Agnosticism is a real belief.

haha okay, dont get mad because i proved you wrong lol

You don't know that. You are acting like a know it all. And honestly youre not me so hey over it.

I dont know why you think there is no proof that there is a God. Simply look at how intricately the body is put together. Scientists still cant explain many things about human nature such as a conscience. Then the Earth itself, for it to be in the exact distance from the sun so we can live on this planet. Do you really think that all happened by chance. I have friends who are agnostic and even they believe its a very far fetched ideal, im sure youve heard it, but the illustration of putting all the parts of a clock into a bag letting it sit there with noone touching it and magically the clock is perfectly put together and working in perfect time. Now thats something that cannot be proven.

to be clear.

The actions of the fundamentalists are justified by their sacred texts.

while

The beliefs of the fundamentalists are justified by the million of moderate believers.

Close Xera but not exactly. Normally we wouldn't have to be so particular but when it comes to religion people tend to get worked up over particulars. Faith i.e. moderate faith doesn't justify the actions and attitudes of fundamentalists. Moderate faith justifies the beliefs of the fundamentalists. B/c their beliefs are justified their actions are excusable. The reason for this has to do with the specifics of the religion and the religious texts. To be just this is in no way my idea. It is the main argument of most of todays leading intellectuals such as Sam Harris, Dan Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens. I suggest you pick up a copy of "The End of Faith" by Harris if you want to get a more detailed argument for this position.

Imagine this clear example:
A small group of people are fundamentalist believers in Zeus. They are pushing a Bill in congress to outlaw the installation of lightning rods on people's houses b.c it interferrs with Zeus's will. This bill would never get passed in the world we live in b.c people would see their beliefs as riduculous and unjustified. However, if there were millions of people who mildly believed in Zeus, but not necessarily the bit about his hatred for lighning rods then suddenly the fundamentalists don't seem so crazy and perhaps we should consider their Bill. The key to all of this and the only way it works is if Zeus's ancient texts actually say something that supports the fundamentalists. In this case they would be right and the moderates zeus believers would be straying from their own religion. So yes we would have to take what the fundamentalists say quite seriously.

Zeromelt: let me see if I get your post correct, basically you are saying that faith is dangerous because it justifies the actions and attitudes of fundamentalists?

I realized that someone could easily say that what i call passive atheism is agnosticism. but its not. Ag·nos·ti·cism : an intellectual doctrine or attitude affirming the uncertainty of all claims to ultimate knowledge. dictionary.com passive atheism is just a lack of belief.

Wow! i was actually just thinking about posting this debate.

I'd like to point out that you can be an agnostic and an atheist/theist at the exact same time. There are also two kinds of atheism. Active and Passive. Active atheism is the belief that there is no God. While passive atheism is the lack of a belief in God. There is a slight but important difference. Most people who call themselves agnostic are actually passive atheists. Just as most atheists are passive atheists. Its generally religious people who mistakenly think that most atheists are of the active sort. The funny thing is that humans are the only non-atheists in the world.

"Personally, agnosticism is a bit stupid. Because we're all agnostics! No one really knows whether there is a God or not. "

I agree completely blond guy, but its more than a bit stupid. It is actually detrimental. The fact is that there are fundamentalists who are willing to kill and die for their unjustified beliefs. If these fundamentalists believed that a teapot orbiting pluto wanted them to do these things people would think they were insane. They'd be locked up. But if you throw in a few million people who sort of believe in the teapot but don't take it as literally as the fundamentalists then the fundamentalists don't look crazy at all. The greatest problem is that the teapot explicitly states that people should do what the fundamentalists are doing. The moderates are actually straying from the teapot's word. Now if most of the intellectuals claim to be agnostic about the teapot then the fundamentalists definitely don't look crazy. The fact is that we all are agnostics about the teapot b/c no one can know either way but to claim to be an agnostic is in someway to justify such believes are if they are on the same rational footing as scientific claims when they are not in away whatsoever.

"we have the term atheist is for people who don't have religion"

Um, no. You can be atheist and religious. Buddhism is a good example.

Personally, agnosticism is a bit stupid. Because we're all agnostics! No one really knows whether there is a God or not. The reason why we have the term atheist is for people who don't have religion and think God doesn't exist (however, like the rest of the world, can't be sure". And the reason why we have the term "agnostic" is for atheists, without the balls to actually call themselves atheist! Atheists are so discriminated, that they're uncomfortable telling others that they are atheists.

But not a select few, like me, who say it proudly.
I AM AN ATHEIST!