backbreaker
Master Don Juan
No I don't think he is the spokesman, however because that is the first thought that popped into my mind, it's only right to give credit to what I was about to say to the person who actually said it, dont' you think?azanon said:Judging by your last post and this one, you seem to think that Richard Dawkins is the spokesman for atheists/Agnostics. On this point, you are wrong. I'm far less interested in one man's opinion as I am an entire community of people. If you're interested in the latter, get to Googling.
On this point, some people would say they are 100.0% sure there are no Gods. Using Dawkins scale, some would rate themselves as a 7.
It's not an oxymoron. Are agnostics theists? (I'm assuming you would concede, no). Then they are, by default, a-theists. You're either a theist or you're not.
On a more practical note, I don't personally advise alienating the agnostics. There are few enough of us as it is grouping the both.
I haven't read the book, but I'm guessing you just misunderstood him.
you can not believe in a higher power and not be thiest. Pantheists don't believe in a supernatural God at all, but use the word God as a supernatural[FONT="] synonym for Nature
I'm in CA.. I go though this every other day. And dont' think I'm swiping at you. I'm not. You can disagree withs omeone and not be mad/bitter/angry with them. I just happen to have in my head a different defination of what exaclty IS an athiest.
[/FONT]

