re: Satanic Temple puts up display at Michigan Capital

quote:

---

It is this strict definition that I have issue with. Now if one wanted to change it slightly to say that an atheist is someone who has the potential to believe yet still lacks that belief then I would be fine with that. However I would think that rules out babies. For example say someone is born stranded from society. As a baby they should not be considered an atheist. However when they grow up still away from society they reflect on nature. They come to the conclusion that this reality did not come to be by an intelligent mind, but simply is all there is for there is no evidence of a mind. I would say this person is an atheist, for even though they have the potential for belief in theism they still lack it.

---

So is a newborn infant a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist? A theist?

How else would you describe a baby except as, "not having a belief in gods"? That's exactly what atheism means.

Like I said, it's almost entirely meaningless to call a baby an atheist. It's true, but it's not useful at all. It's like calling a baby "not a supporter of Ron Paul". Well, no shite.

quote:

---

Yes, but then how could a baby be said to be an atheist. They merely "lack" belief in God. A lacking of a belief cannot be a belief in respect to something for it is a mere lack of belief. If you want to say the baby believes that God does not exists then it holds a belief and does not merely lack belief. I might be misreading you. If so I apologize.

---

That's exactly the definition of atheism.

The prefix "a-" means "without".

The root "theism" means "belief in a god or gods".

Atheism means "without belief in a god or gods" -- that's it. Anything more than that requires modifiers, like "strong atheist" or "gnostic atheist".