I started out Catholic but always found the beliefs baffling.

I know now that my mother has a relatively serious problem with depression but as a kid all I understood was that she was upset and sick a lot. I frequently prayed for God to help my mother. She says she still talks to God every day.

I was a very timid and sensitive child. A lot of my time in church and Sunday school was spent crying. I didn't understand why I was always being accused of having done evil things.

My father was and is an atheist but he kept it to himself until I came out. On one hand it's good to know I wasn't influenced by him to "become an atheist"; that I came to my conclusions on my own; but on the other hand it probably would have been comforting to know there were others out there. I thought I was the only person in the world who didn't believe in God.

I made it through First Communion but was allowed to stop Sunday school shortly before Confirmation. Even though my mother is a believer, she dislikes the Catholic church and dogma in general. It makes me wonder why I was sent there in the first place.

I have come to call myself both atheist and agnostic meaning I do not believe there is a God but I do not have, nor claim, certainty or knowledge.

I have also come to like the term ignostic. The term itself is a pun, but the position is legit: that we cannot answer the question of whether or not God exists without first defining what God is supposed to be.

Always been an atheist, even though I was born into the Danish People's Church and even got confirmed at 14. Just didn't think of it and went with the flow, until I started thinking it might be important to think about it - then I left that church. Got my father to join me too, because he had never thought about it before either and just had it for the hell of it.

Raised Southern Baptist/Presbyterian. Converted atheist.

Lifelong atheist, American.

Sometimes I think it would have been better to have some sort of religious upbringing; such that I could relate to that mindset better. After all, when you strip it all down to the nitty-gritty, empathy is all anyone really wants.

Also, there's a category error in the poll. Agnosticism does not address belief. It addresses knowledge. No biggie.

>> ^shuac:

Also, there's a category error in the poll. Agnosticism does not address belief. It addresses knowledge. No biggie.


You and I know that but most people think it means "undecided" so I opted to put it in there. Maybe it wasn't the best choice, but I can't change it now either way.

edit: I can, however, put a clarification in the description, so I'll do that now.

My family is of Mennonite descent, so I was raised a Christian. Was "born again" when I was seven, read the Bible cover-to-cover at 14 and thought about attending Bible School after finishing high school. The only reason I didn't go on to more religious stuff is that my marks in high school were good enough that not attending university would have been a waste.

Became an atheist in university thanks to some good religion teachers and watching Dawkins and Hitchens videos.

As for the atheist/agnostic debate, I would put myself as a 6 on Dawkins' scale: Very low probability of god, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'

I refuse to participate in your poll until you include my category:

Pantheistic Deist

Since I made it up myself I'll probably be the only vote.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

I refuse to participate in your poll until you include my category:
Pantheistic Deist
Since I made it up myself I'll probably be the only vote.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandeism

That would fall under option #4.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^Boise_Lib:
I refuse to participate in your poll until you include my category:
Pantheistic Deist
Since I made it up myself I'll probably be the only vote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandeism
That would fall under option #4.


They already exist--so I'll have to make up another of my own.

Thanks for the link, xxovercastxx, I really didn't know.

The results of this poll do not surprise me as i see you have left out two of the most important religious groups on the internet: Pastafarian and Jedi.

Okay I voted "Pagan".

Pandeism actually looks very close to my own, invented theology--except for anything having to do with the creation of the universe. Since none of us was there--there's no way of knowing.

Christian. Tim Keller is actually a pastor in my denomination.

Hail Satan!

According to the Bible, Satan killed less people than God and he punishes the wicked. He's the good guy of the story!
>> ^AdrianBlack:

Hail Satan!

Don't ruin my reputation.
>> ^gwiz665:
According to the Bible, Satan killed less people than God and he punishes the wicked. He's the good guy of the story!
>> ^AdrianBlack:
Hail Satan!

Buddhism has been noticeably excluded.

>> ^lucky760:

Buddhism has been noticeably excluded.


Putting it in its own category would be very tricky. If Buddhism was its own option, what would a Christian Buddhist select? How about an atheist Buddhist?

