Currently Online 
Psintendo said:
Sounds weird that most of the quite scattered and unorganised atheist community would use so specialized categories and labels. In my experience those who are members of a religion and those who aren´t all seem to simplify that: agnostic=don´t know if there is or if there isn´t god/s atheist=know/are almost certain that there isn´t any form of god/s. 1. Do you believe that there is a god? Agnostic could answer I don´t know to the first question and no to the second. Atheist could answer no to the first and could answer to the second question by saying that it pretty much knows that a god/s doesn´t exist (in the same way as a person could say that unicorns don´t exist). In the end the exact label doesn´t really matter, at least in this case, as the point was that he wasn´t religious.
To the point again, why is this: attactive+attractive=weird/neutral/not good attractive+non-attractive=great non-attractive+non-attractive=bad/disgusting/even vomit inducing And specifically to the op, I think you might have a bit of fear of the gay/bi sexuality, but you don´t seem to have any hatred kind of homophobia. And maybe you also think too much that gay sex= anal sex, which of course is not true. |
I might reword that from "most" to "most prominent". I haven't done a survey of all atheists, but the more prominent ones and the organizations that do exist for atheists (such as American Atheists) use that.
The first question determines whether you are an atheist or a theist. The second question answers whether you are agnostic or gnostic about it.
An agnostic person can answer yes to the first and no to the second. That person is agnostic, and they are also a theist. An atheist can answer yes to both questions, and they'd be a gnostic atheist.
Gnostic/agnostic are mutually exclusive. Atheist/theist are mutually exclusive. Aside from that, any other combination works. Whether or not a person is religious or not is an entirely different question. You can believe 100% in god, and not be religious. You can be religious without believing in god at all.
Attractive+attractive is good, because I like seeing attractive people doing sexual things.
Attractive+non-attractive is ok. Assuming the non-attractive person is a male, I'd probably be imagining myself in his place. If the non-attractive person is a female, then it's rather unlikely that I'd find her so repulsive that it counteracts the attractive person. But, it is possible.
Non-attractive+non-attractive is bad because why exactly would I want to see two people I don't find attractive in some kind of sexual activity? If it is someone I actually find repulsive then it goes beyond that to disgusting.
