Brent Rasmussen's picture

My Dad Created The Universe And All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt

New Poll down there in the left sidebar... Go vote for your favorite Christian-Road-Rage-Inducing atheist bumper sticker!

See all of UTI's polls here.

RickU's picture

The Golden Rule

Until recently, I'd taken for granted that the golden rule was a good and reasonable rule to live one's life by.

"Do unto others as you would have done unto you"

Seems pretty harmless. However, it was pointed out to me that this rule, well....kind of sucks. This rule allows for people to make value judgements about how they should treat other people based on how they themselves would like to be treated. This opens the door for some truly obnoxious behaviour. For instance a godder could well justify their proselytizing by saying to themselves, "If I weren't saved I certainly would want to hear about Jesus' love!" And that, of course, is the mildest of examples.

Does anyone have a short platitude to replace it?

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Why Don't I Ever Get The Sanctimonious Christian Trolls Anymore?

I found a new blog today called "Atheist In A Minivan". It's written by an atheist woman who goes by the handle "Possummamma". Her daughter, (nick "Possum #1 on the blog), who is younger than 13 from what I gather, was asked to write a "pop essay" (like a "pop quiz") in her public school class right before Christmas.

Folks, you have to read this kid's essay. It's that good.

[link] What I want for Christmas, by Possum#1
There's a movie that's frequently shown in twenty-four hour blocks in which the main character, Ralphie, wants nothing but a Red Ryder BB Gun for Christmas. Ironically enough, he's asked to write an essay about his Christmas desire by a slightly shrewd teacher and told that he'll shoot his eye out. As I glance around this classroom, I see that many of my friends are feverishly pumping out manifestos dictating what gadgets and goodies they wish to find under their Christmas tree on the morning of December 25th. My mind, however, is reeling over the presumption that my public school teacher has addressed our classroom and assigned an essay in which she presumes that the entire lot of us are Christian or celebrate Christmas.

However, the real kicker comes in the form of one of the nastiest, most bigoted Baptist minister-trolls I have seen in a long, long time. "William", the ugly, vile troll in question, equates atheists to rapists, tells Possummomma that she is a bad mother - simply for being an atheist, and denounces anyone who steps up to defend Possummamma with hellfire and damnation.

Start reading here, and read the next three posts to here.

Those of you that think that the intolerant "fundy" Christian is just a stereotype, please read the posts above.

Possummamma, keep up the great work. Possum #1's essay was spectacular. And the ending of the saga was great as well. Possum #1, pushed by super-bigot Baptist minister William, declared herself an atheist due to his bigotry and angry irrationality.

Good for you Possum #1!

It's wackos like William who will be the first in line to piously and gleefully force all the atheists, non-Christians, and non-believers into the re-education centers if the Dominionists take over.

That is, until their own particular flavor of Christianity is deemed to be outside theocratic canon and they find themselves locked up for blasphemy and as "enemies of the faith".

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Gods And Mobsters

The responses to John Bice's column keep getting funnier. This one from political science sophomore Joe O'Connell cracks me up!

Oh, my! Proof, omnipotence, omniscience, the supernatural, Paley's Watchmaker Analogy, a call to "prove there is no god", Pascal's Wager, and The Design Argument all shoved into less than 300 words!

The best line ever from his letter for unintentional hilarity:

[link] Wouldn't you rather be on the safe side?

Is he trying to threaten Bice or something? What is inherently "unsafe" about not believing in his particular Magic Man In The Sky? Retribution from his wacky believers?

I swear it's like an old mobster movie about Gangland Chicago, and the mob enforcers going around collecting "insurance" on the local shopkeepers saying, "you wouldn't want something bad to happen, now would you? Something like, maybe accidentally tripping down two flights of stairs and breaking both of your kneecaps?" Hehehe...

Wow. Keep up the great work, John. It's really a pleasure to watch you stir the pot out there at MSU!

Brent Rasmussen's picture

The Other Seed Magazine

Rev. Hal Seed is Pastor of the New Song Community Church in Oceanside, California. Seed has self-published a book entitled "The God Questions: Exploring Life's Great Questions About God".

[link] For Seed, faith in God is not found with blind surrender but upon evidence found in the Scriptures. "If you understood every Scripture in context, there are no contradictions," he said adding that he uses the Scriptures to explain the questions posed in his book. "It takes more faith to be atheist than a theist."

