed sensory input, even the most objective and accurate sets of data and evidence can be interpreted incorrectly, or be swayed by the biases of the interpreter.

However, the presence of these hindrances should be taken into account by those who are on the hunt for truth (theistic or otherwise) and hopefully we can acknowledge in ourselves the potential to be swayed by what we WISH to be true rather than what IS true.

And how does a human do that? I agree that there is such a thing as truth, and there are things in history that are ‘more likely to have occurred’ than other things, but most people today seem to feel that truth and facts are a matter of opinion. Or that since I speak on behalf of religion, everything I say is suspect, fact-wise.

All people WISH to be right. So on what grounds do you trust what anyone tells you, whether or not they agree with your position?

You discover who/what to trust based on the quality of the evidence and data they can provide to you. Even then, continue to question and analyze the evidence for yourself. Look for flaws or possible misinterpretations of data. Look for signs of confirmation bias and uncontrolled variables. Look for faulty logic in all it’s forms.

Above all, though, keep in mind that humanity’s body of knowledge isn’t a skyscraper being built up layer by layer, but rather a fantastic gem still being excavated from the quarry of discovery. The more we unearth, the more we can polish, refine, and update our information about it… And even the parts that have unearthed and polished need a good going-over with a fine whammy every now and then— if only to look for any flaws or imperfections to be removed.

squeakity: “being an atheist doesn’t mean you get to make fun of others’ beliefs.” well if you...

Wed, 03 Apr 2013 17:38:58 -0400

squeakity:

“being an atheist doesn’t mean you get to make fun of others’ beliefs.”

well if you don’t like your beliefs being laughed at then maybe you shouldn’t have such hilarious beliefs.

…all of my posts have been whittle down to two sentences.

Shades of Gray: Convenient Faith

Wed, 03 Apr 2013 13:55:12 -0400

Shades of Gray: Convenient Faith:

liberalchristian:

theneighborhoodatheist:

liberalchristian:

I think one of the strangest questions I’ve seen is: “I can live without religion, so why can’t religious people?” Well, of course they can. I could. I have before, and even now, it’s it not like I spend 24/7 thinking about Christianity. (I have to sleep sometimes).

But I believe in it- so why…

Belief is not a choice; it is a reaction to the evidence presented to you and whether or not it is powerful and coherent enough to overcome any bias.

Using myself as an example, I would love to see evidence of paranormal activities such as ghosts, cryptozoological beasts, or even quite-powerful sentient entities. However, I’ve yet to find or be presented with any evidence that would overcome my skepticism towards the existence of the items listed above. I cannot choose to believe in ghosts, I don’t believe in ghosts.

However, if I may don my Atheist Hat here, I find that beliefs can be indirectly decided upon by purposeful ignorance. If a Christian reads no literature that questions or contradicts their belief structure, or ignores anyone who points out the inherent flaws and contradictions in the faith itself, they are choosing to remain ignorant of dissent and alternative points of view in lieu of the bliss that said ignorance brings.

Oddly enough, (and to bring this post full-circle) as a matter of belief not being a choice when one actively searches for evidence and alternate sources, the majority of atheists have studied the religion they were brought up in which led to their unbelief in the religion/deity they were raised with!

So the question becomes: When someone says that they “choose” to be a Christian, atheist, or any of the innumerable titles and categories given to people by our society— is the person admitting to purposeful ignorance by avoiding evidence contrary to what makes them comfortable, or are they simply unaware of the existence of evidence outside of their current set of knowledge?

An interesting question, and I wonder that sometimes myself. But the vast majority of people, believers OR atheist, ignore ANY evidence that’s contrary to what they already believe to be true. Even if a non-believer claims to have read the bible, it’s rarely true that they’ve also read counter-arguments to the common objections about the bible. Even if a believer claims to have heard atheist arguments, they rarely consider those of greater or equal weight to their faith… that’s just human nature.

