Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:atheize. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:atheize, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:atheize in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:atheize you have here. The definition of the word Talk:atheize will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:atheize, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Yes, yes, anybody who isn’t dense can identify what this website is, you don’t need to insult my intelligence like everyone else does. Whilst some atheisms could be based on faith, it does not follow that all of them are. Are all disbeliefs based on a lack of evidence based ultimately on faith? --Æ&Œ (talk) 17:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Never heard that one before. In my local atheist group's meetings, we generally like to say people “deconvert” to atheism.
@Robin: I would expect that this would be used by those view atheism as a kind of faith as a kind of a mild put-down. Thus the last I would expect to use it to be atheists. DCDuringTALK17:51, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
@Æ&Œ: Your objection to a rather well-worded entry suggests that you must have some standard other than the lexicographic one of conformity of the definition to usage. The wording of your objection to this term did not reflect any awareness of the implications of this being a dictionary. Your dismissiveness further confirms it.
Finally, your gratuitous insult is simply uncalled for. There is hardly a long-term contributor here who hasn't had some behavioral lapse. Your current behavior seems to indicate that you are no exception. DCDuringTALK17:51, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Everybody on Wiktionary is allowed to be a prick except for Æ&Œ. History confirms this. And if you are going to scorn me instead of addressing my point, then I’m sorry that I wasted time making this topic. --Æ&Œ (talk) 17:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
I don't see what is or was wrong with it. Is long-term contributor Pilcrow objecting to "convert to atheism"? That doesn't imply that atheism is a religion, only a belief. You could convert someone to nihilism, or utilitarianism. (P.S. I'm an atheist!) Equinox◑20:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Why are you calling me ‘Pilcrow’ and why are you calling me a ‘long‐term contributor?’ Is it revenge for my insulting you? Did you not care to read the entry for convert that says ‘To induce (someone) to adopt a particular religion, faith, or belief’ the latter noun which also has religious implications? (P.S. I'm an atheist!) I don’t care. --Æ&Œ (talk) 21:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Alright call it whatever you like. The terminology is arbitrary and common usage is random so the definition should be pretty general. --WikiTiki8922:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.Terence. I think even persistently argumentative behavior needs to be tolerated to a certain extent. Bad contributor behavior can have consequences adverse to the contributor's continued participation, as various contributors have experienced, but some quite outrageous behavior has been tolerated with few adverse consequences. We take the bad with the good of the contributor.
