Strongest argument for atheism?

[Whitney]

   Support for evolution by religious bodies         
Buddhist       81%
Hindu       80%
Jewish       77%
Unaffiliated    72%
Catholic       58%
Orthodox       54%
Mainline Protestant       51%
Muslim       45%
Hist. Black Protest.       38%
Evang. Protestant       24%
Mormon       22%
Jehovah's Witnesses       8%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution#Support_for_evolution_by_religious_bodies

To summarize the above....the more fundamentalist a religion the less likely they are to accept evolution.

Usually those who don't accept it as true simply haven't actually seen the evidence...this is a problem that is probably mainly specific to the US.  I actually have yet to come across someone who rejects evolution yet actually understands it even on the most basic levels.

In the US there is about a 50/50 split between those that accept evolution and those that don't.  I think this just means that half of the population, for whatever reason, hasn't cared to fill in what their backwoods science class left out...those from bigger cities and especially those who attended university are much less likely to view evolution as controversial even if they are a believer.

Really, I think it's a bad idea to push an argument that evolution=no god as that just makes it even harder to get real science in small town science classes.  Especially since it doesn't logically follow that a god couldn't exist that utilized evolution as a creation tool....evolution only conflicts with very specific interpretations of very specific religious texts (mainly fundamentalist Christianity).

[Sgtmackenzie]

I'm typing from my phone but in brief I disagree and don't see evolution as against god..I've explained why in another thread not too long ago

There is no argument for atheism per se .. Just a lot of arguments against theism being a insupportable position

This I don't agree with.   What you are basically saying is that atheism does not have to be proven.   It's the old "Santa Claus doesn't exist and I don't have to prove he doesn't exist to know it" argument.   

We have two sides of an argument where the answer is truly an unknown (Not yet proven)

God Exists
God does not Exist

Theists cannot prove God exists
Atheists cannot prove that God does not exist

Agnostics just don't give a F, but they know enough to say they don't know for sure.

[Whitney]

I'm typing from my phone but in brief I disagree and don't see evolution as against god..I've explained why in another thread not too long ago

There is no argument for atheism per se .. Just a lot of arguments against theism being a insupportable position

This I don't agree with.   What you are basically saying is that atheism does not have to be proven.   It's the old "Santa Claus doesn't exist and I don't have to prove he doesn't exist to know it" argument.   

We have two sides of an argument where the answer is truly an unknown (Not yet proven)

God Exists
God does not Exist

Theists cannot prove God exists
Atheists cannot prove that God does not exist

Agnostics just don't give a F, but they know enough to say they don't know for sure.

being an atheist doesn't automatically mean one is taking the position that god doesn't or can't exist....it's the position of not having a belief in god.  Both atheist and theists can fall into the agnostic range. 
I don't even think it's possible to be a pure agnostic for an extended period of time as that would pretty much require avoiding having any kind of opinion on the topic.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Both atheist and theists can fall into the agnostic range.

I think both atheists and theists are actually agnostic, although members of both categories may subjectively feel that they know whether or not God exists.  For theists, the very concept of faith requires agnosticism.  If you truly "know" something as a fact (and not just have a subjective assurance of something), it doesn't involve faith or belief anymore.  I don't have to "believe" that 2+2=4 or that elephants exist - I know these things.  I don't think anyone can say that either way regarding God.

[Twentythree]

Both atheist and theists can fall into the agnostic range.

I think both atheists and theists are actually agnostic, although members of both categories may subjectively feel that they know whether or not God exists.  For theists, the very concept of faith requires agnosticism.  If you truly "know" something as a fact (and not just have a subjective assurance of something), it doesn't involve faith or belief anymore.  I don't have to "believe" that 2+2=4 or that elephants exist - I know these things.  I don't think anyone can say that either way regarding God.

This is a great comment. Perfectly put. I have struggled in the past mo make a similar point on this forum but have been unable to do it as eloquently as this.

[Sgtmackenzie]

I'm typing from my phone but in brief I disagree and don't see evolution as against god..I've explained why in another thread not too long ago

There is no argument for atheism per se .. Just a lot of arguments against theism being a insupportable position

This I don't agree with.   What you are basically saying is that atheism does not have to be proven.   It's the old "Santa Claus doesn't exist and I don't have to prove he doesn't exist to know it" argument.   

We have two sides of an argument where the answer is truly an unknown (Not yet proven)

God Exists
God does not Exist

Theists cannot prove God exists
Atheists cannot prove that God does not exist

Agnostics just don't give a F, but they know enough to say they don't know for sure.

being an atheist doesn't automatically mean one is taking the position that god doesn't or can't exist....it's the position of not having a belief in god.  Both atheist and theists can fall into the agnostic range. 
I don't even think it's possible to be a pure agnostic for an extended period of time as that would pretty much require avoiding having any kind of opinion on the topic.

