digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Bookstore Chain Adds an "Atheism/Agnosticism" section to Their Stores

scienceblogs.com — If you've ever been frustrated in a search for books on nonbelief in your local bookstore or annoyed by their inclusion in the comparative religion section, Borders Books has remedied the situation. "Atheism and Agnosticism" has been added as a new section for the works of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and many others.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Zares, on 10/10/2007, -8/+54About time too!
    • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -26/+7*Yawn*

      I guess I'll stay out of that section just like I stay out of the religious section.

      For people who don't believe in God, y'all really get up in arms about that fiction section, as some like to call it.
      • Tanath, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5There are good reasons some do so. Try reading something like Breaking the Spell, or The End of Faith, to get an idea of why.
    • Valleye, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6How many books on atheism have you bought anyway, Zares?
      • gegtik, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8probably none, how the hell was he supposed to find them before now
        • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Opinion.... Author's last name.... author's first name

          If all else breaks down, there's the Dewey Decimal System.
    • TomPlansMedia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21seriously. ive always found it ironic that i had to look in the "religion/spirituality" section to find the God Delusion. i felt like such a d-bag looking through that shelf.
      • Tanath, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Heh. I had to go to the gardening section. Yeh, apparently people were hiding them.
  • breadbin, on 10/10/2007, -5/+98I heartily applaud this. Atheism has been a dirty word for too long. It's about time it was up for discussion in the public square. However I found this line from the article quite amusing:

    "A reader actually sent me a photo of this miracle."

    The miracle of the atheism display stand. I'm calling oxymoron on that one!
    • disciple83, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5my first thoughts on this as well.
    • expat001, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Wow I have read every book on in that photo.

      LOL
    • julianrod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5When I read it I thought of it as irony, not an oxymoron.
    • VeganG, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3What's wrong with the word "miracle"? Semantics.
      • Tanath, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yeah, miracles are just statistically improbable events which happen every day, not supernatural.
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Exactly. Nearly everyone states that birth is a miracle. However, millions of babies are born on a daily basis. There is nothing miraculous about birth at all. It literally happens all the time.
        • anonym41414, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Not by any actual definition of the word. No.

          miracle |ˈmirikəl| noun A surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency
    • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5"Atheism has been a dirty word for too long."
      Not in Europe. You guys are lagging behind so it's about time.
      • offwithyourtv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Unfortunately we're still lagging behind. Way behind. The idea of moving to Europe seems more tempting every day.
        • anonym41414, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0I'll help you pack.

          I'm hardly a stars-and-stripeser, but I'm sick of people "threatening" to emigrate. If you want to go, go. Nobody's stopping you. Except the immigration authority in whatever destination country you have in mind.
          • dodus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And they have jails and 10-year bans. So I'd definitely consider that "stopping".
    • CalmLlama, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I agree that Atheism isn't treated as an equal with the other religions, but it is still a belief system.
  • atdigg, on 10/10/2007, -15/+12I bet this is just the way to take those books from "Religion" section so they will not disturb some religious readers who don't want to have their ideas challenged if they open such a book by mistake.
    • skjede, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17Usually they keep books like that under "science". At least, B&N does.
      • atdigg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Sorry, wrong assumption, I thought that book that debate about God would be placed in Religion section, I usually buy my books online so I had no clue in which section they go at B&N
    • siszam, on 10/10/2007, -33/+7It's probably an attempt to pacify the atheists who don't want their religion questioned. Oh yes, it is a religion. Atheists are the ones who hate people for not believing as they do.
      • TomFrost, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15That's a little strong. Sure, there are evangelistic atheists (especially on digg) who make your life hell if you're a christian, but calling them "THE ones who hate people..." is very false, as it doesn't take much looking to find a so-called christian who's just as unaccepting of atheism. And it's all just dumb, all these arguments. People are always going to believe what they've decided to believe, and neither christianity or atheism will ever go away. There will be die-hards in both groups, and they're best ignored.
        • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Most Christians never decided anything.
          And you would say the same in Europe say 50 years ago and it's totally different now.
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Christians decide what to believe all the time. One woman gets married, joins her husband's religion, and decides to believe what the Catholics believe. One guy moves to a new place that doesn't have his church, so he looks around, finds another church, and decides to believe what that new church believes.

          On a another level, Christians have only recently decided that discriminating against women is wrong. That one's so new that not all Christians agree. It's not like another new belief that's had enough time for everyone to agree, which is that slavery is wrong. Despite being the "basis of all morality", there is not a single line in the Bible which condemns slavery. That belief that slavery is evil is a completely secular one.
          • dodus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1There is however, a line in the Bible urging women to be subordinate to their husbands. That's probably why that one's having so much trouble letting go.
      • swrostmore, on 10/10/2007, -18/+4to be fair, people of most religions hate people for not believing as they do. This is a pretty good argument for Athiesm as a religion.
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I originally dugg this down since atheism is not a religion, but I actually agree that religions make people hate for not believing as they do. If we weren't nutty over religion we wouldn't have this Palestinian/Israeli issue. The Protestants and Catholics wouldn't have blown themselves up all over Ireland. Sunnis and Sharia wouldn't be having a civil war in Iraq. Muslim extremists wouldn't have flown jumbo jets into the twin towers on 9/11. Most of the wars out there wouldn't be happening. Atrocities throughout history such as the Inquisition, the 30 Years War, the Crusades, the Salem Witch Burnings, the burning of Jews and heretics in the Dark Ages would not have occurred. In short if we didn't have religion, human society would be in a far, far better place.
      • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -6/+23A lack of belief does not constitute a religion. Is not collecting stamps a hobby of mine?
        • MonsterChaOS, on 10/10/2007, -14/+6Atheism isn't a lack of belief, it is a belief in nothing. There is a huge difference.
          • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6So when I take your religion away from you, you believe in nothing? Sad...
          • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7No, Nihilism is a belief in nothing. Theism is the belief in the existence of a god or gods. Atheism is a-theism, the belief there is no god.
          • SenorCardgage74, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Thats nihilism.
            Now we have to cut your dick off, Lebowski.
        • ryanissuper, on 10/10/2007, -12/+5Agnosticism is a lack of belief. Atheism is the belief that there is not now and never was any sort of a creator, which certainly takes a leap of faith.
          • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5No sir. Atheism is a lack of belief. Agnosticism is not being sure what to believe.
          • Xenth, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4You've got your definitions mixed up. Atheism is the belief that there is no deity. Agnosticism is no belief, not just being undecided.

            Atheism DOES require a leap of faith. You *believe* there is no god despite being unable to disprove something's existence.
          • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6Agnostics are atheists who do not understand probability. Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, elves, gnomes, imps, Thor, Odin, Shiva, Zeus, and God are all equally likely to them since they can't DISPROVE any of them.
          • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Xenth, you Americans have even this messed up.
            Atheists don't believe in god (for there is no evidence), period.
          • Xenth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Atheism and Agnosticism is about logic. It has nothing to do with probability because it would be impossible to calculate such odds without any real data. Agnostics simply take logic further. Is there evidence there is a god? No and so Atheists stop here. Is it possible to prove a god does not exist? Again no and this is where you get agnosticism.

