We've all heard this before: "atheists dont believe in anything," and of course that is not true. Unfortunately, I hear this all too often. Since beliefs are an individual thing (especially among the secular community), I pose the question to you: What do you believe in?
I'd love to hear as many thoughts as possible. Hopefully this discussion will generate a diverse enough pool that it would be worthwhile to link this as a response to statements like the one above.
I was pretty suicidal when I found out Pluto wasn't a really a dog!
Not to mention the inconsistency of Pluto being a dog in canine form, while Goofy is a dog in human form, so I won't mention it.
Are you trying to tell me there is no doG?
Is 20 years long enough to determine failure? What difference do atheists make to this evaluation?
Which came first 'absolute faith' or the determination of failure? Having 'absolute faith', is not the same as 'confidence'. Coming here to get 'absolute faith', seems like a rather foolish enterprise.
If you are trying to get an improvement in your degree of 'confidence' in your belief, this might also not be the place. We are not here for that process.
Far more so than belief, right?
I use oscilloscopes and logic analyzers to gather evidence about the performance of my electrical circuits. I'll tell my customers the data is merely temporal and subjective. Save me a lot of trouble, "just have faith" I'll tell them !
What's realistic about an inclination toward religion (you're a Jehovah's Witness, right?)?
Science is a method, not a body of knowledge. Religion is a body of dogma. The difference between science and religion is probably what you view as it's primary flaw: it's changeable whereas you prefer something solid and unchanging, even if it isn't true.
The difference between religion and science is science's capacity to correct itself. The inability to do so is why religion is worthless.