Post Praetorian said:

thejediknighthusezni said:

     As with all controversial opinions and viewpoints, the holders thereof can be divided into 'Generally Passive' and 'Generally Militant'.

     A passive sort doesn't especially care and takes no great pains to diminish those who hold a contrary view.

     Someone who is militant in their beliefs will be inclined to belittle, in thought and/or deed, those with opposing positions.

     Personally, I only fault passive atheists for their lack of curiosity towards the information that challenges their position.

     I am profoundly distrustful of the militant variety. FAR too often there is more to their militancy than simple disagreement over the available facts. TOO often it involves the perpetuation and propogation of CRUEL depravities in personal conduct and socio-political constructs.

Might you consider yourself to be more of a Generally Passive Theist or a Generally Militant Theist?

Further, is it not somewhat presumptuous to assume that a Passive Atheist is lacking in curiosity? Is it not equally plausible that such a one might simply understand the limitations of both positions and merely wish to refrain from unnecessary conflict?

Whether I am a theist at all would depend upon how broadly one wishes to define "Theism".

In my broad consideration, Anyone with the power to generate, sustain, and effect great changes in an entire universe qualifies as "God" over that creation. For this reason, I am not uncomfortable with being called a "Theist".

I would consider myself a "Passive Theist" in the sense that I feel no special calling to "Win people for Jesus".

I do tend to become militant towards the militancy of others.

As for Passive Atheists, I am confident that any genuine atheist who would take a little time to HONESTLY examine the evidence and Logic would soon move to a position of tentative agnosticism, at the least.