Atheist Extremism, at it again.

"Flint Journal: Anti-abortion activist shot, killed in Owosso"

michiganmessenger.com...

At first I read other articles stating that the murderer's motivation, in his own words, was to kill the anti-abortion activist. All of a sudden (Liberal media / 1984-style) it was removed!! Now supposedly they don't know the motivation for the murder.

Just like the Columbine shooting. First I hear stories about the murderers asking kids if they believe in God, and killing them if they did. Then soon after, those stories disappeared!! Now they blame it on guns, society, and even prescription drugs some say.

No one ever uses the words "Atheist Extremism" until now, by me.

China: ALL religions are persecuted. Is this not Atheist Extremism?

Sure, 7% of Muslims defend Suicide Bombings:
www.cnsnews.com...

The only countries where abortion is illegal in all cases (including risk of mother's health) are El Salvador, Chile, Malta, and Vatican City. ALL Catholic. I do think it's extreme to let a mother die instead of giving her an abortion.

Christian Extremism is a potential threat, but is relatively small. Sure, 400 years ago it was the biggest threat in the world, but not really anymore. Maybe in Jamaica where they lynch homosexuals.

I'd say Buddhism is probably the most peaceful religion, along with Jainism and a few other religions.

I just like to point out that Atheist Extremism is a big problem that no one ever seems to blame for anything. Some say, "But if everyone was Atheist there would be peace."?!?!?! Well, the Radical Muslim terrorists say the same thing about their religion, and Christians say the same as well, etc....

reply to post by bettermakings


atheists believe they turn into fertilizer for trees when they die.
they turn into trees when they die.
non-altheists turn trees into paper and print the bible on them.
ironically funny.

like a thief in the night ....

AT plus HEISTS = ATHEIST

ironically funny.

reply to post by bettermakings


.... also .... further into the logic of the facts ....


an atheist is one by definition that does not believe in a higher or supreme being.

one first commandment i know defines god's perspective of that of a self avowed atheist .....

any monotheistic beliefs .... takes atheists and turns them into christians which means to be christlike .... like christ .... who was god manifested in man ..... therefore :

christianity is nothing more than taking atheists and turning them into people who want to be like god (via being like christ, like god) who is an altheist ....

simple:

christianity is the social attempt to make altheists want to be like altheists without them knowing it.

enjoy the ride ....

I love this. Because there arent Christian extremists, muslim extremists, political extremists.

Defining every act of an evil person by what group they are affiliated with is not only ignorant and irrelevant, but it's playing into exactly what is wanted. As long as you are busy focusing on how other groups are "wrong", you miss the true evils of the world.

[edit on 11-9-2009 by logicalfallacy]

reply to post by bettermakings


Wow. Extreme ignorance in this OP. Because an anti-abortion activist was shot and killed, you somehow just know he's an atheist, and his atheism made him a murderer? I think you might be projecting the faults of religious extremism. I'm not denying that there are atheists who take things a bit far, but not everyone who kills a religious person is an atheist. There is lots of in-fighting between sects. How do you know it wasn't another sect that kill him for not doing things the way his sect did? The guy killed some other guy before the anti-abortion guy, and was going to kill again after. Sounded insane to me, not atheist.

And about China, some religions are persecuted because of the Chinese governments need for total control, not "for atheism". Christian extremists are still a danger in the world, as long as any religion has power and control. Is everyone did not need a crutch of religion, the world probably would be better off.

@soul of integrity-

Copying Dane Cook does not make you funny, and it especially does not make you right. Atheists also don't care about religious commandments, actually, or how you think we live. And what is an althiest?

reply to post by Epic Wolf


YUP!! exactly, if everyone was atheist, there wouldn't be any more problems. . . which is why atheism IS a religion.

The only non-religion is agnostic. . . but they can't be freemasons.

Originally posted by soul of integrity
christianity is the social attempt to make altheists want to be like altheists without them knowing it.

Well I think its working.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by bettermakings
Just like the Columbine shooting. First I hear stories about the murderers asking kids if they believe in God, and killing them if they did. Then soon after, those stories disappeared!! Now they blame it on guns, society, and even prescription drugs some say.