But when it comes to a belief in God, I think it’s a lot more simple than that. I know alternative theories for my own experiences with the divine, but I have no evidence that any of them are more correct than my own interpretation- and no one else does, either. It’s impossible that they do. An atheist would come to a different conclusion, and no argument I could offer would convince them otherwise(I’ve tried!) UNTIL they found belief themselves. All the religious arguments that follow are simply justification of a very basic question: Does God(or the divine) exist or not? Once you answer that, all other evidence follows in response.

I’m just skeptical that anyone in history, ever, has taken a neutral or non-biased look at the evidence for faith- especially their own.

What we’ve arrived at, in this instance, are the very human flaws of subjectivity and confirmation bias. With humanity’s limited and flawed sensory input, even the most objective and accurate sets of data and evidence can be interpreted incorrectly, or be swayed by the biases of the interpreter.

However, the presence of these hindrances should be taken into account by those who are on the hunt for truth (theistic or otherwise) and hopefully we can acknowledge in ourselves the potential to be swayed by what we WISH to be true rather than what IS true.

Carpe Diem.: I think I may have to explain myself and what it really is to be a...

Wed, 03 Apr 2013 04:25:50 -0400

Carpe Diem.: I think I may have to explain myself and what it really is to be a...:

pickwickish:

I think I may have to explain myself and what it really is to be a Christian.

From the outset of this post, I can tell you that you are about to commit the “True Scotsman Fallacy” in which when someone in your group does something you find unpleasant, you denounce them as “Not a TRUE ‘x’.” The only criteria for someone to be a Christian is to believe in the god of the Bible and the divinity of Jesus Christ. If anyone fulfills those two points, they are a Christian, whether or not you accept them as one or not.

If you think mature Christian believers are very defensive and denies almost everything science explains, then you’re wrong. I may be devoted in serving my religion but I still open my mind to science. I believe that the world consists of billions and billions of atoms, I believe in the laws of energy, I believe that the entire universe is a vast expanse of billions of stars, galaxies and other planets, I believe all the things science has already proven to offer. In fact, some of the biggest discoveries in history are written in the Bible itself (like how Earth is round when most of the people before though it was flat, how the stars cannot be numbered when scientists before thought there are only thousands of them and so on).

The Earth was proven to be round long before the Bible was written, and many of the other scientific discoveries attributed to it precede its writing… most of them actually came from Sumeria, Egypt, and India. Even so, the connections between these discoveries and the Bible are tenuous at best, and weak interpretations of bad poetry at their worst. If you’re trying to make a case for religion and science being compatible, you would be better off trying to explain the centuries of scientific suppression committed in the name of preserving the faith.

The only thing I will doubt in science is when they make assumptions and theories in which they proclaim it to everyone as afact instead of just stating them as an opinion for everyone else to choose whether to believe or not. I’ve noticed it in most “discoveries”I’ve seen today, that even if they haven’t even performed any experiments or tests on them and even if they did but received negative outcome, they still assume that it isgenuinely true.

The thing about scientific theories that most people don’t understand is that they have to be predictive in nature. Current Subatomic Theory makes predictive hypotheses towards the existence of a particle called the Higgs-Boson particle. The Theory predicts that when certain conditions are put into effect, the Higgs-Boson particle can be seen and measured by very specialized scientific equipment. Now please keep in mind that even though the existence of the Higgs-Boson particle hasn’t been out-and-out proven (yet,) the predictive nature of all the knowledge amassed over generations’ of subatomic particle study have dictated that in order for all of our current knowledge of Subatomic Theory to make sense, the Higgs-Boson particle must exist! And now, with the journals all but published regarding the Higgs-Boson’s existence, you may think that scientists were working on blind faith or “opinion” that they’d find the Higgs-Boson, but instead, they’re working off of a body of knowledge that has been built, refined, scrutinized, and restructured to fit the knowledge built on these many generations of observation and experimentation. The only time a scientist will express a true opinion would be in the interpretation of a given series of data in regards to an experiment that has yet to be concluded, put up for peer review, and eventually published.

