My Response To A “Bush Is Great” Email

One of the common arguments from Christians is that atheism is a belief
analogous to their own belief in God. The implication, of course, is that
both are therefore equally reasonable. Unfortunately, the debate can’t even
start without resolving the meaning of
atheism
itself.

I don’t claim to be able to resolve
this very complicated issue
in a single post, but I believe we as a community should standardize on one
meaning. What follows is my idea of what that definition should be, along
with my reasons for thinking so.

History + Practicality

Let me try and back that up a little bit. Consider the fact that atheism
came after theism. It’s a
response to people believing in something. It didn’t come about by
itself. It’s not something on its own; it’s the lack of something. That
something is belief.

To view atheism as a belief in itself would require us to create many other
such words to describe other “positive non-beliefs”. Dragons, for example.
If we are to subscribe to the atheism as a belief concept then we’re
going to need to explicitly label those who don’t believe in dragons. Oh,
and the Easter bunny too.

Who would go around actively disbelieving in the infinite number of
things that are preposterous? Here’s one of my favorite quotes on the
matter:

I don’t know who came up with that one, but here’s mine:

Beliefs are the same. You either have a belief in something or you don’t,
and if you don’t then you simply don’t. It would be asinine to
enumerate the trillions of things you don’t believe in and then consider
those your beliefs. And that’s really what we’re being asked to accept with
an “positive” belief model for atheism…that each ludicrous thing we come
across must be actively disbelieved.

I just don’t think that’s the case, but I look forward to hearing from
anyone who disagrees. I’d love to see another perspective on this.: