Am I religious if I say there isn't a marble at the table? Or a walnut? I don't see one, I have no reason to believe one is there, based on how the world works elsewhere there isn't anything there.
But you're telling me I need to faith to avoid these beliefs in small generally round objects. I say it is you who is using faith to assume the existence of one particular type of thing there and you're claiming I am the person operating without any evidence.
What you wrote doesn't even pass the mildest smell test: there is ample evidence that forming babies hear and react to stimuli from outside the womb, for just one example.
But even if there were no evidence of a world outside the womb, I wouldn't expect a baby to think one existed. Nor would I threaten that baby with damnation were they not to believe me without evidence.
Atheism isn't faith-based. If you show me reproducible evidence for the existence of a god, I'll change my tune no problem.
You are not clear on what faith is if you believe atheism to be faith-based. Atheism wouldn't even exist if religion did not. Because religion and unfounded beliefs are so common, there is an actual name for not believing in a god. There aren't a lot of specific terms for a lack of belief in other things without evidence.
Because an invisible pink sky elephant cannot be disproved or proved with any non-supernatural intervention, you must grapple with the imaginary to address the issue.
...
That's not how the world works. We don't spend any time grappling with things for which there is no evidence.
For what it's worth, as a northeastern US liberal who has adopted y'all as an inclusive way to address people, this type of reaction is one of the things that has led to Trumpism.
A bit more temperance before you condemn tons of people based on something open for interpretation like this might be a worthwhile thing to consider going forward.
At what point do we start to discuss how evil the Russian regime is? I mean, this is feeling like we are approaching the lines in the sand that we drew after WWII, if we haven't already blown past them.
I have no desire to lose more lives, but this is evil. How can any country support Russia in this?
FWIW: these types of password rules are discouraged by NIST -
Eliminate Periodic Resets
Many companies ask their users to reset their passwords every few months, thinking that any unauthorized person who obtained a user’s password will soon be locked out. However, frequent password changes can actually make security worse.
It’s difficult enough to remember one good password a year. And since users often have numerous passwords to remember already, they often resort to changing their passwords in predictable patterns, such as adding a single character to the end of their last password or replacing a letter with a symbol that looks like it (such as $ instead of S).
So if an attacker already knows a user’s previous password, it won’t be difficult to crack the new one. The NIST guidelines state that periodic password-change requirements should be removed for this reason.