i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
Let me net it out for you since there seems to be confusion. Plants can't ever not lack a belief in god. Babies, at the stage of their development, do not currently posses the ability to have a belief in god and thus lack a belief in god.
Both lack belief in god.
"Both lack belief in god."
Hence, both are atheist.
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
If by poor wording you are talking about your post I would agree, although everything I've seen of your argument suggests that the poor wording is merely a reflection of the lack of cogency you put into it's formulation.
Then maybe you should look some more...
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
Evidence that your accusation against me of playing word games is false.
I have accused you of it when I found it appropriate, i did not accuse you of it in that case.
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
Wow, the logic train really did leave you at the station!
Poor wording, it is about conceiving of something you don't know.
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
Whats the difference then:
Plants are atheist by necessity since they lack even the ability to have and belief in god and thus the belief itself.
Babies lack belief in god.
Also, are you suggesting that babies have the ability to believe in God but choose not to?
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
Whats the difference then:
Plants are atheist by necessity since they lack even the ability to have and belief in god and thus the belief itself.
Babies lack belief in god.
Lacking the ability to believe in God would necessitate that you lack belief in God.
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
I didn't use two. Ever. Try and keep up, dear.
Well, you implied there are at least two.
Plants are atheist by necessity since they lack even the ability to have and belief in god and thus the belief itself. That has nothing to do with babies, rocks, poop, magical unicorns in my dogs butt or your butchering logic.
"Plants are atheist by necessity"
"That has nothing to do with babies"Or are you saying that they are atheist in the same way then?
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
That was never my argument at all. That's the argument you keep trying (and failing, BTW) to CLAIM I am making. Stop making things up, or at the very least try to start understanding the words on the screen that I am writing.
OK, then Ill ask you again. How are we supposed to understand this?
Do you also think that dogs are atheists, fetuses and corpses? What about plants?
If they lack a belief in god, then yes.
Either they don't lack a belief in God OR, you are saying that plants are Atheists...
It is as simple as that.
In what way are babies atheist if it is not lack of belief?
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
Plants are atheist by necessity since they lack even the ability to have and belief in god and thus the belief itself. That has nothing to do with babies, rocks, poop, magical unicorns in my dogs butt or your butchering logic.
I was not aware you used two atheist definitions, whats the different between them? Which one do you use on a baby and which one do you use on a plant?
i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.
i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.
"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
But you cant prove plants dont know anything therefore your a plant atheist. Or agnostic. Or something......
So either plants are Atheists or they "know" things?
I wasn't aware of your pride given that we dont know each other but i accept it because i deserve it anyway
I am sorry if it came across that way, It was not mean that way.
