"Atheism Produces Evil on Incredible Levels"

I don't see bad atheism, I see bad agricultural science. Yes, bad science can kill. But don't fret...it's falsifiable. Unlike, some ideologies.

 

My religious identity, theological non-cognitivism has a total of 0 deaths associated with it. By this logic, it would seem that it is to be considered much better than Christianity. Personally, I think this line of logic is useless.

One could say that many crimes are committed with knives, so we will ban knives from the dinner table, the kitchen and the workbench. Linking statistics with world views and so on is simply not a good tool for dealing with concepts like world views.

 

WHY oh WHY do you believers think atheists will turn to YOUR godsy when we're dying? That Stupid Old saying, """(drool) Ain't no atheists in a foxhole (drool)"""

WE are the ones with the logic.

UNLIKE YOU we do NOT think that what we do has no meaning except for the last minute of life.

How can I reject something that doesn't exist???

 

It isn't just limited to Mao and Stalin.

Many atheists are also anti-religion as well.

Because it only took half to kill 3 times more people than all the Christian wars, civil wars and crimes performed in the 20th century combined. That's an amazing feat.

You mean by that anonymous blogger with no credentials whatsoever? Even the people in his comments questioned the validity of that blog.

Seems as though when you combine all the people killed by atheist regimes to all the people killed by Christian regimes, atheists take the cake.

Or perhaps its really you who don't understand the statistics. The problem with what was presented is that its referenced by 3 sources.

The problem is most atheists don't have a firm grasp of history. There's a lot of atheist regimes that committed many atrocities. You should research it and then ask yourself if you want to be associated to it all.

 

No. You are not. If you just wanted to reference facts, you would just reference facts. Instead you are using these numbers about communism and using them to generalize about non-communist atheists. Of course I "distance [myself] from the dark side of atheism" just as you distance yourself from the dark side of theism. I feel the same way about communists as you and I both feel about Jihadists.

I am not affiliated with communism, so no, this is not "the reality of the group [I'm] affiliated with."

Let go back to some simple SAT reasoning:

Communism is to Yardmeat as
Jihadism is to Qchan

They are exactly the same relationship. Communism fits into the broader umbrella of atheism, which I am a part of, but I am not a communist. I condemn the actions of these governments. Jihadism fits into the broader umbrella of theism, which you are part of, but you are not a Jihadist. You condemn the actions of Jihadists. Where are you getting lost? I've offered to draw you a Venn Diagram.

Of course, you are going to fire back by saying that "Jihadists are Muslim, why don't you just say muslim? They don't represent Jews, Christians, etc." and I'm going to respond with "Communists are communists, why don't you just say communists? They don't represent humanists, Buddhists, etc." All the while you will do anything and everything possible to continue holding theists and atheists to different standards in order to ignore one and condemn the other. That's called bigotry.

 

I'm not forgetting. In fact, that's what I'm trying to remind Qchan of. We are only talking about communists, not all of atheism. Using communism to make generalizations about all of atheism is as dishonest as using Jihadism to make generalizations about all of theism.

China had several religions.

Yes. Outlawing all religions is a very, very bad and immoral idea.

 

i guess i will take my chances
but thx for the warning

 

I feel like I have to respond to this one again because of its particularly virulent dishonesty. The people you are talking about are Communists. Yes, Communists were atheists, and I am an atheist too. Jihadists are theists and you are a theist too. I am no more "affiliated with" this Communists than you are with Jihadists.

My fellow Buddhists did not fair any better under these regimes than Christians and other theists did. Do not claim that I am "affiliate with" a group that would have persecuted me just as readily as they would have persecuted you.

 

it seems to me that very different standards are applied

evil acts by religionists are rationalized as non representative.... like this
As quoted by Kouki, "It is true that it's possible that religion can produce evil, and generally when we look closer at the detail it produces evil because the individual people are actually living in a rejection of the tenets of Christianity and a rejection of the God that they are supposed to be following.



otoh every bad action by a non religious leader is directly associated with his views on religion.


i will however agree that a narrowly selfish leader might be more inclined to machiavellian policies, and that in some cases a religious perspective might influence a leader away from his narrow self interest. but that is unrelated to the truth of religion generally or specifically

 

If it is your view that atheism (merely unbelief or disbelief in any gods) is somehow the cause of evil, you have to explain how not believing in or disbelieving in God or gods necessarily leads to any evil. Can you actually do this?

 

You are so fascinated with the score.....

but you'll never answer the question: How are any of these people less dead if killed by Christians ?