I may, to be honest, never prove to you that there is a living God, however, the basis of my beliefs lies only on the Bible wherenothingin it has ever contradicted to any scientific facts or historical findings. What contradicts to science is science itself. Not our beliefs. Those priests centuries ago and today are all hypocrites (they’re not even Christians actually. They’re Catholics and there’s a big difference) and in all their life they disallowed themselves from opening the Word of Truth when they should have.

I will put this in all caps so that if you skim this paragraph, it still has a chance of sinking in: SCIENCE DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF, IT UPDATES AND REFINES ITSELF IN THE LIGHT OF NEW DATA AND OBSERVATION. Your assertion that the Bible has no scientific or internal contradictions is laughable (a simple Google search will give you plenty of those) and your thinly-veiled in-bred hatred of Catholics only furthers my oft-made assertion that religions only exist to destroy other religions. Catholics are just as much Christians as Protestants, as they fulfill all of the requisites to being Christian I have listed in my first paragraph. Like I said: “The True Scotsman Fallacy.”

So to everyone who think ALL Christians are defensive numbskulls who tell atheists that they should go burn in hell, then you must know that realChristian wouldneverdo that and that they will always accept you either you believe in God or not. It’s your own life and we’ll respect your own opinions, as long as you respect ours. It’s simple as that.

Christians have, are, and will for a very long time to come, demonize atheists as heretics, heathens, and hellspawn. I have personally been told that I have am going to Hell by some of the nicest Christians I know, and you don’t get to tell me that they are not Christians, because they are— by the very definition of the term— Christians. Your attempts to cast aside your fellows who embarrass you only shows to us nonbelievers (who have every right to comment on this, since you tagged in #atheism) that you are ashamed of those you associate with; disowning them in the cruelest way possible. If you stood up in your church and denounced those who give hell-speeches to atheists, you’d be thrown out, but instead, you travel to our little corner of the internet to tell us how those bad people aren’t REAL Christians, even though they fulfill the requirements of being Christian and actually DO the things that the Bible tells them to do— namely denouncing nonbelievers and attempting to spread the Word of God through threat of eternal fire.

As to respecting the opinions of others. It is a lovely sentiment, but not at all based in reality. People’s opinions influence their actions, people’s opinions affect others for good or ill based on the information those opinions are based on. If someone is of the opinion that women are inferior to men that person will treat women poorly. We are under no obligation to respect that person’s opinion. The same goes for a person’s beliefs (or ‘opinions regarding the nature of humanity’s place in the cosmos’,) if someone has a set of beliefs that actively causes harm to others, I will not respect that opinion, and I will decry it from the highest mountaintops if I have to. I do not care if someone is offended by it, I do not care if someone’s feelings get hurt because their identity is so wrapped up in their opinion that they cannot separate an attack on their beliefs from an attack on them, nor do I care if I’m threatened with pain and suffering (either corporeal or post-mortem) for ‘disrespecting’ someone’s opinion. If someone is acting on a notion that causes undue harm to others, you can bet your bottom dollar that I, and others like me, will stand up and disrespect the shit out of it to prevent further harm coming to our fellows.

Now, before I get blasted with the “He’s a Mean Ol’ Atheist” rebuttal, I will say that I appreciate that you want to come in and make peace between theists and atheists, claiming that you’re an advocate of science and religion coexisting together in harmony. The sad truth of the matter is that it simply cannot be. As long as religion claims to be an objective truth based on faith, it has to be an all-or-nothing endeavor. Either the Garden of Eden existed, and all of humanity spawned from two genetically identical people, or the whole of the Bible is falsified based on its own weak foundations. There is nothing good that can be provided in a religious context that cannot be done so in a secular one, much less with all the tribal “us-vs.-them” animosities that religion breeds into its adherents (see: your “Catholic hypocrites” statement above.)

Again, I admire your attempts to try and bring peace to theists and atheists, but in your own pleas for peace, the causes for conflict are highlighted once more, and it’s with a heavy heart that I have to say that I will continue the battle against religion to free people from the stagnation that comes with it, and to hopefully bring a brighter future based on the wondrously tangible, rather than the fancifully philosophized.

bbdefunct: The thing I hate about Atheists is that they often have the same fervor of belief as...

Wed, 03 Apr 2013 03:43:53 -0400

bbdefunct:

The thing I hate about Atheists is that they often have the same fervor of belief as devout theists.

The thing about atheists, (no capitalization for this group,) is that while many of us have a fervor in our unbelief, it differs from a theistic fervor because we have a worldview in which the rose-tinted glasses are removed, and we can see what we’re doing to ourselves, our fellows, and our world in a stark realness that warrants a haste, an intensity, and most importantly a fervor to correct our own mistakes and prevent others from causing harm with their own mistakes.

You may say that the cause of the atheists’ fervor holds no water, and that any and all types of fervor are harmful, but let us compare the goals of atheism and theism:

—Theism fervidly wants to convert all others to its exact mode of belief, and will threaten nonbelievers (both in life and posthumously) with pain and suffering. Theism also wishes to do away with all knowledge and academics that stand in the way of its tenets and teachings, effectively stagnating humanity’s body of knowledge. The result of theism’s fervor (if left unopposed) is a stagnate, homogeneous mass of humanity clinging to an archaic lifestyle in the hopes of pleasing a poorly defined deity.

—Atheism (for the most part) wants people to search for the truth, regardless of what it is. Atheism emphasizes that the life we have right now is quite possibly the only life we will ever experience, and that it must be cherished as such. Atheism wishes for humanity’s body of knowledge to not just grow, but to be refined, scrutinized, questioned and tested to make sure that the information we build upon is structurally sound and objectively accurate. The result of atheism’s fervor is a humanity that not only looks towards the future, but runs to it, confident that it is making the best decisions for the betterment of all.

I fully acknowledge the existence of “asshole atheists” and the like, but they are the exception, rather than the rule. Much like the WBC, they are a loud and obnoxious cousin to the tamer, quieter majority. Don’t be mistaken though, in the atheist community, we do our best to police ourselves and each other to provide theists with an open door to our thoughts and ideas (varied as they are) and to teach them to find fault in the belief, rather than the believer.

So when you complain about the atheists’ fervor, keep in mind that it’s a fervor that harms no one and is completely ignorable if you don’t march into our small corners of the internet.

"Atheism, in all its railings against God, also has intrinsic beliefs, dogmas, and tenets that..."

Wed, 03 Apr 2013 03:22:54 -0400

“Atheism, in all its railings against God, also has intrinsic beliefs, dogmas, and tenets that supposedly can’t be challenged. It is itself a belief system with all the markings of a religion. In an issue entitled “Forget the Church. Follow Jesus.” Newsweek agreed, calling atheism “a belief.” Atheism as a religion (a set of beliefs) is just as intolerant and closed-minded as the claims made against any faith system it assails.”

- Rice Broocks, God’s Not Dead (via musiccolliding)

Atheists only have one thing in common: A lack of belief in a god or gods; and if that’s all that’s necessary for something to be considered a religion (it isn’t) then by all means, atheism is a religion.

But religion by its very definition, includes rituals, traditions, and more often than not belief in a god or gods. Atheists have no rituals or traditions except maybe for arbitrary weeks where we change our facebook pictures to a scarlet ‘A’ to show each other support.

Many people have compared atheism to religion as to “bald being a hair color” and “not-bowling to be a sport.” so I won’t go into that in too much detail, and just leave that sitting like a well-used dildo in the middle of the living room.

Horrifying visuals aside, I hope to make clear that atheists are a varied and amorphous bunch with nothing really to bind us together except for a lack of belief in a god or gods and the shared experiences (both positive and negative) that such a lack of belief brings to our lives. There are no “intrinsic beliefs, dogmas, and tenets” in our lives relating to our atheism, and there is no religiosity in our lack of belief. In fact, unlike most religions, we usually encourage each other to study other religions so that we may be fully informed on what we’re dealing with (or not dealing with, depending on your point of view) and maybe, just maybe, we can find a modicum of truth in the tenets of a religion that cannot be found through a secular lifestyle and morality structure.