Atheism isn't a religion, but some treat it as dogma

Atheism isn't a religion, but some treat it as dogma

The debate over whether atheism is a religion has erupted. Amid growing polarization, an initial post claims atheism is a mental illness denying objective reality. Responses range from defending it as a simple godless conviction to accusing militant atheists of dogmatizing their stance. The discussion, accumulating 110 replies in 975 days, mixes philosophical, scientific, and political arguments, revealing a latent tension: can the absence of religious belief become another faith?

What atheism is and what it is not

The starting point is a categorical claim: "Atheism is a mental illness that denies objective reality." Far from an isolated opinion, this sets the tone for a debate questioning not only atheism's validity as an intellectual stance but also its status as mere non-belief. Several posts argue atheism isn't a religion but a deep conviction: "There is no god. Period. That is my belief, and I base my life on there being no god." The distinction between religion and conviction blurs when examining certain militant atheists' behavior.

The discussion quickly turns to comparisons with traditional religions. Arguments suggest religions are for "idiots" and that profound atheism is an even greater form of idiocy. These crude insults reflect a current viewing militant atheism as sharing dogmatism and intolerance with religions. Irony emerges when noting certain atheist groups act like a religion: "Certain atheist groups, yes," one user states, linking to a Vice report not reproduced here.

Faith in nothingness and the origin problem

A repeated argument is that atheism replaces God with nothingness. "Atheism means replacing God with nothing. Things with a first cause 'God', since they don't believe in a God, must be created by nothing," it is claimed. This develops into a critique of atheist logic: if everything has a cause, why would the universe be the exception? Big Bang theory and thermodynamics laws are cited to show the universe had a beginning, requiring an external cause. Atheists, per this view, solve this with self-existent universes and chance: "absolute nothing made all known things."

The rebuttal trinc. Believers are accused of authority fallacies and assuming the universe cannot be self-existent while God can. "Ultimately, it boils down to whatever suits you can be self-existent," reads one comment. Others opt for caution: "The correct answer is we don't know the universe's origin." This agnostic trend gains ground late in the debate, acknowledging neither the God hypothesis nor eternal universe theories have empirical proof.

Atheism, pogre, and militant dogmatism

The discussion shifts to the link between atheism and pogre. It is stated atheism is more frequent among pogre, making an atheist practically a leftist, even if critiquing some pogre dogmas. "For me, an atheist is a leftist, whether fitting the usual profile or not," argues one user. This association strengthens with examples of pogre science communicators who, despite criticizing excesses, promote causes like immigration or gender ideology.

Debate on atheist dogmatism extends to figures like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, accused of dogmatizing non-religious stances. Militant atheism is argued to share with religions the pretension of truth and inability to accept dissent. Criticism reaches science: it is claimed state hyper-funding biases it pogre. "Universities and research centers are businesses living off public subsidies," asserts a commenter.

Atheism as faith and social consequences

A recurring idea is that atheism is also a faith. "Atheism is also a faith. It is dogmatic," it is claimed. Believing there is no god is argued to be as undemonstrable as believing there is, thus requiring an act of faith. This is reinforced by observing 20th-century atheist regimes haven't proven better than the religions they fought: "To this day, atheist regimes have shown themselves to be nothing better than what they supposedly fight against, but QUITE THE OPPOSITE."

The discussion addresses psychological and social consequences. Atheists are described as careful pessimists seeking new acolytes. "The atheist tries to make everyone an atheist," says one. Conversely, believers are said to gain tranquility, with faith providing a sense framework atheism lacks. The controversy ends without consensus: some see atheism as liberation from superstition, others as voluntary blindness.

---

Lasting nearly three years, the debate reaches no unanimous conclusion. Whether atheism is a religion remains open, but the exchange leaves one certainty: the line between conviction and faith is blurrier than either side admits.