            Atheists take the lack of evidence for a god as an excuse to *believe* there is no god. Agnostics refuse to believe anything without evidence.
          • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1@Xenth
            I also believe there are no unicorns, no fairies, no ghosts, no imps, no Santa Claus, and no Easter Bunny. However, an agnostic would have to admit they MAY exist, nevermind that probability suggests all of those are so completely improbable as to be completely ridiculous. Agnostics are assigning a higher probability to God than any of those, despite a lack of evidence for his existence whatsoever.
        • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8@MonsterChaOS

          In its general sense, atheism typically refers to a lack of belief or the rejection of theism. You can twist words many ways, but atheists typically don't have a religion; they don't congregate; there is no formal doctrine. Some are humanists, naturalists, Buddhists (Me), among others. Some simply don't give a damn. To call atheism itself a religion is bordering on absurd.

          Why do religious zealots fight so hard to get atheism called a religion? Is it that hard to accept that people don't always have 'beliefs'? It's annoying. I'm going to stick with calling myself an agnostic Zen Buddhist to avoid this flamebait.
          • rderveloy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3You are confusing the definitions of religion, faith, and belief. Atheism is not a religion, but it is a belief.

            Atheism: "The doctrine or belief that there is no God."

            http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism
          • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2@rderveloy

            I wholeheartedly agree; however, they are being used interchangeably by religious nuts to say that atheism is a religion because 'beliefs' are involved. The religious definition of belief is very distorted. It assumes that a belief must not have any basis in reality; whereas most atheists argue that their beliefs are based on the evidence that is provided - if there is no evidence, then there is no belief. Or at least, that's how I've come to acknowledge the situation from talking to people.
        • SpectralSounds, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3I see this argument a lot. Your lack of belief is a belief in and of itself. Is it not? Its like saying, "I choose not to make a decision." Well, the fact that you chose not to make a decision is a decision in and of itself.

          Thats not to say atheism is a religion. But, I do see atheists who try to push their views onto others... to basically convert them so to speak. Its a pointless argument as a person above me has already stated. To each his own I say. People should respect others beliefs and not force them on anybody.
          • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Bull. The definition of belief is the acceptance of a claim. You can't call the rejection of a claim, a belief.
          • SpectralSounds, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1@imperium2000

            What? That is a double negative. You can't have a lack of belief. Your lack of belief is a belief. You dont believe in God. So, there is your belief.

            Try and argue around that all you like, but the facts wont change. Here is a prime example of how your claim makes 0 sense.

            "You cant call the rejection of a claim, a belief." O.J. Simpson was claimed to be innocent by himself and the courts. I reject that claim. I believe he is guilty.

            There, your post has been nullified.
          • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Wrong analogy. Very wrong indeed.
        • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2@SpectralSounds

          Sure, I guess, but then you're bending semantics nonsensically. If that's the case then I have a lot of beliefs because I don't believe a lot of things.
          • SpectralSounds, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2be·lief(b-lf)
            n.
            1. The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another: My belief in you is as strong as ever.
            2. Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something: His explanation of what happened defies belief.
            3. Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Atheists love to argue the definition of religion. Do you want to tell me that the definition of belief isnt what is posted above? Let me repeat the definition:

            Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something

            So, if you have mentally accepted that God doesnt exist. That is your belief. If you have accepted that religion is a bad thing, that is your belief. You cannot argue around this.


          • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3@SpectralSounds

            Sure. However, beliefs not founded with supporting evidence generally aren't worth much. After that, they're either personal morals or engendered doctrine.
      • Eivo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6And THAT is the kind of logic that helped bring me to Atheism to begin with.
      • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Atheism is a viewpoint about god, but it certainly is not a religion itself. Atheism has no tenets, no dogma, no doctrine, no moral code, and no SET of beliefs to pull from - as such, it is not a religion.

        In fact, when someone says they are an atheist that only tells you one belief they lack, but it tells you nothing about the beliefs they actually possess. You can be an atheist and not believe in evolution. You can be an atheist and not believe in humanism. You can be an atheist and believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, astrology, tarot cards, crystals, and any other sort of superstition.

        When an atheist tells you what they believe, that is a result of their personal opinion resulting from one of these other belief systems, such as humanism or evolution. The atheist may subscribe to humanism or evolution because they don't believe in god, but humanism and evolution do not require atheism. There are Christian humanists. And there are Christians who believe in evolution.
      • rderveloy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Actually, Atheism is not a religion as the definition of religion includes the belief in a supernatural being and/or powers. However, it is a faith.

        Faith is defined as belief that is not based on proof. Since there is insufficient evidence to neither conclusively prove nor disprove the existence of God or another divine power, Atheism, like religion, does require a leap of faith in order to bridge the lack of evidence. Atheism is the faith that God does not exist; or, more specifically, the faith in the nonexistence of a divine/supernatural power or entity.

        Quite ironic isn't it?
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3No, it's not ironic if you actually follow logic. If you state that Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, God, or a rock exists, then it is your duty to actually demonstrate that it does exist. You can show me the rock and hand it to me. You can weigh, measure, feel, and probe the rock and show me your results. You can do any number of tests to that rock. I can repeat those tests until the end of time, and likely get the same results each time. When you say the rock exists, I can believe you. However, there are no tests for Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and God. If those things exist, then it is your duty to prove your assertion. It is NOT my duty to disprove your assertion. It is YOUR faith saying these things exist, not MY faith saying otherwise.
          • rderveloy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Your statement is irrelevant. Because we are unable to test something isn't evidence that something does or does not exist. You should know that. For example, just because Christopher Columbus couldn't have tested for the existence of subatomic particles doesn't mean they didn't exist at the time. Consequently, just because we are unable to test the effects of faster than light space travel on the human body isn't proof that it does or doesn't have an effect.

            It's simple logic really:
            The definition of faith is the belief in something without proof. And a belief is the acceptance of a claim.

            You accept the claim that God does not exist.
            Since you have accepted this claim, it is, by definition, a belief.
            There is no evidence that conclusively proves nor disproves that belief.
            Your belief is a faith.

            Tell you what, prove your assertion using a method that can't also be used to prove the opposite and I'll admit I'm wrong. I know I can't, but you're welcome to try.

            Oh, by the way, I never said that I believe in God. Logically, this doesn't mean that I do or don't believe in God.
          • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If you say God exists, then the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that assertion. That is just as true as if you said unicorns exist or the Tooth Fairy exists. If you say aliens exist, then the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that assertion just as well.

            True, in all probability with all the uncountable worlds in all the uncountable solar systems in all the uncountable galaxies in this universe, there are bound to be aliens out there. However, even as probable as that is, you still can not say that aliens exist because there is no evidence. To use your example, Columbus couldn't go around claiming that subatomic particles existed either since he had no evidence for those. There is no evidence for God, so you can't go around saying he exists either.

            The burden of proof for me saying something does not exist which you claim exists and which you have no evidence does not lie with me.
        • Scynet, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Yes, but life doesn't quite work if we start believing everything that can't be proven not to exist, the (in)famous unicorn example was created to demonstrate that. In case you haven't heard it: should we also believe in unicorns because we can't prove they don't exist? Santa Claus? Tooth Fairy? Zeus? Do we have to start believing in ALL IMAGINABLE THINGS because we can't prove they don't exist?

          • rderveloy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1What? Did I say that you, I, or anyone else for that matter had to believe in something because it can't be proved nor disproved? NO!

            Not only are you completely missing the point, you are taking this WAY too far.

            My comment was a simple exercise in reason and logic to prove a point. Nothing more, nothing less.

