There is no "law of science"
Science isn't even a thing.
Its just a process thats the most reliable method (that we've since devised) to determine to a particular degree if something is true or not.
When it comes to your views on religion, those are assertions.
You believe in a god/higher power/deity/soemthing/whatever.
Thats different from me.
I'm not asserting belief in anything. YOU are.
YOU.
ARE.
I'm not saying your thing doesn't even exist. I can't even prove that. I can't prove a negative.
I CAN say that I don't subscribe to, or believe in your assertion.
So therefore, you're making a religious claim.
You can't keep escaping WHAT YOU KNOW TO BE BULL shyt WHEN I USE THE WORD RELIGION because it makes you uncomfortable.
You want to be free to say you believe in a god...but don't like admitting that you still subscribe to how your god does things. Namely:
If it intervenes OR not (this is a characteristic you're asserting of your deity)
If it listens to you OR if it communicates with you...or not (this is a characteristic you're ASSERTING of your deity)
Etc.
These are qualities you've laid upon your personal god.
Whether or not you really think they're this god exists or not doesn't matter.
You're making religious claims because this is how you're defining your god.
For example: If you were to say, "well my god doesn't take candy from babies." YOU WOULD BE DEFINING YOUR GOD because you're showing something about the quality of your god.
It doesn't matter if you're "pushing" it.
You don't have to be promoting it or passing out flyers.
Its a stance you identify with and are lending your support to.
You can't keep saying "well this is my opinion" then say "well i don't think its true"...You're just trying not to be responsible for what you're aligning yourself with.
Its dishonest...and frankly underhanded of you.
Well no one aligns themselves with things they dont at LEAST think are true. That'd be really inefficient because you're not even pro porting any evidence to support your stance.
You clearly think god exists, but you don't think that claim is true. See how ridiculous that is?
if you are a deist, you are still a religious person.
Its hard for you to understand because seem to think you're unique for not subscribing to the more well known religions.
Too bad.
No one told you to keep making unsubstantiated claims that merely remove the amount of rituals you subscribe to while still aligning yourself with the general concept of 99% of religions.
Oh wow. You don't call yourself a christian...how...
unique.
if you can't claim something as true, don't subscribe to it.
Say you don't know.
Thats the respectable answer.
If you subscribe to it without confirming it, then you're not being honest. You're trying to prove the conclusion without proving the premises.
Thats dishonest and moreover, a misrepresentation of the very logical postulates you claim to understand.