The reason why those stories disappeared soon after is that they were false. Consider This from those law enforcement agencies that investigated Columbine
source

Officials at the Jefferson County Sheriff’s office agreed that the Trench Coat Mafia, among other myths, were false. Lead investigator Kate Battan said the 10-year anniversary offers a chance to clear up the misconceptions.

“It was the first big event where cell phones were around, and I had witnesses giving information to the media before I even got to it,” she said. “A lot of that information was wrong.”

For example, many in the media initially reported that 17-year-old Cassie Bernall, a Christian, answered “yes” when asked if she believed in God before she was shot to death. She became a poster child for the Evangelical movement after her death. But investigators and student witnesses later told Cullen that it was another student, Valeen Schnurr, who avowed her belief in God as she was shot. Schnurr survived.

There is no organized "Atheist" group or movement out there. Nor is there a consistent definition of what an "Atheist" is. In fact the only thing that is common among atheists is that the followers of the radical branches of the holy war religions (Islam and Christianty) lump them all together as infidels or non-believers.

There were no atheist crusades, no atheist inquisitions, no atheist jihads... and no global atheist terrorist conspiracy.



[edit on 12-9-2009 by metamagic]

Metamagic wrote,

"There is no organized "Atheist" group or movement out there. Nor is there a consistent definition of what an "Atheist" is. In fact the only thing that is common among atheists is that the followers of the radical branches of the holy war religions (Islam and Christianty) lump them all together as infidels or non-believers.

There were no atheist crusades, no atheist inquisitions, no atheist jihads... and no global atheist terrorist conspiracy."









I would consider many communist countries, such as the former USSR and modern-day China, to be atheist. I will lump them together the way all the different kinds of "Islam" or "Christianity" are lumped together, the way atheists lump them all together.

Ask the Dalai Lama, or any other religious leader from China, if there is not "jihad" against organized religion in China. China is an organized group of radical atheists who have control of a government, just like radical muslims have control of Saudi Arabia, for example.

I've heard stories about communist Russia taking Christian children out into the freezing cold naked, and taunting them saying things like, "Where is God now to save you? Why don't you tell God to come bring you a blanket?"

[edit on 13-9-2009 by bettermakings]

Originally posted by bettermakings

I would consider many communist countries, such as the former USSR and modern-day China, to be atheist. I will lump them together the way all the different kinds of "Islam" or "Christianity" are lumped together, the way atheists lump them all together.

Ask the Dalai Lama, or any other religious leader from China, if there is not "jihad" against organized religion in China. China is an organized group of radical atheists who have control of a government, just like radical muslims have control of Saudi Arabia, for example.

I've heard stories about communist Russia taking Christian children out into the freezing cold naked, and taunting them saying things like, "Where is God now to save you? Why don't you tell God to come bring you a blanket?"

[edit on 13-9-2009 by bettermakings]

Just because you decide to lump groups of people together doesn't make them the same. I don't lump Christians together arbitrarily, they define themselves clearly as those who are followers of Jesus. Within that large self definition of "Christian" are different flavours of the Christianity, yet no Christians accept Mohammed as a prophet of god because it would not be consistent with the criteria that they use to define themselves as Christian.

Similarly Muslims self-define themselves as those who are followers of the prophet Mohammed irrespective of whatever doctrinal differences exist between branches of Islam.

So saying that you are doing what I am doing is just a non sequitur -- it's just wrong reasoning since I am not doing what you claim.

Second of all, Communism is a political movement, not a religious one. Yes, there have been communist governments which, for political reasons, sought to stamp out organized religions, but there have also been communist governments that have worked with organized religion. Consider the role the Polish Catholic Church played in Poland when that nation was communist.

As for Tibet, that is not atheists against Buddhists, that is one of the most horrific genocides that we have seen in modern times. The Chinese government has tried to exterminate the Tibetan culture, languages, religions and society to prevent them from opposing the Chinese hegemony. What the Chinese are doing in Tibet is unspeakably evil, but it is not based on religion.