            That point is that, by DEFINITION, Atheism is a faith. It may not be religion, but it is a faith. You're confusing the meaning of the words religion and faith.
      • ben_nushmut, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Hey, I don't hate anyone who doesn't feel the same way about "God" as me. I stick to respectful disagreement generally, but it's usually the most devout of religious people who get up in arms when my disbelief in their "God" comes up. I've been cursed at many times in my life, told I'd wind up in "Hell", and that I was somehow less human than them.

        If you believe in "God", good for you. I just think that many of Christianity's core teachings can be learned without having to believe in the "Almighty".

        Most of my friends in the real world find me to be a caring and moral person, yet I've never set foot in a church except at the behest of others (funerals, being babysat when young, music concerts etc.) or for historical purposes.
    • redwards, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19Or just so that atheists don't have to look like morons searching for an atheism book in the religion section.

      James Randi's books are in the 'new age' section at Barnes and Noble. What a travesty.
    • redwards, on 10/10/2007, -8/+6Or just so that atheists don't have to look like morons searching for an atheism book in the religion section.

      James Randi's books are in the 'new age' section at Barnes and Noble. What a travesty.
  • blast0x, on 10/10/2007, -9/+87In other news, Bush declares Borders Bookstore a terrorist organization
  • mage1129, on 10/10/2007, -20/+126Atheism already has a section at the book store, it is called non-fiction.
    • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -43/+5Located right next to the DIY wrist cutting section for your convienence
      • JD52, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15Oh yeah.... because Christians never kill themselves.
        • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Nope, never. Not one in the history of christianity.
          • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"The No Real Scotsman" Fallacy in action. I'm assuming you mean that no 'real' Christian by your definition would kill themselves?
          • ffleming, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2@imperium
            Actually, it's the "your ass just got trolled" fallacy. Deal with it.
      • atdigg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Such a nice comment... let me guess you are a Christian!
    • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2YES!
    • cusoman, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1"Fiction" is a man made word meaning it has boundaries bordering what only man can prove. Being that there is so much that the human mind cannot grasp or even begin to understand (and I'm not talking about higher powers here people, I'm talking about scientific mysteries) the antonym "reality" or "fact" fails at fully living up to its definition as it only takes into account what we currently know.

      You may be able to prove to me that your facts are "real" and that they prove the non-existence of God, but can you go a step farther and explain how it is that you feel the ground beneath you? Can you explain, down to the tiniest molecule, how you seeing these things even work? You know, sight. If you have any questions about how the processes work, then you, my friend, are no different than someone who believes in a higher power.
      • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7So that's how you excuse blind faith to yourself or what?
      • BeardDob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Nice attempt ... but no.
    • TheGeek27, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2BWAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

      Oh man, you're killin' me here! You should take that act on the road.
    • Cyberen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Zing!
    • jmkiii, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Cusoman needs a nappy nap.
  • WestonP, on 10/10/2007, -38/+12I find it interesting that atheists organize, meet in groups, have their own books, etc... you know, just like religions do. The sooner that people realize that both sides are human beings who actually can have a lot in common, the sooner they'll be able to co-exist peacefully and respectfully. Until then, we'll just see both groups spewing endless bitter remarks on the Internet and elsewhere, trying to segregate book stores, and other petty and pointless things that only serve to further divide people and spread hate.
    • gegtik, on 10/10/2007, -5/+29Things I don't find interesting: your thoughts.
      • Fafnir43, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Advocating peace and understanding is uninteresting now?

        [Note to that unfortunate subset of atheists that froths at the mouth: I am an atheist myself.]
        • gegtik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Sorry, I tuned out after you equated atheism and religion because they both gather and discuss ideas.
          • Sketchcast, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I guess my Toyota club is a religion too, after all we organize, meet as a group, talk about Toyotas, even have our own books... sweet. I wonder if I can claim that street drifting is protected under freedom of religion?
        • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Well, instead of thumping a bible into my head, you athiests use your teeth.
    • bagboyrebel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+20yeah, how dare they organize their bookstores so that people can find what they are looking for...
    • arbulus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7I'm sorry, but "spreading hate" falls under the purvey of the Christian side of that argument. They're the ones who scream and shout at non-believers like they are garbage; they are the ones who go around telling non-christians that they will be happy to see them burning in hell; they are the ones who bomb abortion clinics; they are the ones who refuse even to speak to someone who isn't christian. You don't seem to realize that it's the Christians that are causing the tension and have been doing so for centuries.

      it's the Christians who need to open up to the possiblity that the world is a larger place than their little book tells them that it is. It's the Christians who need to stop declaring ***** holy war against non-Christians. Maybe then we'll be able to co-exist peacefully and respectfully.
      • jricestevens, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1You do realize that your comments amount to Christians saying "atheists have no morals", right? You're being just as bigoted by lumping all Christians into one group as the Christian's you're pissed at.

        This is the problem with knee-jerk Christian bashing.
      • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1All that you're going to burn in hell stuff they spit at you is equally as offensive to a non-believer as 'There is no God' is to a believer.
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Right... that's equivalent to the modern equivalent of burning heretics: bombing abortion clinics.
      • GfunkGbuss, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1There are always extremes to all sides... I'll admit to being Christian myself, but I won't try to force my religion on you if you chose to not believe it, and many of my Christian friends are the same way... I have no problems being friends with Athiests (I have several), we just tend to avoid discussing that topic and believe whatever we wish

        You're being just as stereotypical and hypocritical in your comments as the very "hate-spreading" Christians you speak of, but I'm sure this comment is only going to get dugg down because, after all, this is Digg.
        • joe7845, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Isn't it your duty as a Christian to spread your faith?
      • mepol, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Touche'
    • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8It's hard for atheists to exist peacefully when they've been hunted, burned, and killed by Christians, Muslims, and other believers thousands of years due to being heretics.
      • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0Yeah, that must be really hard on you
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4There was a recent poll which stated that atheists are far more distrusted than blacks and Jews. In fact, atheists are the most hated minority in the US. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't previously lived in the South. I kept my mouth firmly shut down there, lest a bunch of hicks decide to string me up. Even today after 10 years of living in the North, I still haven't come out to my friends and family that I'm an atheist. My wife only recently learned.
    • quaxon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10being an athiest is nothing like being a christian. look at the religious whackos in kansas who stopped teaching science in favor of fairy tale stories. religion is anti-knowledge and has taken an anti-knowledge stance throughout history. look at all the religious lobbying groups in washington and all the religious nuts in congress and senate who are trying to get roe over-turned, get creationism in every classroom, ban porn and strip clubs, hell just turn on the ***** tv and see what religion has done to free speech, where in america (supposedly the free-est country) you cant even hear a swear word on cable (that you pay for) yet in every other country even basic cable isnt censored, you get true free speech (not the watered down american version that masquerades around as free speech) and even nudity. theyve got people like fred phelps on their side spreading his hate (although not too many of them admit that they support him i know many christians hold the same views as him against gays from first hand accounts). ***** dude the list goes on and on, seriously if you dont think this is a problem then you are blind. there is so much that christians are doing wrong in this country

      i remember going on a roadtrip through the midwest last year and in and driving through Pennsylvania or ohio or one of those random middle states to get to NYC i saw countless signs and billboards stating that youre going to hell if you dont follow the ten commandments or love christ etc. (dont believe me i have the pictures to prove it). ive never seen any athiest billboards condemning people who are religious.
      • GfunkGbuss, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Just because you don't see Athiest signs doesn't mean people wouldn't make them, it's just that Christianity is more accepted in this country, thus you see more churches with more bilboards. Bong hits 4 Jesus, anyone?