I hoped that any variety of Buddhist would fit into one of the above categories and that it might actually be better to not list it specifically exactly for that reason.

If we were able to put a lot more poll options I might have tried to accommodate it with specific entries, but with only 5 I felt this was the best setup.

*comment removed by me.

Born Catholic. Began making a transition to atheism shortly after puberty.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I'm not particularly religious but I think I'd say I was spiritual.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^lucky760:
Buddhism has been noticeably excluded.

Putting it in its own category would be very tricky. If Buddhism was its own option, what would a Christian Buddhist select? How about an atheist Buddhist?
I hoped that any variety of Buddhist would fit into one of the above categories and that it might actually be better to not list it specifically exactly for that reason.
If we were able to put a lot more poll options I might have tried to accommodate it with specific entries, but with only 5 I felt this was the best setup.


Surprising you consider that the ~3rd largest religion on Earth (behind Christianity and Islam, with between 500 million to 1.5 billion) could just "fit" under some other religion's category. Buddhism is by itself its own category. I guess you're right that any variety of Buddhist is covered by your options... except for Buddhists, obviously.

It's rather incredible and slightly insulting that you (or anyone) would assume most Buddhists follow some mishmash of Buddhism and another belief system.

In any case, it's a valid point that we should allow for more poll options. We just didn't want people to go nuts with it. Perhaps we will up it to a maximum of eight instead of five.

[edit]
Polls now support a maximum of 8 vote choices.

@lucky760

When I started reading your post I thought it was going to be about Hinduism (which, according to Wikipedia at least, is more or less on equal terms with Buddhism).

I think I understand why the poll is this way: it seems "Western"-oriented, in that the Abrahamic monotheisms are often represented as the leading triad, while the "oriental" religions are lumped together. I think the poll would look very different if it were on an Indian site, for example.

That being said, the lack of Pastafarianism is unforgivable, arrRRR! May His noodly appendages smite you down with tomato sauce stains!

>> ^lucky760:

Surprising you consider that the ~3rd largest religion on Earth (behind Christianity and Islam, with between 500 million to 1.5 billion) could just "fit" under some other religion's category. Buddhism is by itself its own category. I guess you're right that any variety of Buddhist is covered by your options... except for Buddhists, obviously.
It's rather incredible and slightly insulting that you (or anyone) would assume most Buddhists follow some mishmash of Buddhism and another belief system.

I don't think it's a mishmash, exactly. It's just that, unlike most other major religions, Buddhism doesn't conflict with other beliefs. Of the handful of Buddhists I've known, 1 was Christian and the rest were atheists. "Pure" Buddhism is atheistic, as I understand it, so if I listed it separately would that not introduce a conflict?

What I'm now thinking is my big mistake was explicitly listing atheism. Atheism is only a position on the existence of God, not on religion, and there are religions that do not have gods.

That being said, no slight was meant toward Buddhism or Buddhists. I just made a poor decision when I set the poll up. I should have taken a little longer to consider the options.

<some boring story about my religious or non-religious upbringing>

</some boring story about my religious or non-religious upgrining>

I think this post shows that people resist being categorized.

Lumping together "others" is condescending and can easily be taken as an insult. Also, the term "believers" is an extremely loaded term which some people--I for one--see as excluding. I believe in science and reason. Many monotheists BELIEVE so intently that they have dismissed all evidence--including independently verified scientific evidence--and even admit that they will dismiss all evidence which contradicts their prejudices (definition of dogma).

Please don't see this as an attack xxovercastxx. I see what information you wanted to get out of this--and I'm interested in what results might come out of this--but a poll (IMOHO) will only be seen as pigeonholing. Maybe if you simply asked what beliefs people hold you would get more information (as alway mixed with smartassed remarks--this is Videosift after all).

Christian.

