Look up the definition of god.
Oxford Dictionary definition of God:
1. In Christianity and other monotheistic religions, the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
2. In certain other religions, a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity; an image, idol, animal, or other object worshiped as divine or symbolizing a god; used as a conventional personification of fate.
3. An adored, admired, or influential person; a thing accorded the supreme importance appropriate to a god.
4. Informal: the gallery in a theater.
Regardless, these are the concepts typically associated with a god, which is where theism comes from, which is where atheism comes from.
Yes.
Sure, you can define god in any way you want but at that point you are no longer communicating with us, just playing silly semantic word games.
Which is what atheism does.
Exactly zero people read the title of this thread and thought it was referring to people who don't believe in sex.
That's nonsense. Sex isn't God, sex can be a god. Atheism is disbelief in the existence of God or gods. Gods defined above. Note, not just God, but gods. What gods? Your narrow silly semantic and limited definition which is redundant. God and gods aren't the same. Which gods? Presumably any gods.
Atheism isn't supposed to "have a clue" because that's categorically not what it is.
Dumb. Atheism denies the existence of gods but it is clueless or decides what gods are which isn't in line with theism or definition or it's just a xenophobic imitation of what it denies. The product of ignorant and hypocritical ideologues. Just a socio-politically motivated sort of class struggle. It's about control because theism has wrongly appointed itself as arbiter of global morality. The motivation is, in my opinion, justified, but the methodology is stupid and hypocritical. Control. World view. Ideological fixation. Xenophobia. For some reason I've never understood why we can't all get along even though we disagree. Without having to make everyone else think like us. So, abortion and homosexuality are against Christian practice. That don't mean you (Christians) make laws secularly or that you (atheists) have to protest and reform Christianity. Just do whichever you want to do. Both of you without interfering with the other.
Atheism isn't a world view, it's a response to theism.
A worldview is a particular philosophy of life or conception of the world. Theism is a worldview. How is atheism, as a response to that, not a worldview? What are you denying? Commonality? You can't train a cat? Disorganization? First of all, the commonality is - well, I would say stupidity but that is prevalent in theism and humanity at large (not excluding myself) so that would be moot, but a specific stupidity (willful ignorance) regarding what it criticizes or protests. And it does. But also, commonality in the simple fucked up basic tenet. Can't train a cat? Go to a circus, see a lion tamer. Disorganization due to lack of commonality? Nonsense. Minorities don't all have to think alike and anyway atheists do but seem to be oblivious to it.
It isn't a good argument.
You claim there is a God, I don't accept your claim. That's it. Anything else is something else.
You (collectively) just don't have an argument because you don't even understand what it would be. I'm fine with and completely empathetic to the argument against the claim of the existence of God. It's a completely rational one. Faith requires just that. Faith. What I object to is the ambiguity if not complete willful ignorance of the gods part of atheism. You just reject it because you conflate God with gods. That doesn't make sense. Tell me the difference. And not one you made up in your limited worldview group think I saw at a PTA meeting recently! (PTA reference source GTA VC Maurice Chavez Pressing Issues for my own odd approach to humor and entertainment)
Ya' know it?
One does not need to understand a claim in order to reject it, in fact rejection is the only possible position in that circumstance.
[Laughs] It's so obvious. It doesn't matter what theists think, what they think is untrue because their thinking gets in our way - not of thinking, who cares about that, it doesn't exist along with the God we know nothing about. It's about telling me what to do. We want the power. This is a democracy! Yeah, majority MOB rules and you aren't it! That's what it's about. When an atheist says theism is stupid and false they don't know what the fuck they're talking about. That's what it's all about. Do you see? What could possibly be the reason for obfuscating the obvious actual intent? Only ignorance or deception.
I'm using the word reject as in "to not accept".
And the word god in any arbitrary fashion as well. Wow. Obtuse. Rejecting is not the same as accepting if you perceive the acceptance to be mandatory. That isn't a claim that isn't even an offer. You aren't rejecting the claim in a reasonable manner which is totally acceptable, you are distorting the claim for the same reason the theists distort it. Power struggle. The claim isn't even relevant so why argue the OP without actually arguing or even addressing the claim? Ideologues coming out of the proverbial woodwork.