        Besides, the original post you replied to said Athiesm was a RELIGION, not just comparing it to Christianity. There are hundreds of religians very different from Christianity. Dictionary.reference.com has this definition for religion: something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience

        If you'd ask me, Athiesm falls right into this. You guys just need to realize that labelling Athiesm as a religion is NOT the same as comparing it to Christianity, it is merely going off a very definition of the word religion: a belief.

        Most Christians don't like being called members of a cult, but many definitions would put them under that word.
    • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1How on earth did you get dugg down for that
    • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I find it interesting that animal lovers/baseball fans/role players/swingers organize, meet in groups, have their own books, etc... you know, just like religions do. Notice what a retarded definition of religion toy are using?.
  • thedarkrabbit, on 10/10/2007, -32/+11But doesn't this kind of, in a way, sorta maybe attempt to MAKE Atheism a religion?
    • swrostmore, on 10/10/2007, -20/+6Athiests do this all by themselves: "Atheism already has a section at the book store, it is called non-fiction." How dogmatic is that?
      • redwards, on 10/10/2007, -4/+17That's what we sly atheists call a 'joke'.
      • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3If that is your definition of dogma, you obviously need to open a dictionary.
    • gegtik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21Yeah Borders is pretty much responsible for establishing whether certain movements are religions
    • ohthedaysofyore, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16No.
    • disciple83, on 10/10/2007, -22/+4i say it already is. They already have extremists like Hitchens and Dawkins, who yell and scream just as loud as the religious extremists like Falwell. They all vehemently defend their "belief" in a lack of God, and place all of their faith in "science". Just my two cents, and it won't be the first time it was dugg down.
      • Fafnir43, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Er... Not sure about Hitchens (never heard of him), but I'm damn sure Dawkins never advocated forcing believers to become atheists. Or blamed 9/11 on religious people. Or said that religious people weren't truly American. Or tried to get government funding for atheistic initiatives. Or really did any of the things that makes Christian fundamentalist whackjobs like Falwell such wankers.

        He insults religion quite a lot, I'll grant you, but that's about it. If all Falwell had ever done was insult atheism, I wouldn't have had a problem with him.
      • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Science is a useful tool that has led to progress. These people don't put 'faith' in science, as there is nothing about science that requires blind faith; the scientific method and careful observation allow for conclusions to be drawn. It is falsifiable.
      • rderveloy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Science doesn't require faith. Faith is defined as belief that is not based on proof. All of science is based on evidence, therefore no faith is needed.

        However, that doesn't mean Atheists aren't without faith. Since there is insufficient evidence to conclusive prove nor disprove the existence of God or another divine power or entity, Atheism does require a leap of faith to bridge this gap of evidence. Atheism is the faith that God does not exist; or, more specifically, the faith in the nonexistence of a divine/supernatural power or entity even though there is no conclusive evidence to support their beliefs.

        Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Atheism is incorrect or not true. I'm simply saying that it requires the same leap of faith that belief in divine entities do for the simple reason that it can't be conclusively proven.
      • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3You are a liar. You probably never read or even seen Dawkins or Hitches in debates or interviews have you? In what way are they extremists? Is criticism of religion extremism? Are they advocating violence?


        Since you are using faith and belief in a completely arbitrary and ultimately useless way and completely ignored any prior post correcting your usage of the two terms, you are purposefully being deceitful, ignorant or stupid. No wonder you're being dugg down.
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7It's just a way of organizing them. Do "Non-Fiction" "Reference" "Travel" and "Sci-Fi" sections make the books they include "religious"?
    • Nougat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Atheism will be a religion when it gets tax-exempt status.
    • arbulus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Atheism is not a religion. That's the same ***** that creationists try to push about Evolution.

      Atheism is a default. You are NOT born with faith or a belief system. You don't believe in anything. You are taught to believe. But you are taught to believe in something that cannot even be proven to exist. The burden of proof is on the believer to prove that what they say is true. If they cannot, then the argument is null. Lacking that belief is not in itself a belief; it is simply nothing.
    • Fafnir43, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well, the only realistic alternative is to stack atheism-themed books along with 'Religion' or 'New Age'. If anything, I'd say the trend's moving in the other direction.
    • jhsolorz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3For atheism to be a religion, atheists would have to agree on more than just the non-existence of Gods and be dogmatic and ritualistic about it.
  • Shattermap, on 10/10/2007, -46/+6HEY DIGGGG HERE IS AN ARTICLE WITH "ATHEISM" IN THE TITLE! AM I COOL YET!??!?!?!?!?!?!

    Why does Digg have to be the news feed for atheist progression in America?
    • Pake, on 10/10/2007, -5/+21Because we're censored everywhere else by religious people.
      • Shattermap, on 10/10/2007, -14/+1No you aren't , your just seeking sympathy based on instances from encounters with a few extremist nutjobs. Most Christians, Jews, Muslims I know couln't care less what you believe. Stop it with your pity party already, and stop it with the generalizations. You are no worse than the most intrusive fundies out there, which represent a fraction of "religious" people. I will eventually be dugg down for this comment, but I am not going to call it "oppression". Grow up, claiming "athesim" doesn't automatically make you a wise, logical, world renowned philosopher.
        • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -10/+0You'll be dug down, but not by me... I don't consider myself religious, but these athiests are the are the most forceful with their beliefs of anyone. I'm pretty sure the same things they do are what they hate about christians and other religious groups.
          • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5"these athiests are the are the most forceful with their beliefs of anyone"

            Yes. Those civilian killing, abortion clinic bombing atheists are so scary.
          • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yes, I do hate Religion. I think it is a superstitious faith based belief that belongs in the dark ages and is retarding progress. I do not hate its practitioners. So being passionate is equated with forcefulness and extremism. I guess you can call most sports fans extremist?
        • Pake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6You haven't tried to write to the opinion section of your newspaper lately, have you? How about the Starbucks disaster? I'm not claiming to be wise or logical, but atheism does get oppressed.
    • Scynet, on 10/10/2007, -3/+21Because the Diggers want it to be? Because the topic is important to them? Why do you care?
    • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -22/+1People who try to pound atheism into other people are usually the same people who are insecure. The same way christians try to explain how the world was created, athiests try to explain why no one loves them
      • Shattermap, on 10/10/2007, -11/+0I swear, I just want to put a mirror in front of ever loudmouthed atheist I have ever heard complaining about the Jehovahs Witnesses that knocked on their door.
        • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0my thoughts exactly
        • DavidYeah, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Yeah, but we don't show up at your door at five in the morning.

