Separate Studies Conclude: Atheism = Peace, Religiosity = Higher Sociological Problems

Originally posted by Xtrozero

I'm not that religious but more of a social psychologist in nature, but the funny thing is that even though Atheists lack some observable sign in general it seems I still know who all within my circle of friends and acquaintances happen to be Atheist.

Why do you think that is so?

Interesting - you think like I do. Will have to get serious and put some extra thought in my responses to you. Social anthropology is a hobby interest of mine.

Too late for me to think right now though.

reply to post by Xtrozero


We can continue to supply examples which seem to contradict each other for a very long time, but in answer to your question:

Why is it that people who do evil things and are atheist it seems their lack of religion is not to blame, but when people who do evil things and are not atheist then their religion is to blame?

How many people have been killed in the name of atheism?

reply to post by Titen-Sxull

I doubt anyone would sign on to have a government that forces one religion or no religion, everybody wants religious freedom.

If only this were true...

In my own country, there is official freedom of conscience, but Buddhism is the State religion, and the Buddhist majority uses its vote to impose oppressive, unfair laws upon the whole nation. Every full moon day is a public holiday, a kind of Buddhist Sunday. No alcohol may be purchased or served anywhere on these holidays. On major festivals government-enforced abstinence may prevail for several days. Often the sale of meat is similarly outlawed.

Freedom of expression is absent when the subject is Buddhism. Works of art that feature the Buddha in any non-religious or otherwise 'questionable' context are banned. Followers of Mahayana Buddhism, which is different from the Theravada form practised in my country, have no place to worship, for all attempts to set up Mahayana shrines and monasteries are thwarted by the Theravada establishment.

Recently, a Muslim woman, formerly a Buddhist, was arrested and locked up for writing a book about her conversion to Islam.

State institutions often have elaborate Buddha statues or Buddhist shrines on their premises. Government functions are attended by regiments of orange-clad Buddhist monks. No important official function can take place without their blessing.

All of this is supported, openly or tacitly, by the Buddhist majority. Freedom of religion is not for them.

A law against converting Buddhists to other faiths is regularly debated in Parliament, though it is yet to be promulgated. In the meantime, Buddhist monks fulminate on TV about these 'unlawful conversions'. Many churches have been sacked and burned by Buddhist mobs. Rarely is anyone arrested for these attacks. Often local politicians (who are also, usually, the local mobsters) are involved in them.

My own life experience bears out the connexion between religiosity and bad societies. In my country, religion and nationality are inextricably mixed; the Buddhist majority is also an ethnic majority, and the origin-myth of this majority teaches that my country is a land sacred to the Buddha and his faith, and that the group were his chosen custodians of the land. This ethno-religious self-definition and sense of entitlement has led to the destruction of the wondrous, colourful multicultural society we had soon after Independence and its replacement with a largely monolithic ethnicity and the marginalization of members of other races and faiths. An entire ethnic group whose culture was thought incompatible with the Buddhists' was driven out of the country as a result of deliberate State policy. Another, larger group resisted this ethnic-cleansing-by-stealth; the results were regular race riots once a generation until the 1980s and then a full-fledged civil war. This has just ended, after tens of thousands of lives were lost, many of them civilians who died like flies in the last stages of the conflict, caught between the forces of the State and the guerillas opposing it.

This is what happens when religion rules a people.

Christians who think their religion is different from others may well be right, though. Not because Christianity is less evil than other religions but because it is more so. The name of Jesus Christ has certainly been responsible for more bloodshed than any other in the history of our unhappy species. Muslims and Communists are sophomores at slaughter compared with Christians.

[edit on 1/6/10 by Astyanax]

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Communism is a political philosophy and system.

Actually, Communism is a religion, and its vices are all religious vices.

• Like a religion, Communism has its Eden, its Fall, its explanation for the evil and misery of the world and its road to salvation. These are, respectively: the Rousseauian world of the noble savage, the rise of industrial society, Marxist political economy and dialectical materialism.
  
  
• It has its God: the almighty People, whose rightful rule must extend over all nations and in whose name all deeds may be accomplished, even the most fell.
  