Ah. Circular logic and a misunderstanding of what the word "evidence" means. Typical. There is no "evidence" in the Bible - just anecdotes. "Anecdotal evidence" is not really evidence at all - and should not be treated as such.

Seed asks what he considers to be the "biggies":

  1. Is God real?
  2. Is the Bible true?
  3. Do all roads lead to heaven?
  4. How could a good God allow suffering?

The first three seem like good questions at first blush - but are they really?

More below the fold...

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Welcome Back John!

Op-ed columnist and atheist John Bice makes a triumphant return to Michigan State University's newspaper, the State News. Welcome back John!

[John Bice] In recognition of the growing popularity of atheism, which religious fundamentalists have greatly aided in fostering, I've compiled a short list of splendid books related to the subject of rationality and religious criticism. Of course, these books aren't for everyone; respect for evidence-based reality and reasoned arguments is necessary to get much out of them. As Dawkins correctly points out, especially devout believers, whom he refers to as "dyed-in-the-wool faith-heads," are immunized by religious faith against such argumentation.

As a simple test, ask yourself if you agree with the following statements: 1) The earth is less than 10,000 years old, 2) Every word of the Bible is supernaturally inspired, literally true and free from contradiction or error, 3) Communion wafers and wine transubstantiate into the body and blood of Jesus, 4) Evolutionary theory is unsupported by evidence. If you agree with any of those statements, you're likely too blinded by faith to be reachable. You may as well stop reading now and go back to inspecting your cinnamon bun for a likeness of the Virgin Mary.

Of course, the Christian majority can't let a dirty atheist have an opinion without whining about how much everybody hates them, and about how downtrodden they are.

Poor, poor persecuted Christians.

[Jacob Rhein] Atheism is certainly becoming more popular. But I am surprised that someone as well read as John Bice can claim that the public criticism of religious belief (i.e. Christianity) was, until recently, a "cultural taboo." ("Rising numbers of nonbelievers increase popularity of atheism," SN 1/16) Since the first coming of Christ, Christianity has been besieged, and it will likely remain so until the second coming.

If the dogmatic doctrine of disbelief now appears to be mainstream, it is because Christians are caving under the weight of ridicule. Turning the other cheek, however, doesn't mean that we have to retreat silently. Rather, we must stand our ground, be a witness to our faith and pray for our unbelieving sisters and brothers. Yes, they'll laugh at us — they have been for more than 2,000 years — but we must not be afraid. After all, Jesus said, "Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you … because of me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven," Matthew 5:11-12.

Jacob Rhein
political theory and constitutional democracy freshman

Look, Jacob, I know you're just a kid, but even a kid should be able to count. You folks outnumber us by at least 8 to 1 - probably more. There are Christian churches on every corner. Christianity is almost a requirement to become elected to public office - and if not Christianity, then at least Judaism or Islam - two other Abrahamic religions based on the same set of basic tenets. Christians control the most powerful companies in the U.S. Our President, the leader of the free world and the most powerful politician on the planet, is a Christian who claims to talk to his God and use it as an advisor of some sort. Christian-themed programming on Television, cable, satellite, and radio is a multi-billion dollar a year industry. Christian-themed businesses can actually make a comfortable profit by only doing business with other Christian-themed businesses and serving only Christian customers. Christian book stores exist in every city in America.

Replace the words "Christianity" and "Christian" above with "atheism" and "atheist" and unless you are a complete and utter moron, you will have to agree that it is ridiculous to claim that Christianity is being "besieged" by the dirty atheists who have the gall to - *gasp* - publish well-written, popular books. If anything, the exact opposite is true.

A handful of atheists have published popular books in the entire history of the United States. Three of them happened to be published last year, but that's just a coincidence. How many "Chicken Soup For The {insert media-savvy label here} Soul" alone were published in the last five years?

Besieged? You have no idea what the word even means. Talk to any atheist to find out.

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Funeral Rights

My grandfather died last week. He was 86 years old and he had made it abundantly clear to us that he was ready to go. It wasn't unexpected, but it was very sad. We spent some time with him and my grandma, his wife of 67 years, before Christmas and he told us flat out that this would be his last Christmas and that he really enjoyed spending time with us on the lights and the decorations.

