site last updated 5/6/2005

Or, "Why I call myself an agnostic rather than an atheist, freethinker, 
or any of the other names they've come up with for folks who don't go to church."

    First of all, I think its important to define terms. People like American Atheists use the term "atheist" in it's most literal sense. An "a-theist" is anyone who doesn't believe in a god or gods. As such, the term can correctly apply to the whole gamut of nonbelievers. However, in general usage an atheist is someone who says "There is no god." while an agnostic says "I don't know if there's a god or not." Of course, we Apathetic Agnostics have taken this one step further by saying "I don't know if there's a god or not, and I don't care one way or the other."

    To me, the general usage of "atheist" is as much a statement of faith as any religion. There's no god? How do you know? You'll get much the same answers you'll get from asking a religious believer the same question - "I just know" or "I know in my heart its true." As for me, I don't know. I've never seen a miracle, no voice booming forth from a pillar of fire. No one has yet come up with a logical argument as to why everything couldn't have just happened. Most of those who've tried have done so simply because their own sense of imagination is so stunted they can't conceive of such a thing, so it can't have happened that way.

    Some people ask "If you don't believe in god, what's to stop you from doing evil?" My reply is to look at the history of religion and ask "If these people truly believed, why didn't they stop themselves?" From the horrors of the Crusades to Jimmy Swaggart's crocodile tears, religious believers have always been able to convince themselves that anything they wanted to do is alright with god. My feelings of right and wrong were formed rather simply: My parents said "This is right, and this is wrong" with my father's right hand applied to my backside as necessary when I got confused between the two. They didn't need the Bible to back them up, they had all the authority they needed already. As I grew older I began to develop my own ideas of right & wrong which diverged somewhat from my parent's beliefs, but that's what growing up is all about. That's something that always turned me off about religion - the attitude of "Don't think, just do what we tell you." Its kind of like remaining a child for your whole life. Do everything your Daddy in the sky says without asking questions and you'll be fine. No thanks, I don't need to hold Daddy's hand to cross the street anymore. I'm a big boy now.

    An argument some religious folks will give you is "But what if you're wrong? If we're right you're going to hell, so you should believe. After all, if you're right you haven't lost anything and you have everything to gain if you're wrong." This is known as "Pascal's wager", after the mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal. The problem is it only works in an either/or situation. If the choice is either being a Christian or being a nonbeliever, the wager holds true. But Christianity isn't the only religion (no matter how much Christians would like you to think it is). Your choice is between being a nonbeliever and believing in Christ, Allah, Buddha, Zoroaster, and all the other gods humanity has dreamed up. Pascal's wager can't help us here, since in order to win the wager you have to pick the right religion to believe in. This brings us back to proving which religion is right, which none of them can do.