Over the past decade, the idea that ‘atheism’ means a lack-of-belief in the existence of God or gods has become mainstream. Thus, rather than claim that atheism is the positive view that God or gods do not exist, unbelievers now argue that they simply lack a belief in the existence of God or gods, and so they claim to have no burden of proof for their alleged lack of belief. Unfortunately for such unbelievers, this view is bullshit—in the philosophical sense, that is. For as is argued throughout the interlocking essays within this work, the move to define atheism in a negative lack-of-belief manner is little more than an attempt by atheists to avoid the burden of proof which legitimately falls on their shoulders. And so, by covering such topics as the fact that atheists themselves admit that lack-of-belief atheism is an attempt by them to evade their burden of proof, to the ultimately unsuccessful attempts by atheists to have lack-of-belief atheism mean something different than agnosticism, and to showing that, in fact, everyone—atheist, agnostic, and theist alike—has a burden of proof, this work provides both sides of the God-debate good reasons to reject the idea that atheism should ever be defined as just a lack of belief in God or gods. So, whether you are a theist, an atheist, or an agnostic, this work is sure to challenge, refine, and even transform your view of so-called lack-of-belief atheism.
With the rise of the so-called New Atheists, the idea that atheism is merely a lack-of-belief concerning the existence of God or gods—a position often called negative or weak atheism—is a concept which has been enthusiastically and vocally championed by non-believers the world over. Because of this, it is an idea that has now been generally accepted by the culture at large. This, in turn, has provided atheists with a rhetorical advantage over God-believers. Indeed, it has allowed atheists to claim that their negative-atheism is not only the default label that all people who do not positively believe in the existence of gods should attach to themselves, but also that the ‘atheist’ label should be maintained by every non-believing person until and unless the theist is able to provide the non-believer with sufficient justification for the adoption of theistic belief. And so, because the atheist defines atheism negatively, the atheist thus gains the rhetorical benefit of having every non-theistic position be categorized as some form of atheism while also allowing most of these types of atheism to completely avoid bearing any burden of proof.
This short book, composed of two inter-related essays, seeks to turn the tables both on atheism’s claim to be the lack-of-belief position and on the rhetorical advantage that atheism gains from making this claim. The first essay argues that if atheism can indeed be understood as a lack-of-belief position, then so too can theism, a fact which thereby negates the atheist’s rhetorical advantage of holding to a burden-less and negative point-of-view. And the second essay argues not only that theism can be understood as a lack-of-belief position—meaning negative-theism—but also that it, and not atheism, should actually be accepted as the true burden-less lack-of-belief position that most people should be labeled with. Thus, by showing that negative and burden-less theism is an entirely legitimate idea, this work will help weaken the presently existent rhetorical advantage that atheism possesses in our modern culture.
In today’s age of insanity and absurdity, to be a contrarian is to be a realist. And to be a patriarchal, red-pilled, right-wing, christian, ideological-identitarian contrarian is to be more than a mere realist, it is to be an enemy of the liberal-progressive order that holds sway in many of the religious and cultural power-centers of the West. But that is what I am: a Patriarchal, Right-wing, Identitarian, Christian, Kontrarian (pun intended)…or, in other words, I am a PRICK. And so, that is what this book is about. It is about me being a PRICK against the present progressive cultural order that influences the West’s entertainment, its media, its academies, and many of its churches. It is about the kinds of essays that feminists, progressives, liberal churchians, and SJWs don’t want you to read. It is about the kinds of ideas that such people wish to ban. And it is about the kinds of thoughts that are not mentioned in polite social circles. Indeed, touching on issues such as Men’s Rights, Christian theology, countering SJWs, science, finding your purpose, self-defense, the Alt-Right, and so on, the essays in this book delve into a wide array of non-PC topics in order to provide you, the reader, with a varied and captivating read as you move from essay to essay. So buy it for yourself. Or buy it for a friend. But buy it nonetheless, because there is sure to be something of value for you within these pages. And thank you in advance for your patronage; it is greatly appreciated!
Illuminating. Insightful. Factual. These are the words that describe Reasons to Vote for the Liberal Party, Canada’s answer to Reasons to Vote for Democrats. But unlike that latter book, Reasons to Vote for the Liberal Party truly offers an exhaustive list of the best reasons to cast your ballot for the current Liberal Party of Canada. Indeed, in clear prose and unapologetic language, and in pages actually filled with writing, this work genuinely articulates the best reasons why Canadians should vote for the Liberal Party. As such, this is a book that no liberal should do without. It will stand the test of time and teach countless generations why Canadians embraced Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party in this modern age. Buy it for a friend. Buy it for yourself. But buy it nonetheless, for it speaks truths that few dare to utter.