Originally Posted by ClaraWho
Entirely disagree on both points. Buddhism was the philosophical teachings of a man who refuted any claim to be a prophet or a god. Ergo followers cannot claim otherwise without it no longer being Buddhism. Religion requires a god(s) or Devine entity. Spirituality is different to religion, as is 'supernatural' by itself. Whilst there may exist people who claim to be 'religious' Buddhists, it doesn't fit the dictionary definition.
Atheism is the absence of religion, not the presence of a specific spiritual philosophy. It irritates me that people refer to aethism as a belief in not believing, which it simply isn't.
We don't have a special term for those who say the tooth-fairy or unicorns don't exist. You aren't afairiest if you disbelieve in fairies, and that doesn't denote you to a collective. It's a eclectic undefined out group. We are all atheists, just some of us take it one God further.
Okay. It's not really worth debating over to be honest. When I said atheism was a non-religion I meant just that. I never said it was a "religion," but it doesn't matter. There's no point in arguing over whether something fits a definition or not. So, I guess it's whatever.