Grandpa was a very religious man. He wasn't an fundamentalist, or an evangelist, but rather very quietly and intensely religious in the Mormon tradition. He had been a Mormon all his life, serving his church in various ways and in various positions of leadership for decades. I was always certain of his love, even after I came out as an atheist. Grandpa accepted me for who I was, regardless of his own feelings on the matter.

More below the fold...

Eric Lorson's picture

Out of the Mouths of Babes……

I have kids, and I teach them about religion the same way I teach them about everything else – give them access to unbiased information (as much as possible) and let them decide for themselves. In our house we have books on religion, atheism, history and much more, and we encourage them to look things up when they have questions. We also give them our worldview – when they ask for it. One thing I will not be accused of is ramming atheism down my kid’s throats like theists do with religion. And I have recently found that I do not have to.

Not that long ago, my oldest son came up to me and said ‘I have decided that I don’t believe in god.’ When I asked him what brought him to that decision, he related the following story;

Brent Rasmussen's picture

"I never met an atheist I could like."

Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo is Professor of Puerto Rican and Latino Studies at Brooklyn College and Distinguished Scholar of the City University of New York.

He also really, really dislikes atheists.

Today in the "On Faith" section of the Washington Post, Prof. Stevens-Arroyo tears into his carefully-constructed strawman "atheist" with a fervor and religious gusto that ends up showing his true colors as a bigot.

[Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo] I never met an atheist I could like. Surely, somewhere on this planet, there is a friendly atheist, but I haven’t bumped into one yet.

The atheists who have crossed my path are obnoxious. They create the world in their own image and likeness, where only they are right or reasonable, and everyone else is either a fool or fanatic.

Prof. Stevens-Arroyo goes on to define an "atheist" as someone who is certain that a god or gods do not exist. This is what us atheists call a "strong atheist" or a "gnostic atheist". Some would even go so far as to call them "anti-theists".

However, that is not what the word "atheist" means. Atheists are simply human beings in which god-belief is absent - for any reason whatsoever. Conversely, "theists" are human beings in which god-belief is present.

More below the flip...

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Heir Apparent

James P. Pinkerton thinks that the imaginary "War On Christmas" failed because us atheists don't breed nearly enough due to the fact that we're also, inevitably, sandal-wearing, leftist, progressive hippies who don't want children.

[James P. Pinkerton] Part of the problem is that those who are most inclined to accept "modernity" are oftentimes the least inclined to have children. So "converts" to atheism have a way of disappearing without heirs, while those who stick with their faith, including the injunction to go forth and multiply, are more likely to have kids who inherit at least some degree of devotion.

Hmnn. I have five kids. I know PZ has a pretty big brood.

I'd like to know what all you atheists think about having kids? I love having lots of kids, but I realize that I may be the minority atheist that Pinkerton refers to above with his "oftentimes" qualifier.

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Grist For The Mill

Evolution is a fact. It happens. It has happened. It continues to happen.

This is not in question. Those who protest either don't know what the heck evolution actually is, or they are lying to themselves and to you.

What I would like to talk about today is the perception that people have about what evolution is and is not, as well as what I believe we can do about it.

I have been arguing the creation/evolution debate for a long, long time. Back in 1986 I jumped into the infant online world with both feet, learning how to think critically and how to construct arguments. I have been an atheist since I was about 17 years old. I have been interested in science and the scientific method for much longer than that. The idea of a personal invisible imaginary friend seemed ridiculous to me even at the age of ten.

So, when the virtual world of the the new online services presented itself to me, I was floored. Here was a pure realm consisting of exact meaning. A world where people talked to each other almost mind-to-mind - cutting away the traps and the pitfalls that usually accompanied face to face conversation. Nervousness, apprehension, emotion, forgetfulness, shyness - none of this mattered when you were composing your thoughts off line in a text editor. You were able to edit and vet your words, making sure that they flowed well and made sense.

But those things which so attracted me to online text-based communication seemed to make others dumber than they would have been otherwise. Time and again I witnessed ostensibly intelligent people stumble and rush through a message or a rebuttal, making themselves sound like fools due to incoherent rambling, spelling and grammar errors, and faulty, fallacious reasoning.

It's almost as if they didn't care how they were perceived when they were online.