          On digg, we show up due to democratic process. Digg up your favorite religious articles if you want. Or bury the athiest ones. Or go create your own digg.com clone like the conservatives did with conservapetia when they realised that the reality presented in wikipedia doesn't conform to their ideology and never would.
        • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5You are where? A public forum discussing Atheism and Religion. Do we come into your homes, TV, school or government and try to force you to believe?
          You seem to have a double standard when it comes to atheism.
      • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3If you can't see the difference between an article posted on Digg and someone bothering you at your home residence, then a brisk walk on the freeway might clear your head.
      • Fafnir43, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Interesting. So you, as a Christian, believe that if God didn't exist then no-one would love you? What does that say about you as a person?
      • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Sad. Is that all you are? A Christian? Without Christianity, no one would love you? Sad.
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7So you're whining about the kinds of articles posted on a user-driven news site? Go somewhere else.
  • infra172, on 10/10/2007, -21/+10Christians should arrogantly demand that their beliefs be classified a non-religion too.
    • shibbyo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4What?
    • Zreitan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4he means to imply us Atheists say we aren't a religion when 'really' we are. of course this is just plain stupid as Atheism is a logical movement when religion is 'faith' in a man in the sky. we look for the answers, they try to prop up their faith.
    • ecidnac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2In any case, atheism is a LACK of beliefs, so um...
    • mrsatan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Man you are a complete idiot. Do you even understand what being classified as a non-religion means.
  • rootchino, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1I was working on borders new e-commerce website and noticed that when going
    through and testing that the sections of books are being displayed properly. They also
    had quite a few items under their "Featured Item" sections that were edgy to say the least
    but I think that was just the software developers screwing with us...
  • Pake, on 10/10/2007, -6/+35Damn. Maybe it was just me, but I loved watching people get offended when they entered the religious section and would run across "The God Delusion" and other books.
    • catalysis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Who were more offended, the christians or the atheists?
      • Pake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9The Christians, like your typical Mrs. Over-Weight-Soccer-Mom. They are the funniest, because they start huffing and puffing, contemplating on whether or not to remove the books and put them in another section, but too scared to even touch the books for fear of someone thinking they are going to buy it.
    • techgnostic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You can still have fun reshelving which makes it even more fun.
    • netsui, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Just move the Bibles to the fiction section.
    • verstohlen, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1Exactly. I feel the same way when Atheists run across the book "The Atheist Delusion" in the Atheist section. Their faces turn red, steam starts coming out of their ears and everything, just like when they read Digg threads about religion and they come across a post that's pro-God. Hilarious! Oh wait, I see another one right now...
  • expat001, on 10/10/2007, -9/+15Great, are they going to post an armed guard so we won't be attacked by some crazy Christian nut job on a mission from God?

    /sarcasam (sort of)
    • rderveloy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Why would you need an armed guard from the blues brothers?
    • verstohlen, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1It's the atheist nuts I'm more worried about. And there are more of them out there than you realize, pointing fingers and screaming at religious people like pod people in Invasion of the Body Snatchers. You're next!
  • greymattar, on 10/10/2007, -41/+10Atheism is already a religion. It takes just as much faith to be an athiest as a Christian. Neither side can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are right, hence it takes faith to believe either.
    • expat001, on 10/10/2007, -8/+19Why do you hate the pursuit of knowledge?
      • jobscomfort, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1Where is the hate? I always miss the hate... I also missed any reference to "the pursuit of knowledge"... My computer must have blocked it...
      • Fafnir43, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Please tell me that's sarcasm.
      • rderveloy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The pursuit of knowledge is not dependent on someones beliefs. Humanity has always been pursing knowledge. Not all scientists are atheists.
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0What do you call the intelligent design movement other than preventing the pursuit of knowledge?
    • swrostmore, on 10/10/2007, -9/+8OH NO YOU DIDN'T! Atheists hate that argument.
    • ryanissuper, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4That's why agnostics rock. You can't prove my beliefs wrong, cause I don't have any.
    • bagboyrebel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11so not believing in unicorns is a religion too? how about not believing in faeries, or gnomes, or leprechauns? just because you can't prove/disprove something doesn't make it a valid belief. By your logic, I could claim that the earth is actually controlled by a giant invisible duck, but since you can't disprove it it must be a valid claim.
    • gwalms, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Prove to me that fairies aren't real. O *****, you can't. I guess we are all crazy loons for assuming that fairies aren't real..
    • Zreitan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10ahem, the ground you're standing on and the universe you live in is a whole lot more proof for Atheism then some silly made up book. And when i say made up i mean stolen and reused material.
      • cusoman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Do you know exactly how your senses work, down to the most basic building block (which still hasn't been discovered or confirmed) to trust them? Do you fully understand what's happening when you 'feel' the ground beneath you, when you "see" things with your eyes? If you have to question any part of the biology and science behind it, then you're no farther than someone who believes in a higher power.
    • wvannus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Atheism has less proving it's fallacy than Christianity.
    • Bamborzled, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Wrong, because us atheists have evidence. The only evidence you have is a somewhat historically accurate storybook that was never meant to be taken literally.

      "Neither side can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are right, hence it takes faith to believe either."
      Can you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that gravity exists? Long story short: No, but there's sufficient evidence to believe it does.
    • Herriott101, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Not quite true. Many atheists are atheists because all they evidence they have at their disposal suggests that there is no god. This is the scientific approach you can never prove any scientific theory beyond a shaddow of a doubt, but you can say that a theory is valid if the evidence suggests that it is. And this is what many (I'm not saying all here, but many) atheists believe, i 'believe' in atheism like i 'believe' in relativity or gravity. If there was more evidence for a god to exist then i'm sure many people, including myself, would admit that they were wrong and that a god did exist.
    • Fafnir43, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Wrong. You're acting as though we can either be absolutely certain of something, or have no evidence one way or the other. That's a false dichotomy. Atheists assert that while we can't technically be /certain/ that God doesn't exist, in the same way that we can't be /certain/ that the Kuiper belt doesn't contain any asteroids made of frozen caramel without sending out probes, without evidence to the contrary the probability that God exists is so low as to be practically negligible.

      Does it take just as much faith to disbelieve in the Loch Ness Monster as it does to believe in it?
    • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7If that's the case:
      My favorite hobby is not collecting stamps and my religion consists of the disbelief in unicorns, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy.
    • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I can't disprove Santa Claus either, but I certainly don't say he exists.

      I can't disprove unicorns either, but I certainly don't say they exist.

      The same goes for the elves, hobbits, dwarves, gnomes, imps, Thor, Odin, Shiva, Zeus, Medusa, etc.

      The problem with your argument is that it ignores probability. The idea of an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good God is so overwhelmingly improbable that it is on the level to believing in the Tooth Fairy. So, while I can never disprove God, I certainly have no reason whatsoever to actually believe in him. In fact, just like the Tooth Fairy, I can safely say that the idea of God is so improbable that God does not exist.
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Actually, atheism can be disproven. All it would take would be for God to show up in front of everyone and perform miracles that defy all rational explanation. The fact that he has yet to do so is yet another good arguement for being an atheist.

      The existence of God, however, can never be disproven, since he could have initiated the Big Bang and then had no further interaction with the universe. This, however, is not a very good reason to believe in him.
    • Yarmin3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1By your definition it takes just as much faith to believe you can flying from a rooftop as it does to believe you'll fall to the ground. I can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that I won't be able to fly because I've never tried it before. However, from all the evidence I know it's most likely that I won't be able to fly.
    • Yarmin3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0By your definition it takes just as much faith to believe you can flying from a rooftop as it does to believe you'll fall to the ground. I can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that I won't be able to fly because I've never tried it before. However, from all the evidence I know it's most likely that I won't be able to fly.
  • empiric, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Does this mean theism in now -extra- not? Super-not? Growing more not over time?

    "Reification fallacy"... learn it, love it.
  • jobscomfort, on 10/10/2007, -21/+15Atheism: I know there is no God because there is no God that I know.
    Agnosticism: I just don't know.
    Goodie! A whole section dedicated to explaining, oh, I don't know... exactly.
    • Pake, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0I hope they conveniently locate it next to the other section.
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13CORRECTION:
      Atheism: There is no compelling evidence for God, therefore there's no more reason to believe there is one than any other mythical deity throughout history. Live with it.
      Agnosticism: I just don't know.
      Religion: I believe in God because this old book and my mommy and daddy and the preacher all say he exists and if you don't agree then you're evil and going to Hell forever. So there.
      • FatherVic, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2You guys sure know what you don't understand...

