Atheists (and most groups) are very hard to understand when they're arguing. And maybe I'm coming from a combative place, but if you start your explanation "You're wrong about believing in God." I'm going to be too flustered to understand some very good points you make later. You do believe in something, and that's far easier for me to understand than having the table set with "I believe in nothing." Just because it's not the patter I believe in, doesn't instantly make it Nihlism.
I write this in response to an interview I heard with the author of Me and Dog, a book meant to teach children about Atheism. I don't know if it can be taught that way. I believe, like anything, it has to be discovered and understood through experience. So does religion. Children's books on religion help explain basic doctrines. Maybe the book explains basic "doctrines" of Atheism.
I guess I'm really writing this in response to everyone telling me The Golden Compass is an Atheist book, and I can't see that yet. Maybe I don't want to. I was raised on Narnia and all it's virtues and a belief that Atheism is empty. Based on this short interview with an Atheist author, I've learned that it does have it's own virtues, much the same as the religion I grew up with, but they are separate from the motivation of a God. I can respect the statement, "Do good because this world is all we have and we are responsible for everything that happens in it." Maybe I grew up in a really weird religion. Maybe I interpreted the interview wrong.
TL:DR I have a lot to learn about what Atheism really means.


