I didn't understand it then, and I don't understand it now. Online communications in this day and age - YouTube notwithstanding - is primarily text based. That is to say that if you cannot form cogent and thoughtful sentences, spelled correctly with the meaning coming through crystal clear, then why the hell are you arguing online - using text to try and get your meaning across to the other guy?

But that is neither here nor there - except as a base for my thoughts about evolution and the way that I have observed that people look at it.

More below the fold...

Jim Downey's picture

Atheism on "All Things Considered".

This afternoon's "All Things Considered" had a longish piece on the 'new atheism'  Here's the lead from their website:

In response to the growing power of religious extremism, a small group of atheists has taken a new approach. Going on the offensive, they target the tolerant, with both reason - and ridicule. Brooke Gladstone, host of NPR's On the Media, reports.

It wasn't bad at all.  Lots of comments from Sam Harris, some good perspective on how atheists are stereotyped.  If you didn't get a chance to hear it when broadcast, the full audio should be available this evening, 7:30 EST.

Jim Downey

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Army Says Pat Tillman Is Worm Dirt - Deal With It, Grieving Parents!

American hero Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. You'd think that the Army would want to find out exactly what happened, and discipline those who were responsible.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Instead, Lt. Col. Ralph Kauzlarich has decided to blame everything on the Tillman family's atheism instead.

[link] Kauzlarich said he is confident the current probe will not result in criminal charges against the shooter or shooters. He said investigators would not still be examining the incident at all if it were not for Tillman's NFL celebrity — he walked away from a multimillion-dollar contract with the Arizona Cardinals when he enlisted — and the pressure brought to bear by Tillman's family on a number of Washington politicos.

"His parents continue to ask for it to be looked at," Kauzlarich said. "And that is really their prerogative. And if they have the right backing, the right powerful people in our government to continue to let it happen, then that is the case.

"But there [have] been numerous unfortunate cases of fratricide, and the parents have basically said, 'OK, it was an unfortunate accident.' And they let it go. So this is — I don't know, these people have a hard time letting it go. It may be because of their religious beliefs."

In a transcript of his interview with Brig. Gen. Gary Jones during a November 2004 investigation, Kauzlarich said he'd learned Kevin Tillman, Pat's brother and fellow Army Ranger who was a part of the battle the night Pat Tillman died, objected to the presence of a chaplain and the saying of prayers during a repatriation ceremony in Germany before his brother's body was returned to the United States.

Kauzlarich, now a battalion commanding officer at Fort Riley in Kansas, further suggested the Tillman family's unhappiness with the findings of past investigations might be because of the absence of a Christian faith in their lives.

In an interview with, Kauzlarich said: "When you die, I mean, there is supposedly a better life, right? Well, if you are an atheist and you don't believe in anything, if you die, what is there to go to? Nothing. You are worm dirt. So for their son to die for nothing, and now he is no more — that is pretty hard to get your head around that. So I don't know how an atheist thinks. I can only imagine that that would be pretty tough."

Asked by whether the Tillmans' religious beliefs are a factor in the ongoing investigation, Kauzlarich said, "I think so. There is not a whole lot of trust in the system or faith in the system [by the Tillmans]. So that is my personal opinion, knowing what I know."

Asked what might finally placate the family, Kauzlarich said, "You know what? I don't think anything will make them happy, quite honestly. I don't know. Maybe they want to see somebody's head on a platter. But will that really make them happy? No, because they can't bring their son back."

I think I'm going to vomit.

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Don't Get Me Wrong, Some Of My Best Friends Are Atheists

The true meaning of Christmas seems to be a vehicle for running down the dirty, non-believing atheists.

This is how your average American sees atheists; evil, Christmas-stealing, Baby Jesus-hating, "Happy Holidays"-insisting, non-believing scum who deserve to be abused and blamed for the imagined ills and the Christian persecution fantasy.

Letter: 'Happy Holidays' simply will not do

Monday, December 11, 2006

As a child growing up, "Merry Christmas" was the only thing anybody ever heard during the Christmas holidays plus "Happy New Year." "Happy Holidays" just didn't cut it in the spirit of the holidays, even for those who didn't understand or know the real meaning of the Christian holiday of Christmas - the celebration of the birth of God's only begotten son.

Today, it seems that most political and big businesses use only "Happy Holidays" in fear that it might offend some nonbelieving atheist. Now I have nothing against the phrase "Happy Holidays," but then I am offended when somebody tries to tell me I shouldn't use the phrase "Merry Christmas."