        Lumping all religious people under that category is tantamount to bigotry.
        • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4So how many educated and intelligent people do you know who actually chose a religion without being brainwashed? And how do these numbers compare to brainwashed ones who managed to think freely and abandon religion?
      • stonewaljacksn, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1wow otaku i wonder if u are biased.
    • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7A better definition is Atheism: There is no god since there is no evidence for one.
  • alex.will, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24Borders pissed off a lot of atheists by pulling Free Inquiry from their shelves for printing the Danish cartoons. Christopher Hitchens boycotted them after that. Props for attempting to hug and make up.
  • gegtik, on 10/10/2007, -14/+2Our Group vs. Their Group arguments are a weird mix of frustrating and supremely boring, whether it's atheists wanking about catholics or republicans wanking about democrats. Buried.
    • gwalms, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3yes, everybody is right. EVERYTHING is subjective..
  • scottmillerinva, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6Why would you need a book section on atheism? Since the only reason to discuss or to read about atheism would be to counter a religious argument, wouldn't the books fit best in the religion section?
    • redwards, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Yes, and lets put the science books under new-age, while we're at it, since they tend to counter each other. Wait, what?
  • scottious, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Ummm, I go to Borders all the time and they've had an atheism section for a while now.
    • aerogant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah, the one near my work has had it for a while at least, but by 'section' I mean the end of the audio book isle (which is near the religious section) with like 8 books.
  • wafflesomd, on 10/10/2007, -9/+12You know, one of the reasons I'm atheist, is because I don't care about religion, and think that it's one of the greatest brain washing sceme's sine gumby.

    The most annoying ppl are the atheists who have to let everyone know they are atheist.
    • danielsan1701, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9I have to agree. I consider myself to be athiest. Not an Athiest.
    • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Some people are passionate and fight to prevent their country from falling into the hands of the fundamentalists. They fight to get atheism accepted as normal. If you are annoyed by that, too ***** bad.
      • BeardDob, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0What do you mean "falling into " ? This country was founded by fundamentalists... sadly.
      • SteelyGlint, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Many of the founding fathers were actually Deists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deist), just about the least fundamentalist form of religion that was acceptable in that time. Why do you think they tried so hard to prevent the country from becoming a theocracy?
  • HarryBauzonia, on 10/10/2007, -17/+2That must be the section with the empty shelves.
    • ruley, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6because if there's one thing atheists dont do, its read
    • f8tbrautmehere, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2No, the one with Religion should be as it would make more sense. Imagine your books are there, much like you imagine god to exist. But then again, nobody ever accused a religious person of having a strong grasp of logic.
  • sjm20k, on 10/10/2007, -5/+15the issue with any debate is that both sides cant be right. logic points to atheism as being the right answer so most logical minded individuals flock in that direction. traditionalists and your average joe will simply believe what he has been raised to believe or sees those around him believing. to respond to WestonP: lord of the rings fans have books and gatherings too, does that make lord of the rings a religion, no, it makes it something people are interested in. i prefer to think i don't delude myself with religion, and in this way (and i'll come right out and say it), i feel that i am more right than any religious person. it seems like most people with a good ***** detector will always flock towards the atheistic argument. just remember, opposing sides can't both be right.
    • ryanissuper, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4Until logic can prove that there is not and never was any sort of god, logic points to agnosticism.
      • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Probability points to atheism, just like in the cases of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.
        • jricestevens, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Probability doesn't point to atheism. Probability based on a predisposed notion towards non-theism (not non-Christianity, which shouldn't be involved in a theism/non-theism debate) will undoubtedly lead to atheism. However, one could show that it's highly probable, there is a first cause resembling what we know of to be God.

          The outcomes of probibility are only as good as their inputs.
          • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yeah, what caused that first cause? Who created God? Even on that level, you are making a whole list of assumptions, none of which are entirely probable.
      • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Until logic can prove that there is not and never was any sort of unicorns/pink monkeys/Zeus/Odin, logic points to agnosticms.
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Again, there's that probability thing. Yeah, you can't disprove God, just like you can't disprove Zeus or unicorns. However, the probability for ANY of those is so low as to be completely ridiculous. THAT logic points to atheism.
    • demiurgency, on 10/21/2007, -5/+0"the issue with any debate is that both sides cant be right"
      I disagree entirely with your opening premise, and I believe it to be the underlying flaw shared by both fundamentalist and intolerant atheists.
      Please look up pluralism. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralism)
      Accepting that your world view may contradict someone else's world view, but that both can co-exist, and both have something to offer humanity, is what will (hopefully, one day) bring about true peace and tolerance in this world.
      • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Even if someone's belief is inherently and completely false? I do not have an issue with religion if it is kept a private belief such as most Buddhist and Jews do. However, many of the big religions seem to evangelize and want to theocratize our government and you are stating that "they are right" or we should just let it be?
      • sjm20k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3The fact that they can co-exist doesnt make both right. If there is a door in front of you and there is a chair behind it, i can say there is a chair, and you can say there is no chair - our beliefs don't stop the world from spinning, but ONE side of the debate is actually right. You can't say everyone's opinion is just as valid as the next. If someone says, all people are the same, and should be treated equally, i will regard this as a more valid opinion than "black people are all theives because i like tacos." there is ***** in this world, like it or not.
  • woodguard, on 10/10/2007, -16/+7The section will only have three books, one on nothing, one not knowable and a self-help book on how to get the chip of your shoulder.
    • dan537, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I suggest you start with the book on removing the chip from your shoulder. You already seem to know nothing.
    • ruley, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3thanks for adding to the conversation
    • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Since you know nothing about atheism, you are in essence an idiot. You should look up Epicurus, Hume, Kant, Dawkins, etc.
  • graaaag, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1the borders near me already had one, i haven't been in months, but the section was there when i had gone. It wasn't a very big section though, only two or three shelves.
  • galtenberg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14Now how about taking philosophy out of the religion/metaphysics section?
    • Loonacy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I was about to ask if they didn't have a "Philosophy" section for just this sort of thing.
  • nattisfaction, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8I've worked at a Borders for 3 years and for at least that long there has been an atheism section. It usually hovers around a couple of shelves in size and is located in the religion section after the Christian religions.

    This endcap is actually just a new piece of marketing that went up about 4 months ago. All Borders stores are required by corporate to place this endcap, so if you don't see it up call your local store and ask for the name and number of the district manager (this speeds things up dramatically). You'll be amazed how fast it will go up then.
  • iamorlando, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11Nooo, what is the world coming to!!! If we go any further people might start to think for themselves! /sarcasm
  • IamBobX, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12As a Christian, I fully support this idea.
    • f8tbrautmehere, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7As a former Roman Catholic, I also fully support this idea.
      • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Dugg for being a fellow recovered Catholic.
    • julianrod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Thank you, Voltaire.
  • biogears, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0Funny, this story is right next to a story named "Lost America".....

