There Probably Is No God

I don't think there is, anyway. Does that make me an atheist or an agnostic? Agnostic, since the "probably" in there equivocates; atheists are far more definite. They claim there most certainly is no god. And humanists? Likely they fall into the same uncertain category, but perhaps a humanist can define themselves as either an agnostic or an atheist. Life can be so complex, sometimes.

So, if there is no god, then what? Why, nothing much. Since nothing equates with nothing. Still, why irritate people unnecessarily? Why cause heartburn when it's not required? Just to be antagonistic? Because I personally don't feel the presence of an immortal spirit, a universal, all-seeing, all-knowing god, that's for myself. I needn't trumpet my disbelief, just to irritate others.

The simple fact is, to state that "There probably is no god, now stop worrying and enjoy your life" wouldn't be too terribly persuasive to those innumerable people whose belief in god is their salvation. That believing in spirituality and the presence of a supranatural being gives them comfort, relieves them from worrying, permits them to enjoy their lives.

So why begin a campaign designed to challenge their belief? Does this sloganeering campaign on behalf of atheist thought really advance equal rights to free thought? Obviously, the advertisers feel their provocatively cheeky encouragement to drop a belief in the Almighty has currency. While the religious community feels affronted and under assault.

Quite unnecessary. In fact, from what I glean from the very young, very intelligent young British woman who coined the phrase and had it swooped into infamy by an enthusiastic horde of free-thinking atheists (of which preference she professes to herself), she wouldn't want to distress anyone. She is more of a 'let live' type. A relaxed, refreshingly candid and discerning woman.

The cavalier provoking of passion on the part of the atheist campaign does them no credit. The thing of it is, atheists claim to be rational creatures, eschewing passion for the science of the mind. What, then, is the point of behaving irrationally, stirring passions where they're not really required?

In the absence of proof, there is no god, agreed. The human construct of a divine presence meant to comfort the afflicted and the fearful is a crutch, but it's their crutch. Atheists, agnostics, humanists, don't need an emotional crutch to sustain them; they've chosen intelligence and science to guide them. Why submit to immature upsmanship?

It's trifling, condescending, uncivil.