  
• It has its Heaven: the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
  
  
• It has its Bible: Das Kapital.
  
  
• It has its commandments, its Leviticus and its Deuteronomy: the Communist Manifesto, co-authored by the prophets Marx and Engels.
  
  
• It has its Devil: capitalism.

But most of all, Communism is a religion because it demands faith: faith in the inevitability of the historical process as outlined by Karl Marx, and faith that the leaders truly speak with the voice of the People.

It is these religious elements in Communism that make it so malevolent. The evils of Communism are all religious evils: reliance on faith instead of reason; intolerance of other creeds and the demonization of those who believe and practise them; insistence that one rule is right for all men (as Blake said, one law for the lion and ox is oppression); the exhortation to sacrifice one's own energy and happiness for the greater good; an obsession with blasphemy; and a terror of free speech.

Sloppy thinkers who contrast Communism with Christianity are merely comparing like with like. They are sisters under the skin.

Originally posted by Astyanax

Actually, Communism is a religion, and its vices are all religious vices.

Someone else had brought this up and I found this to be quite an amazing observation. I hadn't thought of it this way before and I'm glad this was pointed out.

Since my last post was edited out I´ll repeat the essence of it here:

The "My * is bigger than your * syndrome" shown by atheists is a sign of existential insecurity. Someone who is actually more intelligent does not have to go around shoving it into peoples faces.

There are dozens of similar threads on ATS, each with the desperate goal to prove how much more intelligent atheists are

Examples:
Atheists more intelligent than religious believers (41 pages!)

Liberals and Atheists smarter

Atheists Superiour

Religious people have other issues, but the predominant atheist issue seems to be the preoccupation whether he is smart or not.

Religion can teach one great things and religion most oft promotes peace rather than war...
So what causes these wars over religion is not religion itself, rather people's intolerance. If we just learn to hold back judgement then these religious killings would not happen in the first place.
If you think religion should be abolished then so should cultures and languages. For they too, are a cause of clash...
It's a stretch to say that there'd be peace wo religion... People will continue to fight over control, power and material possession.
Don't take spirituality for granted...


"Catholic monks did help preserve Ancient Greek and Roman texts by copiously hand-copying them. Up to this very day, missionaries spread education and relief in poverty-stricken areas around the world. It is because of Islam that we have beautiful temples like the Dome of the Rock and palaces at the Alhambra. Some of the greatest human rights pioneers were religious leaders: Martin Luther King Jnr, Malcolm X, even Jesus and Mohammad. The Catholic Church is the biggest donor of care for those with AIDs in the world. Religion gives people hope when there is none: Voodoo has helped unite Haiti, a country in grief during the Port-Au-Price Earthquake. Even the basics: religion teaches us morals for us to follow. Honor thy parents, thou shalt not murder and all that jazz is prevalent in almost every major religion in the world."

Originally posted by lucid eyes
The "My * is bigger than your * syndrome" shown by atheists is a sign of existential insecurity

And what would you call your incessant trolling attempts? A desperate cry for attention?

This thread is not as you have claimed and if you actually checked the links instead of just the title perhaps you could make a worthwhile contribution to the thread besides trolling and insults.

reply to post by Xtrozero

Why is it that people who do evil things and are atheist it seems their lack of religion is not to blame, but when people who do evil things and are not atheist then their religion is to blame?

We're talking, I think, about the evil things religious people do explicitly in the name or cause of their religion. I have yet to see anyone do evil in the name of atheism, but if you have any examples I'm open to correction. Bigbert had the same question, I think.

About Communism being a religion: yes, a couple of posters before me did point it out. I starred their posts, but thought it was worthwhile making the comparison more explicit. The member (pardon me if I don't go back to check the name) who explained that Communist suppression of Christianity in the USSR was intended to eliminate competitors with the cult of Stalin was particularly insightful.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
And Atheism not only tries to destroy religions, but any sense of spirituality within individuals.

Well that's blatantly not true.