    • ruley, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2because America was founded on Christian principles and all...
  • badjoke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Funny, when I bought The God Delusion it was in the science section.
  • lansuggs, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6Why should atheism get its own section? Remember, atheism and agnosticism are non-beliefs - there aren't many books that don't believe in anything. The example books are books talking about the problems with religion, and those can be appropriately put in the Religion section as counterpoints to the number of books that advocate religion. Books talking about the evidence and theories that support atheistic viewpoints can be put in the science section.
    • biggrz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Actually, books being inanimate objects and all, don't believe in anything to begin with. For this very same reason they won't be found 'talking about the problems with religion' either. However, as you may have noticed if you've actually BEEN to a bookstore, books on the same topic often get their own section.
    • ruley, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4agreed, but science != athesim. its just a way to better organize their shelving space.
    • lansuggs, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2That's exactly my point - atheistic books are usually on the topic of religion. Go read The God Delusion and God is not Great, and tell me they're not talking about religion. Dumb ass.
    • joe7845, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0For classification and the benefit of customers - you think?
  • lordmetroid, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3What is their to write about?
    "There is no supernatural and aheist doesn't believe there is either." The End!
    • origclubsoda, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2$29.95 Please!
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Why is the Bible so long?
      "God did it all, and you better be a Christian or you're going to Hell." The End!
      • jricestevens, on 10/10/2007, -8/+0This is just as ignorant as asking why all atheists are sex loving, pedophiliac, gay sinners.
    • f8tbrautmehere, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Pick up a book and find out. What's an "Aheist"? Is that opposite of an Asheist? In the beginning where there only two? Asheist and an Aheist?
      I firmly believe you to be lacking in the intellectual department. Either that or you're closed for the day. /pun
  • Chnoubis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Would it be fair to say that the Atheism section has evolved from the Religion section? Or was it created?
  • fuseideas, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10I never understood why they didn't put the Bible under Fiction and atheist texts under Non-Fiction.




    I bet this comment will start a fight!
    Don't get mad, just laugh!
    • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -13/+1Atheist: It's technically an opinion book.
      Bible: It has historically verifiable data (not saying the whole thing is a literal account of history or anything)
      • Pake, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10The amount of historically correct data in the bible is equivalent to that of the book "300." Sure, some ***** did happen, but most what was written did not. The difference is "300" was just soooooo much more awesome.
      • ruley, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7the Da Vinci Code should be put under non-fiction according to that logic. the bible is not(usually) put in the non-ficiton section of large bookstores because it IS historically inaccurate. it is put in the religion section
      • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Opinion?? LOL
        Historically verifiable?? LLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
        • jricestevens, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0I can't wait until school starts again
      • f8tbrautmehere, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Hence the word faith is spelled f, a, i, t, h, and not f,a,c,t.

        You need to do some more research.
    • origclubsoda, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1Just to prove why you are a dumbass
    • cafzal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ha ha?

      @thecobbs: opinion books can be in non-fiction. Most non-fiction IS opinion.
      @Pake: good point on the 300.
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I dunno. With the Biblical references to giants, unicorns and fire-breathing sea monsters, I think it might more properly belong in the Fantasy section.
    • MicroKusa, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They put the Bible in the Religion section because it's a religious book.
      Funny how that works.
  • shanevendrell, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6How much you wanna bet some pastor will try to organize a boycott of these stores.
  • issachar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0The section may exist, but they're not stocking it very well. Ayaan Hirsi Ali's book is a worthwhile read, but it's scarcely a book about Atheism.
  • origclubsoda, on 10/10/2007, -12/+1Atheists are suckers if they by a book about atheism. I dont believe this topic section exists.
  • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -13/+0Atheism is a religion, make no mistake. There are even (futile) movements in place to try to make it the national religion. In fact, it takes more faith to believe in something with absolutely zero supporting evidence, like atheism or evolution, than it does to believe that which has been proven time and time again: Truth of the Bible... Think about it... no wait, never mind, um - just believe what they tell you, yeah. http://unblinded.blogspot.com/
    • raymondmarble, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Wait, was that, zealotry or sarcasm? I'm afraid to click that link.
      • ffleming, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1it was actually pure awesome. which is funny, because i always assumed that pure awesome would be pretty much identical to your standard sausage gravy.
      • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0The information is available readily enough for anyone to do their own fact-finding mission. It all comes down to a simple matter of openmindedness. Either you're open to the truth, or you're afraid of it. I was taught about the religion of atheism by the public school system, especially college, and for some reason it all seemed a bit far-fetched. When I turned my life over to God, I discovered how real He truly is. I'm not going to lie, belief in and knowledge of the true love of God is worth all this pre-pubescent ridicule from diggers. Even knowing that it's only going to get worse is not going to make me stop and live a lie like everyone else. Life is Good... Thanks to Jesus!
        • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"One must have an open mind but not so open that your brains fall out"
        • raymondmarble, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3After reading your second comment, and realizing that you were serious, I dared to click your provided link. Good Gravy!

          "There is a worldwide push to eradicate any and all historical references to the world's Creator." Are you serious? I defy to to find me one single accurate historical reference to the world's creator. No, the Bible is not a historical document.

          And I have to bring out the old cliche, if atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

        • joe7845, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0This is called "the special way of knowing" gambit. There are people who claim this about all sorts of things, not just God. They claim to have some sort of special experience, a special way of thinking or something (superior to scientific evidence) that lets them see things that others are just too blind to see.
      • Hetman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Dont kid yourself worldlighmedia the reason life is good is thanks to modern medicine and moderrn farming. It has nothing to do with Jesus. A mighty God is a living man and will always be more capable than a God that never shows hisself.
        • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0God has shown Himself to me. Why else would I care about this? He wants to show Himself to you too.
        • Hetman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I am not an athiest. I believe in God. I just dont believe in a personal God who shows himself. I take all my beliefs on faith I have no proof and I do not require proof of his existance. I just find it odd that you can personally think people are ignorant for believing that there is no God. You are the reason why I would rather hang out with Athiests than Theists.
        • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0It's not just that I believe, as the Bible says, "even the demons believe in God and tremble in fear". It's that I know God. More importantly, He knows me. I never said anything about ignorance, did I? And you can blame me for whatever friends you have chosen if you want to, but seriously, I doubt that I have had anything to do with who you choose to hang out with. What's at your core?
        • Hetman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I agree with you. You have not affected who I hang out with. You really have no baring on my life. I would just not rather be around people who believe that God is the ultimate meaning of life. Because I believe humanity in itself is the ultimate reason and God has nothing to do with it.
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1God told me that he doesn't exist.
    • jim45804, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Are you so deluded that you cannot fathom a worldview that expresses passion about a topic without labeling it a religion? The absence of theism is by definition not a religion. Don't confuse passion for religiosity.

      And your following comments are simply idiotic.
      • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I can certainly fathom it, I once embraced it. Think about it... A religion is defined as a set of beliefs based (mostly) on human writings. Atheism's "bible" is Darwin's The Origin of Species. They believe, despite what anyone else tells them, that this book contains ultimate truth which refutes all other truth. (Even though, as interesting as it may be, that there is NOT A SINGLE SHRED OF EVIDENCE for evolution!) A religion is attained through discipleship; Atheists are disciples by listening to preachers (teachers) who spew the doctrine (evolution and atheistic science) in the exact same manner as other religions. I could go on and on... Science really is: " The study of HOW God created things" but an evangelized prognosticator would not be able to acknowledge that, it would sound as if it were idiotic gibberish from some nut job. I rest my case...
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Lol atheistic science.. how oxymoronic
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1An atheist is someone who does not believe in god, period. An atheist may or may not believe in evolution, just like anyone else. Atheism certainly was around in Greek times, long before Darwin, so calling the Origin of the Species the atheist "bible" is complete nonsense. Science-oriented people who understand evolution do not believe in "ultimate truth". Provide scientists with a better reason to explain the evidence and they will change their views - a mindset that is the exact opposite of the religious. And yes, there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate evolution.
    • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You are a complete and utter idiot. Evolution is supported by more evidence than the Bible and Atheism is a lack of belief in YOUR claim. Now back up your claim with some evidence.
      • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Name one fossil that has been found that show animals in "transition" from one species to another. Just one... please... No? ... We're waiting...BZZZZT! Sorry, time's up!
        Of the millions of fossils found, don't you think ONE would show even the slightest hint of an animal that was in between one species and it's evolved descendants? Sadly, much to the world's chagrin, there is zero evidence. Sorry you wasted all that money on your tuition getting lied to!

