I see you missed my point about secular societies. And in fact, amply demonstrated it. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
That they are created by theists who are flexible in their attitudes. Not by atheists, they are still inflexible as the fluffy lawsuits show.
Our secular principles were indeed created by mostly religious people to ensure religious freedom. They become hypocrites by insisting on an exception for Christian customs. Don't fool yourself, they aren't tolerant of other religions at all.
If we compare worst to worst, I think atheists will be winners by a greater margin. I prefer to compare best to best. And best to best, I find Christians to be more flexible than atheists.
so what is the essential difference between a god that does absolutely nothing and remains absolutely unknowable and atheism?
I'm flexible in that I support personal religious freedom. I'm just not flexible one bit with respect to religion as a part of government customs. This country is a home for all religions (or no religion) only as long as our government keeps the hell out of it.
Like I said, secular societies are a result of theists extending themselves. Its why theist societies work.
They had no choice. In a multicultural society, a theist government would create unrest and probably lead to violence.
You can reverse it and compare theists living under atheist societies, if you like. While theists can extend themselves to accept other systems, it just does not work the other way around. Majority theist societies will permit self government of other systems, atheists will not. Majority theist societies will adopt secular mores whereby they will be willing to give up, for example as in Lebanon, the right to majority rule by one theistic group, atheists will not. Majority theist societies will even be willing to support a society where there is separation of church and state. You'll never see a majority atheist society bending the same way. So it doesn't matter whether its a "religious" society or a secular society. It only "works" when the majority of the people are theists.
That's incorrect. Here are the Top 10 least religious countries in the world: 1. Sweden (up to 85% non-believer, atheist, agnostic) 2. Vietnam 3. Denmark 4. Norway 5. Japan 6. Czech Republic 7. Finland 8. France 9. South Korea 10. Estonia (up to 49% non-believer, atheist, agnostic)
No it means that the questions asked in the polls do not reflect religiosity Q: Do you pray 5 times a day? Me: No Q: non-religious
Not the US. Not willingly. At gunpoint. One reason it's at risk. The atheists managed to get their way in the Constitution, with religious war fresh in everyone's mind and a religiously disparate nation to unify, but a new day is a new opportunity, and we've got Pledges to God and "faith-based" criteria for governmental hiring and spending.and an increasingly theistic military, especially the Air Force. You may have noticed some of the effects of that, of late. Right now we've got spreading theisms that can't even coexist with the theisms most closely related to them. We've got theisms that can't coexist with nude swimming or a beer on Sunday. And they are quite durable. The Islamic civilizations have been around a long time, and coexist by writing their religion into the law - apparently coexistence is capable of fairly significant negotiations after all. The only flexible theists are the ones answerable to other beliefs. Where one kind gets sufficient power, flexibility tends to disappear. No, it isn't. Yes, they do. Deal.