And I've also heard stories from my Aboriginal friends about how they were taunted about their own traditional beliefs while they were being beaten and worse in the residential schools that were run by various Christian churches. Don't try to imply that mocking and cruelty is the exclusive domain of communists or atheists, it is endemic in human society. Tragically.

[edit on 13-9-2009 by metamagic]

[edit on 13-9-2009 by metamagic]

Metamagic, I understand your point-of-view, although I don't agree with it.

When I use the term "Extremism", I mean that (religious or not) some people are trying to force their beliefs on other people. I admit that religion can often become "Extremist", but at the same time non-religion (Atheism) can be "Extreme" quite often too.

It doesn't really matter if Atheism is considered a religion or not. My point is that Atheism can potentially turn into "Extremism", and therefore a threat to non-Atheists.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

"Celebrating Life Before Death"

"I forget - Which day did god create all the fossils?"

"Don't pray in my school, and I won't think in your church"

"You're basically killing each other, to see who has the better imaginary friend"

These are all ironically true, and the first one on the list is the most ironic!

These may be interpreted as attacks on religions, but most often they can be linked back to religious attacks on non-believers, and why can't non-believers defend themselves?! Why not a fair game? If religious people can criticise non-believers, why can't we criticise believers?!!!

Do we call non-belief in any particular entity a belief!, e.g. is non-belief in giant flying mushrooms also a belief?! No it's not! So why any different with non-beliefs in god?! It's no different to any other non-belief.


[edit on 13-9-2009 by john124]

reply to post by bettermakings


Nah, extremism is what harms other people directly, or enforcing views in a harmful way.

Telling somebody they will go to hell if they don't wish to believe in god is an extreme view.

Athiests pointing out that religions are extreme in various fashions is not a form of extremism, it's a form of rational thinking & reasoning. Of course you don't have to like that kind of rational thought, and you can believe whatever you want at the end of the day. Non-evidenced ways of thinking, i.e. by faith alone, can only ever be an opinion, which at the end of the day can be criticised because of the same freedom of speech that we have, which is a similar freedom to freedom of religion or non-religion.

To call somebody extremist for not wishing to be indoctrinated into religious beliefs is another extreme view, which adds to the extremism of religions.

Athiesm is not a belief, non-belief in god is a logical statement because of the lack of evidence. Athiests would glady accept existence of god, should that be proven!

If someone were to believe in a spaghetti monster, would you call it a belief if someone else were to say that it probably doesn't exist, or that they choose not to believe in it? I would hope not! Athiesm is exactly the same as this, when people like Dawkin's choose to put messages on London buses that say "God probably doesn't exist....".

To call somebody an extremist for not choosing to believe in god is just an emotional response, and not at all logical. It highlights the flaws in one's own faith, and tends to lead to attacks on science that is often misunderstood, and leads to arguments which have nothing to do with the original assertions made by the religious folks. So you can see why from this perspective that some athiests usually don't wish to argue with people who behave extreme, & often ignorantly, when debating.


[edit on 13-9-2009 by john124]

Originally posted by bettermakings
"
I just like to point out that Atheist Extremism is a big problem that no one ever seems to blame for anything.

Uh, I believe that's because the number of these "radical" attacks is outweighed by religious folk rather the Atheist.

reply to post by bettermakings

I would consider many communist countries, such as the former USSR and modern-day China, to be atheist. I will lump them together the way all the different kinds of "Islam" or "Christianity" are lumped together, the way atheists lump them all together.

Ask the Dalai Lama, or any other religious leader from China, if there is not "jihad" against organized religion in China. China is an organized group of radical atheists who have control of a government, just like radical muslims have control of Saudi Arabia, for example.

I've heard stories about communist Russia taking Christian children out into the freezing cold naked, and taunting them saying things like, "Where is God now to save you? Why don't you tell God to come bring you a blanket?"

I think you're misunderstanding the original point that was made to you!