Isn't that the point?   The only way to live in harmony is to NOT have an opinion on an unprovable (Existence of God) when some people believe 100% and some people do NOT 100%.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

I'm typing from my phone but in brief I disagree and don't see evolution as against god..I've explained why in another thread not too long ago

There is no argument for atheism per se .. Just a lot of arguments against theism being a insupportable position

This I don't agree with.   What you are basically saying is that atheism does not have to be proven.   It's the old "Santa Claus doesn't exist and I don't have to prove he doesn't exist to know it" argument.   

We have two sides of an argument where the answer is truly an unknown (Not yet proven)

God Exists
God does not Exist

Theists cannot prove God exists
Atheists cannot prove that God does not exist

Agnostics just don't give a F, but they know enough to say they don't know for sure.

being an atheist doesn't automatically mean one is taking the position that god doesn't or can't exist....it's the position of not having a belief in god.  Both atheist and theists can fall into the agnostic range. 
I don't even think it's possible to be a pure agnostic for an extended period of time as that would pretty much require avoiding having any kind of opinion on the topic.

Isn't that the point?   The only way to live in harmony is to NOT have an opinion on an unprovable (Existence of God) when some people believe 100% and some people do NOT 100%.

Everyone is going to have an opinion. The key to harmony is not to require everyone else to agree with your opinion.

[Guardian85]

The strongest argument for atheism is simpy that there are no good (read:empirically proven) arguments for deieties.

[Whitney]

Everyone is going to have an opinion. The key to harmony is not to require everyone else to agree with your opinion.

exactly.

[Sgtmackenzie]

Everyone is going to have an opinion. The key to harmony is not to require everyone else to agree with your opinion.

What's the fun in that?   

It tends to be like that in everything that is based on opinion.   Be it religious beliefs or how to go about getting something done at work.   Everyone has an opinion which to them is "right" and know the "right" way to do things, and the funny thing is - they're all right!

Some more "right" than others.

[Stevil]

Everyone is going to have an opinion. The key to harmony is not to require everyone else to agree with your opinion.

What's the fun in that?   

It tends to be like that in everything that is based on opinion.   Be it religious beliefs or how to go about getting something done at work.   Everyone has an opinion which to them is "right" and know the "right" way to do things, and the funny thing is - they're all right!

Some more "right" than others.

If people are open to discussing rather than trying to win an argument then it leads to interesting exploratory discussion.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

If people are open to discussing rather than trying to win an argument then it leads to interesting exploratory discussion.

That's right. And it usually takes some time before people can understand the other person's position, so you have to invest a little effort and energy.  One problem we have in modern communication is that we all used to one-liners and sound bites, and just sitting down and talking to other people for an extended period is difficult.  Real communication is becoming a lost art, I'm afraid.  We want to categorize and jump to easy conclusions too rapidly.

Some of that has to do with self-doubt, lack of confidence, and feelings of inferiority, I think. If someone else disagrees with us, we get personally offended and think we have to defend our position at all costs. 

[Sgtmackenzie]

If people are open to discussing rather than trying to win an argument then it leads to interesting exploratory discussion.

That's right. And it usually takes some time before people can understand the other person's position, so you have to invest a little effort and energy.  One problem we have in modern communication is that we all used to one-liners and sound bites, and just sitting down and talking to other people for an extended period is difficult.  Real communication is becoming a lost art, I'm afraid.  We want to categorize and jump to easy conclusions too rapidly.

Some of that has to do with self-doubt, lack of confidence, and feelings of inferiority, I think. If someone else disagrees with us, we get personally offended and think we have to defend our position at all costs. 

Partly because many people realize that some positions they hold if they looked closely enough...would melt away along with their merits.    Kind of like the person raised a Christian that examined his positions on religion and realized they were not his own.     I won't name any names though.   

[yodachoda]

How important was the literal account of genesis to you before you learned about evolution?

Not important at all.  I grew up in a Christian family that didn't believe in a literal interpretation.  They believed the 7 days could be symbolic for a couple million or billion years.

When I first heard about evolution, all I knew was it was "change over time of species".  I thought, "OK, no problem, no reason why God couldn't create by changing a species. 

Then I really learned how evolution works, and IMO it's not compatible with a God at all.  The reasons are: (1) It's a stupid way to make life if he exists and guides it.  It's wasteful, cruel, results in suboptimal design, requires mass death, is slow.  And (2) we exist today because of ancient contingent events.  If an asteroid didn't hit Earth to kill off the dinosaurs a few million years ago, then we wouldn't exist today.  Evolution also requires chance, so we are an accident and if we went back 3.8 billion years and did evolution again, we almost certainly wouldn't exist today. 

[yodachoda]

The strongest argument for atheism is simpy that there are no good (read:empirically proven) arguments for deieties.

I can't really relate to this because I was brought up in a religious family.  I lived most of my life believing he exists, and it took a powerful argument to convince me he probably doesn't exist.  So I started out assuming exists, and needed evidence he doesn't.  If you grew up in an irreligious family, it's probably the reverse.  You seem like you grew up in an irreligious family, m i rite?

So this question, "strongest argument for atheism?" is directed toward people who started off assuming God exists before becoming an atheist.