Take a hike to all of you who think that way. I am a Christian and it is my duty as a Christian to stand up to my beliefs as this is still the United States of America and it still has the freedom of religion, not from religion. Even if we ever lost that freedom, no government nor dictator will ever stop me from saying "Merry Christmas" or believing in the virgin birth of Christ.

Don't get me wrong, I know several Jewish and Muslim individuals and I will tell them "Happy Holidays" out of respect for their religious beliefs, but for the atheists, Merry Christmas.

Russ Bray

Laurel, Montana

To paraphrase:

"Happy Holidays, Muslims and Jews. Merry Christmas Christians... Fuck you, atheists."


"I know several black people. Some of my best friends are black."

Sound familiar?

We have a long road ahead of us. Hang in there, folks.

Oh, and Happy Holidays.

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Pro Wrestling And The Atheist Ethicist

I've been a big fan of Alonzo Fyfe's essays and writing since I first read his stuff back on the Internet Infidels Discussion Board. His post yesterday is fascinating and well worth the read. Alonzo's trademarked crystal clear thinking is applied to the current concern in the atheist community about the 'New Atheists' or the 'Evangelical Atheists' like Dawkins and Harris. I heartily recommend that you read it.

[Alonzo Fyfe] When I listen to atheists discuss strategy, I tend to think about a group of abused children discussing the best way to avoid a beating. Because of the children’s concern, they quickly turn against any child who dares to do anything that might upset the abusive guardian. History has shown that, once the guardian is riled, all of the children are in danger. So, it becomes important to ‘punish’ those who rile the guardian to promote an aversion to doing so.

Brent Rasmussen's picture

An Atheist Candidate For President?

[link] Consequently I would like to see an atheist emerge as a national candidate in 2008. Who that could be I have no idea. Nor do I expect such a candidate to prevail. It is my hope that an eminently respectable citizen with stature would illustrate that non-religious people have values and can be entrusted with power. A vital contribution would be made to our society if such a candidate emerged.

I disagree. I believe that a candidate who made an issue of their atheism would become a laughingstock gimmick who would do even more damage and further the stereotypical public perception of atheists as dangerous demagogues focused on taking away their right to religious freedom because they "hate religion" or "hate God".

Larry Darby has already equated himself in the public mind as "that weirdo atheist guy" who ran for office and lost to a True Christian™ (Praise The Lord, Hallelujah).

Please allow me to reiterate; If any candidate's atheism becomes known, it will become an issue. If it becomes an issue, they will lose whatever election they happen to be in.

The only way I can see for this fact to change is if existing elected officials who happen to be atheists come out of the closet and prove once and for all that you can be a good and faithful public servant or elected official without being religious. Ideally, this person or persons would have been in elected office for a number of years and have done good things for their districts or constituents - and no one would have known that they were atheists, just that they were considered to be "good people".

Then, this would need to be repeated over and over again until the public just became bored with atheist politicians and elected officials coming out of the closet.

Do you see this happening any time soon? Heck, the gays have been working on this same plan for a lot longer than the atheists have, and look how far they have gotten. Sure, they have one openly gay Congressman, and now most Americans consider gay people - to be human. Wow. Great strides to be sure, but it took a very long time.

An openly atheist Presidential candidate in 2008?

You're dreaming. It'll never happen in our lifetime. In fact, if the country swings back towards the conservative end of the spectrum again in a few years, which it probably will - I wouldn't be surprised if atheists were rounded up and placed into detention camps - just for being atheists.

Sporkyy's picture

New survey indicates atheists finish second to last in presidential unelectability

I found this article that mostly focuses on the electability (or lack thereof) of Mormons. Since the survey was conducted by an outfit called Rasmussen Reports, that oughtn't to be too surprising. If you're wondering what chance a Mormon has running for president, I'll go ahead and quote it here.

Some 43 percent of Americans wouldn't even consider voting for a Mormon for president

That, of course, isn't why I'm posting this. Now the good news.

Some 61 percent of likely voters would not even consider voting for a Muslim presidential contender while 60 percent wouldn't vote for an atheist, the poll found.