None of these athiests commit these crimes because of their non-belief in god. Nobody will claim that every athiest will be a nice person, just like no christian can claim all christians are nice either! Communists who commit atrocites do so because of their communist way of thinking, not because of their athiest thinking. This has been shown to be true, as non-communist athiests are peaceful in the majority.

Some may persecute people of a religion because they are brainwashed into thinking their victims are inferior, i.e. communism or fascism.

There were no atheist crusades, no atheist inquisitions, no atheist jihads... and no global atheist terrorist conspiracy.

[edit on 13-9-2009 by john124]

reply to post by john124


Dead wrong.

Hébert's and Chaumette's atheist movement initiated a religious campaign in order to dechristianize society. The program of dechristianization waged against Catholicism, and eventually against all forms of Christianity, included the deportation of clergy and the condemnation of many of them to death, the closing of churches, the institution of revolutionary and civic cults, the large scale destruction of religious monuments, the outlawing of public and private worship and religious education, the forced abjurement of priests of their vows and forced marriages of the clergy, and the the War in the Vendée. The enactment of a law on 21 October 1793 made all suspected priests and all persons who harbored them liable to death on sight. The climax was reached with the celebration of the goddess "Reason" in Notre Dame Cathedral on 10 November. Because dissent was now regarded as counterrevolutionary, extremist enragés such as Hébert and moderate Montagnard indulgents such as Danton were guillotined in the Spring of 1794.

SOURCE:Reign of [email protected]

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


en.wikipedia.org...

Several Parisian churches were transformed into Temples of Reason, notably the Church of Saint-Paul Saint-Louis in the Marais. The churches were closed in May 1793 and more securely, 24 November 1793, when the Catholic Mass was forbidden.

The Cult of Reason was intended to complement, in the religious sphere, the radical opposition of the enragés to Robespierre's political project. In particular, Chaumette and Hébert objected to Robespierre's emphasis on the Supreme Being as a back-handed return to religion, and instead advocated the worship of Reason, personified as a goddess. The Cult of Reason enjoyed a certain support among the sans-culottes before the persecution of the Hébertistes put a stop to it.

The cult of reason sounds more like a religion to me under the guise of athiesm. Modern day atheists aren't asking for churches to become temples of reason! We don't worship anything in temples, in the way the cult of reason did.

It's ironic though don't you think, that creationists want to turn science classrooms into pseudo-science teachings. Makes you wonder what led up to this conflict in the 18th century, i.e. intolerance of dis-believers. Sounds familiar to what's happening today in the world doesn't it. Any kind of defensive behaviour that become an offensive, will be the product of attempts at mass indoctrination.

Different religions brand athiests differently, in fact Muslims will brand both christians and athiests as dis-believers & infidels. Therefore modern day athiests can never be branded specifically! It's just a general term for dis-belief. It's religions who add this extra false label, which causes dissent, not the intentions of the athiest to go out and cause trouble!

Much in the same way, any such dis-believer in a spaghetti monster may be considered a spaghetti monster spy in league with the evil baked beans, by the by the believers of a spaghetti monster. Obviously to the dis-believer, it's utterly absurd and stupid, as they don't even think spaghetti monsters exist. Therefore such branding is silly and pointless!

If the cult of reason had succeeded, just maybe the human race would have become a little more enlightened by now!

[edit on 13-9-2009 by john124]

reply to post by john124


I think you missed the point. People have been killed for atheism. Purges have happend for atheistic ideals. Qualify it all you wish. Use assumptive detours all you wish. Doesn't change the fact.

[edit on 13-9-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply to post by soul of integrity

atheists believe they turn into fertilizer for trees when they die.

This made me laugh! So, when somebody dies, presuming you're going for the burial option.... they should recognise the fact that their rotting corpse will become part of the Earth?!

they turn into trees when they die.

No, just the nutrients recycled back thru' the food cycle!

By definition an athiest does not have to belief anything, just have a dis-belief in god.

Any other beliefs that humans become trees, or more rational interpretations by science are not a pre-requisite for an athiest. Although many athiests come to conclusions via evidence-based thinking.


[edit on 13-9-2009 by john124]