The importance of self-reliance as a member of human society, but the reliance on God for the preservation of our souls.
The use of our abilities to glorify God, over ourselves.
Heeding God’s calling in one’s life
[Emphasis mine.]
Translation: they are not independant and not selfish. So they should not be claiming aby support for Objectivism, not even such half-hearted supported.
Woah, crazy stuff there. However sadly I cannot honestly say I have not heard a lot of this crap before.
Yeah, I think we have all heard that sort of crap before Dwayne - or at least the vast majority of us have. I know I have.
“Rebellion: Atheism stems from a deliberate choice to ignore the reality of God’s existence” – Just wanted to make special note of that.
I think that should be: “…a deliberate choice to believe that there is no evidence of Gods existence”. Trust such articles to imply Objectivists are evasive. I would assume a lot of this sort of article do that.
Another quote from the Atheist article:
“The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.”
But then the article goes on to imply that such people might merely be lacking in judgment, instead of being evil, as this implies:
“Error: Some argue that atheism partly stems from a failure to fairly and judiciously consider the facts”
Gee, is it an innocent error or not? Make up your mind!
I found this rather interesting, as an alleged reason for Atheism
Negative experiences with Christians
Yeah, that is certaintly one good reason to want to say Atheist (though not a primary reason) 
. I think reading that very article makes that point.
I was just searching for another reference, but for the love of god, Conservapedia calls Argentina an “American-friendly CAPITALIST Country”, so… christ be with them
I’m involved in a debate about atheism on one of the large conservative websites now. As I’m not familiar with the Bible, would any of you be able to provide me with some arguments against the following claims? They allegedly prove that the Bible includes predictions that have been proved historically accurate.
The Bible speaks of a census, one was conducted by Augustus. Mentioned in the Res Gestae Divi Augusti.
PROVED
The Bible speaks of Pontius Pilate, Governor of Judea. He was a real man, lived and died (killed by Tiberius in retaliation for his negilgence in allowing Judea to become unstable)
PROVED
The Bible mentions Herod, he lived, known as Herod Antipas.He was one of many such rulers placed in Judea to govern the Roman protectorate
PROVED
The Bible mentions Rome in detail, well the letters of Pliny the Elder, governor of Bithynia and Pontus, specifically refers to Christianity as distinct and separate from Judaism. Suetonius does as well. As does Claudius in his role as Pontiff…he and Herod were friends.
PROVED
I’m involved in a debate about atheism on one of the large conservative websites now. As I’m not familiar with the Bible, would any of you be able to provide me with some arguments against the following claims? They allegedly prove that the Bible includes predictions that have been proved historically accurate.
Just because the Bible contains many historical facts does not mean that the supernatural occurances related therein are also accurate. In fact, the inclusion of supernatural events in the Bible render it useless as a historical document. Once you mix fact with fantasy, it becomes impossible to know where one begins and the other ends. So in reality, you cant believe any of it unless it can be independently verified elsewhere. There may have in fact been a Herod and a Pontius Pilot, even a Jesus. So what? That does not prove either the existence of God or the truth of the Bible as a whole.
The entry wasn’t perfect, but I thought it generally accurate. It identified the main points of the philosophy correctly, with relatively minor editorial comments, and while noting that Branden had been Rand’s closest associate for many years also identified his criticisms as criticisms, not as statements from someone claiming to be a spokesman for Objectivism. Certainly, far worse has been written about Rand by the conservative movement.