Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – naturalism and religion

Found this post about naturalism and religion. It’s pretty much the same claims from a christian who needs to insist that their god really really does exist, even though he has no evidence for it at all. No evidence, so all the theists have are attempts to claim no one can show their god *doesn’t* exist, although it does nothing and they can’t explain why. (memes below since there isn’t much new here)

My response to it:

this seems like a lot of words to still have no evidence for any supernatural cause or effect. Naturalism isn’t a religion in the same sense that christianity or any other faith system is. It is simply acknowledging reality. Theists, especially christains, often make this claim that naturalism, or atheism, is a religion, in their need to feel that everyone “really” agrees with them.

It’s curious how theists consistently try to shoehorn their gods into reality and have failed entirely to show they merely exists at all despite all of their attempts for the past millennia. Your claims here:

“Given that the world is overwhelmingly a ‘religious’ place, given that the metaphysical underpinnings to modern science do actually have a quasi-religious feel to them, this does give some impetus for a more considered reflection on the interface between science and faith, than currently plays out within the media and education.”

Are no more than an appeal to popularity fallacy and an attempt to ignore that the sciences have long left any religion behind, and have shown that the claims of religion are simply false. For christanity, the sciences have shown that stars are not little lights on a dome that can fall off, and that the wrath of some supernatural being is not the source of disease.