How are they less RAPED (remember those Christian priests and all the other rapers in christianity? ) if raped by chrstians?

How are they less tortured if tortured by Christians??

 

Neither do you. You're limited to a century. Go back many millenia to when history began. Countless millions have been killed in the name of a god. A god? Yes, those followers of ancient gods were just as confident in the existence of their god, as you are.
In the Bible god is said to have had the Hebrews wipe out nations. Maybe those nations were not on the scale of modern nations but is there any difference between god wiping out a nation and a tyrant wiping out millions.
If you compare yesterdays conditions with todays conditions there is little difference.

It's not atheism that kills, it is evil people whether it be the 'athiest' Stalin or the 'Christian' Friar Tomas de Torquemada.

 

They're just the worst perpetrators. Why don't you pay attention to this point instead of trying to divert the path again? You, nor the author, have made any link to atheism and these atrocities.

And the vast majority are peaceful.

You aren't even quoting what Rummel is saying correctly. You need to read your citation by him more seriously.

Ad hominem attack. A logical fallacy. Attack the ideas, not the man.

And? That apparently makes them or you automatically correct? And that doesn't make the critique against Rummel any less ardent.

How would we know? You haven't provided that statistic, so it's incredibly dishonest of you to claim that.

What are you even talking about? What was presented was referenced by what 3 sources?

Associated with it in what way? Are you associated with the Westboro Baptist Church because you're a Christian? Are you associated with the atrocities under the Nazis because you're a Christian? The idea that all atheists are bad by association is logically unstable and absolutely just tired. And hell, it's hypocritical of you to claim that atheists are bad by association, but Christians aren't. Additionally, the claim that atheism led to Mao and Stalin's actions are untenable and foolish. You need to PROVE these things, you can't just assert them like they're fact.

 

I totally reject the Middle Eastern God that Jews, Christians and Muslims believe in


.

 

Everything I said was written in the sources I've provided. Kinda surprising how you have all of these opinions, but not once have you checked the sources I gave.

 

Except that the 20th century was the most violent century in the history of the world itself.
Source: https://thinkpoint.wordpress.com/2007/09/14/the-most-violent-century-of-human-history/

And you wanna know what? Atheists were responsible for most of it.

 

No. I'm talking about atheists. Communism was pretty common among most secular nations. So, you can't just blame all of this violence on "communism". Nice try though.

 

I was just making sure what you were talking about. Uh... Why did you avoid responding to any of the rebuttals that I gave you?

- - - Updated - - -

How about we blame it on autocratic rulers like Mao, Stalin, and others? Being an atheist had nothing to do with why they committed atrocities. Me being an atheist doesn't make me culpable for their crimes just as other Christians aren't to blame for the Inquisition.

 

You know what's hypocritical? Linking to a blog right after you whined about another person's source being a blog.

 

Then how come all of your examples are communists?

Looks like we are going to have to correct your false view of history yet again.

I can blame it all on communists because all of the examples you gave were of communists.

 

All you're doing is arguing with an article I quoted and provided the source for.... Maybe you ought to read the source before you let your emotions run wild.

 

Or maybe you should grow up and learn how to argue? Of course he's attacking what your source says... Because you provided it. You then tell him to "read the source" even though he clearly has and is now arguing against it? ... Wtf?! Again, you seem to think that just quoting a source is the end of a debate. It's not. Trust me when I say that everybody is calling you out on the same thing for a reason, it's not a coincidence.

 

That's not the only thing I'm arguing with. I'm arguing with your line of reasoning and your source (which . . . why the hell are you pretending like your own source is immaterial now?). You are generalizing about atheists using Communists. An appropriate counterexample for why this is bigoted ignorance would be to generalize about theists using Jihadists. Which you have no argument against. And reason and emotions are not mutually exclusive. Sorry. Is your God being irrational when he is jealous? Is he irrational when he is loving? Is it irrational to be angry with Jihadists and murderous Communists? No. No modern psychiatrist sees reason and emotions and mutually exclusive.

 

Is Singapore considered a nation?

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.chinahighlights.com/travelguide/temples-and-monasteries/
http://www.chinahighlights.com/travelguide/temples-and-monasteries/


China was more religious than the jews.

 

I just called you out for being hypocritical because you dismissed someone's source for being a blog... and I just noticed this... EVERY source you've provided in this thread, including the two from your OP, has been a blog. So, seriously, how can your conscience allow you to be this dishonest?