Reply #88: You know, it's not necessary to keep battling over the vocabulary.

[Inland]

Fact is, atheism is defined as a lack of a belief in a deity. That's it. That's all.

Where you are confused is by the fact that your correspondents clearly do have a belief system, as shown by the vociferous and constant repetition of assertions about the nature of religious and themselves. That belief system just isn't part of, or compelled by, atheism. But they clearly have belief systems that different from, or additional to, merely not believing in a god.

They are sure that as long as they don't have a religious belief, they are on the side of the angels, so to speak. THAT is the belief system.

What exactly are the parameters of the belief systems of your correspondents, besides a clear distaste for the religious as a group and belief of just about anything bad about religion and the rationality/good of the atheist? I don't know. So much time and effort gets spent on ragging on religion and in denying even having a belief system for the sole purpose of distancing themselves from anything even approaching religion, that your correspondents just don't come up much more.

Your argument over the meaning of the word "atheism" prevents the examination of and discussion of your correspondents' beliefs and ends the discussion at their lack of belief in a deity. Given that the former is important politically and the latter isn't going to change and may not even matter to you (you really weren't expecting to convert anyone here, were you?), I don't know why you would keep the discussion where it is only comfortable for everyone involved.

Now, as I admit to actually having a belief system, I can go to GD and actually discuss matters of the day. So what IS R&T good for?