        BTW... it's really clever for you to resort to name-calling and all, but it hardly makes you sound intelligible.
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'll one up your request for a fossil:

          http://stromdotcom.blogspot.com/2007/07/shark-with-webbed-feet.html
        • Vicissidude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Evolution is a gradual process that works over time, dumbass. Species are merely the accumulated differences such that previously related animals can no longer interbreed. All animals constantly live under evolution and natural selection and are in transition. Every fossil out there is a transition from one species to another.
        • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0You guys are simply regurgitating the BS that you've been spoon fed all your lives. I too have eaten that crap, and then did my own study instead of just listening to what a "teacher" tells me... and I found out that the public school system lied to me. Why? That's another story, but nevertheless, they did and so don't think for a minute that I'll buy into that crap again. Think about what you're saying! Did a dinosaur give birth to a chicken? No. The dinosaur would have had to give birth to a mutated dinosaur and generations later there would have been some weird half-dinosaur/half-chicken like creature....
    • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0http://answersingenesis.org/
    • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Evolution: The change of genes allele frequency in a population. You have problem with that? Is that your only hang up on evolution? What a retarded definition of transitional fossils. Please use the correct before even trying to attack evolution. Here s proper definition and a list of transitional fossils. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
      • worldlightmedia, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Again, you're not making enough sense to be intelligible. Perhaps you'd like to give it another try? There seems to be a lot of missing words in your sentences. Anyway, what makes your definition of "fossils" right and mine wrong? A fossil is an imprint left in the stone by dead creatures. (!) Is it not? Come on, try again! Your list contains no fossils.
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Did you not take a look at the link before commenting? Or is it too hard to look up pictures after being given the names of species that show evidence of transition.
    • jim45804, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You're deluded because you frame everything in religious terms, no matter how irrelevant. It's silly.

      Scientists are expected to change their beliefs if new evidence obsoletes old evidence. Religious nuts like you refuse to alter your beliefs, even when faced with evidence to the contrary. It is a patent misnomer to call science a faith -- science is everything faith is not! Here's why: science will _always_ be open to new beliefs, so long as the evidence meets the demands of objective inquiry; whereas religion by its very nature will _never_ accept new beliefs because it judges faith (i.e. absolute belief) as its highest virtue. How you can deem willful ignorance as a high virtue I will never know.
  • UnFriendlyFire, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3Do you really need a book to help you not believe in something?
    • catalysis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I'm an atheist because I don't want people proselytizing me and trying to sell me books about how great their opinions are. So no, I would never buy a book on atheism. I don't need it reinforced and I don't need to boost my ego by reading about how great my decision was to not believe in god.
    • mali, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5You really need a whole wall or two of books to help you believe in a little man in the sky?
      • Heckran, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No...you only need one, but you need that wall full of others to interpret it.
  • diggjones, on 10/10/2007, -11/+1It takes more faith to NOT believe in God than it does to believe in God.
    • Scynet, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I don't see why, considering nothing mystical, supernatural or divine is going on that science can't seem to explain. We've figured out some truly amazing laws and theories about life after hard work, and it's getting more and more obvious that we're not going to find miracles any time soon either. So why would one believe in something divine? Give me a bush that lits up without any natural reactions by chemicals or other known forces, and I'll revise my statement.
    • jim45804, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5You, like many religious folk, are missing the point of atheism. Atheists choose not to believe in something without sufficient evidence -- it is an objective and scientific position. Faith, on the other hand, is _absolute_ belief in something without evidence. If a preponderance of evidence suggested that God does in fact exist, most atheists would gladly become theists. Regrettably, the opposite is not true. It has already been demonstrated that theists will not become atheists, even when faced with a mountain of evidence against supernatural agency in our universe.
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Prove it.
  • cafzal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Cool! Right next to the Wiccism and Scientology sections! /sarcasm

    Now all they need to do is split up that massive Politics & Government section... seriously it's not that hard to do considering they over-categorize about everything else.
  • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -12/+3Athiesm is a big joke. I pray to God I'll be dugg down for this comment.
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7No need for prayer--people will take care of it. Just like they always have.
    • imperium2000, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Well you will be dugg down but by people who actually exist.
    • jhsolorz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It clearly worked :)
    • raymondmarble, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2YOUR WISH IS MY COMMAND.
      love, god




      Naw, just kiddin', it was us diggers...
  • soulscreme, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2So, here are two questions:

    1) Since when did an endcap qualify as a section? It's an endcap filled with books that sell well, not an affirmation of Atheism or, judgin fromt he books on their, Anti-Theism.

    2) I agree that these do not belong in the Religion section, but how about the Philosophy section? These books are not a unique genre and there for do not need their own section.
    • Zreitan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2agreed on both counts, although i do think atheism needs at least a sub section.
  • AnimZero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Thank God!
    Err.
  • soulscreme, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1arbulus: if they were able to prove it to be true would it not cease to be a belief and become a fact?
  • bmson, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Why isn't this under the science section
  • ChuckAndBob, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Power to the infidels!
  • soulscreme, on 10/10/2007, -15/+4I love how the answer to belligerant, ignorant, offensive Christians is to have the same thing coming from an atheist, Dawkins. I mean honestly people, Dawkins is a biggot.
    • bsmang, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Maybe he just gets frustrated knowing that there are so many 'helpless' people who truly and absolutely believe in their almighty Gods. It's kinda like seeing everyone bound in imaginary shackles, but you can't convince them that the shackles are not real. You want to see them be free, but they refuse.
      • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4We shouldn't be concerned about their imaginary shackles; they have the freedom to pursue religion privately without persecution. However, the problem arises when those imaginary shackles are placed on the rest of society and attempt to dictate law, resulting in the erosion of a previously free group of people who want nothing to do with someone else's supposed "absolute" morals.
    • raymondmarble, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Can you offer an example? With page and paragraph numbers? From all I've read of his work, and heard from in in interviews, Dawkins may be blunt about his absence of belief, but I've not read or heard him be bigoted.
    • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5He is actually a humanist.
      Or do you have any evidence pointing otherwise?
  • wonky73, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6Atheism != science.. Stop posting atheist stuff in the science section.
    • jricestevens, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Smartest comment for this article. I was wondering the same thing
    • ffleming, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3No, don't you understand, science is composed of things that are empirically verifiable, and as we all know, the easiest thing to empirically verify is the non-existence of something.
    • teh_techie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If you're going to complain about ***** like this, at least add a suggestion. The last thing I want to see is you posting this exact comment in every story submitted!
    • cranium, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They're highly correlated. They both postulate that NOTHING has a supernatural cause.
  • FatherVic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Christians - Contention is of the devil. Yet I see a lot of it here on digg regarding religion.
    Atheists - Calm down. No on is telling you how to believe.

    I, for one, think that that section at the bookstore is a great idea. If religion can have its own section, then so can atheism.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.