I came upon this site claiming atheism is a religion via atheism.about.com. Anyway, the site claims:

But this [that atheism is not a religion] is like saying that “black,” (which physicists define as the total absence of color) is not a color. The car I drive is a big, old Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the world, “black” is understood to be a color, despite the technical definition of the physicists. Likewise, “Atheism” is a religion, despite any technical definitions to the contrary.

If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.

The analogy is flawed. The answer is clear when you think about it the right way. What color is a window?

Yes, black is a color, but atheism is still not a religion.

So, I decided to send an e-mail to the webmaster (which is pretty much what I said up here). It’s subject is “Concerning the absence of color” and it reads:

Dear Rev. Bill McGinnis,

In your web page titled “The Religion of Atheism” (found at http://patriot.net/~bmcgin/atheismisareligion.html) you state:

“But [saying atheism is not a religion] is like saying that “black,” (which physicists define as the total absence of color) is not a color. The car I drive is a big, old Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the world, “black” is understood to be a color, despite the technical definition of the physicists. Likewise, “Atheism” is a religion, despite any technical definitions to the contrary.

If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.”

I believe your analogy is incorrect. An object that is transparent, such as a window, can be said to lack color.

If you believe I am incorrect, please reply. If you believe that I am correct, could you please e-mail me if you decide to make any changes to the aforementioned web page.

Thank you for taking the time to read this e-mail.

I’ll keep you updated if he decides to e-mail back.