It's already dying out in France, Italy, Greece, Eastern Europe, Britain and even in Scandinavia too.
In what way? As a European I don't personally see how our cultures (there's more than one) are dying out. There are increases in multiculturalism across Europe but I don't see how that means the death of the original cultures. It's not an assimilation by a foreign force.
And equally valid is the fact that secularism is on the increase across Europe and is higher here than anywhere else in the world.
Take a look at this BBC survey which found Britain to be one of the most secular countries in the world (only succeeded by Russia and South Korea in the survey), while USA ranked highly in religious belief.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2004/02_february/26/world_god.shtml
atheism is the lack of a belief in a god/deity so yes you are
While not necessarily a universal definition I've been taught by my Philosophy of Religion textbook that Atheism can be spit into two separate categories.
Negative AtheismA lack or absence in belief in God. This can come about from having never considered the concept of God, or through informed debate leading to the conclusion that belief in God cannot be justified.
Positive AtheismSimilar to Negative Atheism but goes further. It requires a conscience denial of God's existence as well as satisfactory reasons for this denial. It can't come about from a lack of thought.
kidplasma is wrong in that he is technically an atheist, but by saying he has "no religion whatsoever" and claiming that to mean Atheism, I would assume that kidplasma finds Positive Atheism, which is an active denial of God to be like a religion. So, kidplasma is more of a negative atheist.
agnostic/irreligious: doesnt worship or follow a god
Agnosticism as a word comes from the Greek words for 'without knowledge'.
Agnostics find that there is insufficient knowledge to prove or disprove the existence of God, and so neither believe nor disbelieve in a God. They can't believe or disbelieve as either would require definite knowledge.
Agnosticism is similar to Negative Atheism, but Negative Atheists can go on to deny belief in God, whereas Agnostics cannot.
Religion, in some cases, could have helped form a country to what it is today.
This is a massive understatement.
While I can't speak for what would hypothetically have occured throughout history if religion (of any sort) had never existed, there is absolutely no denying that it has been the carrot on the stick that has led humanity from it's dawn to the modern day.
There's not a single country in the world that hasn't been greatly influenced by religion.
The Ancient Persian, Greek, Roman and Egyptian Empires were all led by religion, with it being the guiding power behind the figure-heads of those Empires.
The Pharoahs would never have been in control if they hadn't claimed divine descent, and Julius Caesar and the Emperor Augustus would never have reached their pinnacles of power if they didn't have the divine backing of their claimed lineage, or the power to use their religious offices.
The Catholic church was the leading power throughout Europe for over a millenium and defined numerous countries.
Then consider the splits which are key to the cultures of multiple countries.
The British Empire would never have spawned if Britain hadn't taken a split from the Papacy and led itself with Anglicanism.
The America's would never have been colonised in the way they were without the Puritan views of those first settlers.
It would be a ludicrous idea to suggest that religion should have been removed from existence.
It has led more good than bad, and without it I dare say we would not have progressed as a species quite so far.
There's no knowing how humanity might have developed without religion, but I'm sure that it would be slower. Science was never going to pop into existence and the state it is in today on its own, or it would have thousands of years ago. And between then and now, religion has provided a proper guiding force for empires, countries and individuals.
On the topic of Muslims, I have no problem with them nor Islam.
Normal modern muslim values are good values, the kind which are beneficial to society, in much the same way that Christian or Hindu or Sikh values are.
Extremism is a problem and seems very active in the modern world, but this isn't new.
There has never not been an extremist side to a religion.
80-50 years ago my country would have had much bigger problems with extremist Catholics and Protestants in Ireland and the UK. Today we have problems with extremist Muslims in the Middle East and the UK.
I've no reason to hate an entire religion or culture.
I hate those who twist their religion to promote gross acts of violence, greatly against the teachings of their own prophets.
Muslims follow the teachings of Isa (Jesus) the al-Masih (Messiah) and Muhammad, among other Prophets who were all for peace, in the same way that Prophets and Holy Figures are in other religions.
And those who so actively ignore this and attack innocents out of ill-aimed revenge or simply for terror are not true Muslims and don't deserve to be regarded as such, and all people should not stand for their actions.