Brent Rasmussen's picture

"You Belong In Hell"

A 16 year old high school student from Kearny High School in New Jersey named Matthew LaClair was a little uncomfortable when his history teacher, David Paszkiewicz, talked more about the Christian heaven, hell and Jesus than he did about history.

Oh, did I mention that this is a public school? And that the history teacher Paszkiewicz is also a a Baptist preacher in their town?

[link] "I would never have suspected something like this went on in a public school," LaClair said yesterday.

He said Paszkiewicz told students that if they didn't accept Jesus, "you belong in Hell." He also dismissed as unscientific the theories of evolution and the "Big Bang."

Nice. Well, being a smart kid, Matthew realized that no one would believe him about the proselytizing and that it would probably come down to a case of "my word against yours".

So, he started recording Preacher/Teacher Paszkiewicz's public schoolroom religious rants on audio CDs.

[link] On Oct. 10 - a month after he first requested a meeting with the principal - LaClair met with Paszkiewicz, (Kearny High School Principal) Somma, and the head of social studies department.

At first Paszkiewicz denied he mixed in religion with his history lesson and the adults in the room appeared to be buying it, LaClair said. But then LaClair reached into his backpack and produced the CDs.

At that point Paszkiewicz remarked, according to LaClair, "Maybe you're an atheist. You caught the big Christian fish."

"I don't hate this man," LaClair said yesterday. "But if you're going to preach your religion in a public school ... and lying in a meeting about it, then I think he must have some problem he can't deal with in a public school."

More below the fold...

Brent Rasmussen's picture

Self Proclaimed Morons

Update: See Glorious Revolutionary People's Hero Comrade Ball and his fellow Revolutionary Partisians here.

This guy looks like every conservative Christian's worst stereotype of a subversive, communist atheist troublemaker. It looks as if he has gone out of his way to look like this. Look, Jason old pal, appearances do matter, regardless of what you might think. You have to live within the boundaries of your society or risk being ostracized as an outcast - and how is that going to help your cause? The sooner you learn this, the better you will be able to assist with atheist activism. Give Lori Lipman Brown a call and ask for some tips, for goodness sake. Until you do, don't say anything ever again and associate yourself with atheists like me. I don't doubt that you are an atheist, but your other ideologies are "irrelevant to the business" of atheism. Don't conflate your personal belief system of communism/socialism, with the lack of belief in a god or gods. That's what fundamentalist Christians do!

Jebus. This is all we need. Some imbecilic, pea-brained college student equating communism and atheism in the public mind again.

[Reuters][LifeSite News] The Student government of Orange Coast College in California, voted 3-1 this week to eliminate recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance from its weekly meetings.

According to news accounts, student Board member Jason Ball, a self proclaimed atheist, called the flag salute "irrelevant to the business of the student government," and referred to a 2002 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on a possible "church-state conflict." Ball, wearing black boots, a beret and a hammer-and-sickle pin, was quoted as saying, "Nationalism is something that divides people."

College students are morons sometimes. That goes without saying. I was a moron when I was in college. Communist college students who are "self proclaimed" atheists are studying hard and failing to become morons.

Yes, yes, Comrade Ball, the Pledge is not relevant to the business of student government. Yes, you're an atheist. You're a communist who wears black boots and a beret. How very revolutionary for you, tovarische. We get that part all too clear, hammer & sickle boy.

But would you do the rest of us atheists a favor and shut the fuck up from now on? Thanks. You're not helping. Trust me.

Jim Downey's picture

Makes you wonder.

From this diary over on dKos, I followed a link to the Amazing Belief-o-Matic, which purports to tell you what you should believe based on your answers to a series of 20 questions.

Just out of curiosity, I took the test.

And guess what? I'm a Unitarian Universalist. 100%, according to the test. No, really. It seems that they don't have an "Atheist" category (gee, isn't that surprising). It isn't even an option for the test, though if you poke around on their site a bit, you can find a page that says that there are such creatures as atheists and agnostics. The page is all of four sentences long:

Atheists do not believe in a god or deity. Atheists' beliefs are similar to those of the Secular Humanists but do not necessarily include the emphasis on humanity's ability to improve the human condition. Views on contemporary issues vary widely.

Agnostics are inclined to question the existence of supernatural being(s) or a force, e.g., the answer to whether or not God (or Deity) exists would be: "We do not and/or cannot know."

Syndicate content