Voting for this poll ended with the majority of users voting Atheist, Agnostic, other non-believer.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

I think this post shows that people resist being categorized.
Lumping together "others" is condescending and can easily be taken as an insult. Also, the term "believers" is an extremely loaded term which some people--I for one--see as excluding. I believe in science and reason. Many monotheists BELIEVE so intently that they have dismissed all evidence--including independently verified scientific evidence--and even admit that they will dismiss all evidence which contradicts their prejudices (definition of dogma).
Please don't see this as an attack xxovercastxx. I see what information you wanted to get out of this--and I'm interested in what results might come out of this--but a poll (IMOHO) will only be seen as pigeonholing. Maybe if you simply asked what beliefs people hold you would get more information (as alway mixed with smartassed remarks--this is Videosift after all).


You might not understand what loaded means if you think "believer" is a loaded term. "Stupid believer" or "righteous believer" would be loaded terms.

As for your belief in science and reason, that's ignoring the context. I asked how people would classify themselves religiously. Unless you think science and reason are religions, your belief in them is irrelevant. Though, if you do think they are religions, feel free to call yourself a believer. This poll is all about self-identifying.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^Boise_Lib:
I think this post shows that people resist being categorized.
Lumping together "others" is condescending and can easily be taken as an insult. Also, the term "believers" is an extremely loaded term which some people--I for one--see as excluding. I believe in science and reason. Many monotheists BELIEVE so intently that they have dismissed all evidence--including independently verified scientific evidence--and even admit that they will dismiss all evidence which contradicts their prejudices (definition of dogma).
Please don't see this as an attack xxovercastxx. I see what information you wanted to get out of this--and I'm interested in what results might come out of this--but a poll (IMOHO) will only be seen as pigeonholing. Maybe if you simply asked what beliefs people hold you would get more information (as alway mixed with smartassed remarks--this is Videosift after all).

You might not understand what loaded means if you think "believer" is a loaded term. "Stupid believer" or "righteous believer" would be loaded terms.
As for your belief in science and reason, that's ignoring the context. I asked how people would classify themselves religiously. Unless you think science and reason are religions, your belief in them is irrelevant. Though, if you do think they are religions, feel free to call yourself a believer. This poll is all about self-identifying.


Ignoring context.

The context in which I use the word believe was a juxtaposition between the belief in science, and reason and the Belief of Believers.

Do you see the difference?

Both use the same word in much different ways. One means a belief in a system which self-corrects and is always adjusting to make a model of the universe which is always getting closer to the underlying truth. And one is a faith based rejection of any change or adjustment in the rock-hard adherence to previously set down TRUTH.

Do I have to explain how I just used the juxtaposition of differing uses of the word truth now? Or, do understand the context?

Because of the condescending tone of your reply; go ahead and see this as an attack.

[Edit of the first statement:
I said people resist being categorized. I should have said that some people resist being categorized. Many people relish the chance to say, "I'm with this group."]

>> ^Boise_Lib:

Ignoring context.
The context in which I use the word believe was a juxtaposition between the belief in science, and reason and the Belief of Believers.
Do you see the difference?
Both use the same word in much different ways. One means a belief in a system which self-corrects and is always adjusting to make a model of the universe which is always getting closer to the underlying truth. And one is a faith based rejection of any change or adjustment in the rock-hard adherence to previously set down TRUTH.
Do I have to explain how I just used the juxtaposition of differing uses of the word truth now? Or, do understand the context?
Because of the condescending tone of your reply; go ahead and see this as an attack.
[Edit of the first statement:
I said people resist being categorized. I should have said that some people resist being categorized. Many people relish the chance to say, "I'm with this group."]

Not sure which part of my post came off as condescending or why. I was just trying to respond to your points.

When I read your original comments on the word "believers", I understand your point to be that non-religious people might "believe" in "science and reason" and might then be considered "believers". Maybe that wasn't your point, but my reply was based on that. I think the question makes it clear that this is not the belief I'm asking about. If, however, someone wants to claim something along the lines of "science and reason are my religion", then they may feel free to classify themselves as believers in the poll.

Sorry again for my tone. It was unintentional.

I think I was the only one in my class not to get confirmated... I was a passive atheist until I noticed where the religions got theit claws in Germany and teh rest of the world.