Athiests don't care about religion, most of us certainly don't care whether someone believes or not, so there is little to no purpose of trying to destroy something you don't believe in or care about.

Believe or don't believe, the choice is yours. I'm sure we could both come up with perfectly good arguements for our side, more intelligent people than most of us on here have been debating both sides for centuries.

At the end of the day, I've know religious people who are A-Holes and Atheists who are A-Holes. What does this tell me?

No religion has a monopoly on being an A-Hole. that's a right that's been reserved for the whole of Humanity... and boy do we use it!

Originally posted by bigbert81

How many people have been killed in the name of atheism?

Your question doesn't make sense because atheism is not a thought, belief or actions, it is the lack of.
I have notice that atheist tend to rely on simple logic loops as their primary tool when they debate this issue, but things are not so simple.

The better question is, how does the lack of religion affect human behavior?

Originally posted by Xtrozero
[
The better question is, how does the lack of religion affect human behavior?

According to each of the studies in the OP and a subsequent one posted by someone else, it appears to have some rather positive effects.

Politicians start wars - not people.

Politicians use tools to incite people to react.

It is my opinion the average person - no matter what they believe - want the same thing. The basics: shelter - water - food - a sense of purpose - companionship - means to provide for their family.

If you put a group of families in a neighborhood with different beliefs - - without external forces "stirring the pot" - - I think they would bond in common need - - not go to war for their differences.

So we really should put the blame of warring over differences where it belongs.

[edit on 1-6-2010 by Annee]

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Xtrozero
[
The better question is, how does the lack of religion affect human behavior?

According to each of the studies in the OP and a subsequent one posted by someone else, it appears to have some rather positive effects.

I think when you put all responsibility on yourself and view life with a more logical - rather then emotional approach - - the overall outcome makes more sense.

Religion to me allows excuses.

Originally posted by Astyanax

Actually, Communism is a religion, and its vices are all religious vices.

Lol ok, so then is capitalism (money=god), hell might as well put all systems in the pot too. The bottom line is there are many motivators that affect humans and religion just happens to be just one of them. Atheists have many motivators too and humans as a whole do a lot of bad things not in the name of religion, and they do a lot of good things in the name of religion, so what is your point?

My point is that many times man can be downright evil and a multitude of motivators can drive that, but in every case it is a modified version of the motivator as humans change them for very personal interests. So humans by nature can and will do evil acts whether religion is here or not. Maybe if we started as herbivores things might have been different.

Originally posted by Annee

Religion to me allows excuses.

Most certainly. The atheist has no wiggle room for his/her morality. They answer to their conscience and themselves. A theist has a forgiving god to pardon those sins.

Plus there's the issue of reckoning that god is on your side or that you are doing something in the name of your god. Once you start believing this all moral codes disappear.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

According to each of the studies in the OP and a subsequent one posted by someone else, it appears to have some rather positive effects.

I have some problems with the study that even in the study they talk about. They stated, and rightly so, that there are more rapes in America because more women are willing to report it, so in reality there are no more or less compared to other 1st world countries.

So this also means there are a huge number of reasons other than religion or lack of that drive cultures to be as they are.

To give you an example: Does violence on TV create violence in children? On the surface we all say yes! But there are many factors to look at. What if violent kids just like to watch violence on TV too? That would skew the whole theory would it not?

If we look at Sweden, is it really the lack of religion that has created their culture as it is? I cannot answer that and neither does the report. Off the top of my head I can come up with 10 to 20 disparities that might or might not be a reason for their lifestyle, and if I did a serious study that number would greatly increase.

Since Sweden has an extremely low immigration number and the US has the highest in the world I can just as easily say immigration is the factor for the differences....

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Annee

Religion to me allows excuses.

Most certainly. The atheist has no wiggle room for his/her morality. They answer to their conscience and themselves. A theist has a forgiving god to pardon those sins.

Plus there's the issue of reckoning that god is on your side or that you are doing something in the name of your god. Once you start believing this all moral codes disappear.

And in my belief it is even more so.

In my belief every thought is considered an action. You can't put the "smiley face " on - on the outside - - - and be thinking nefarious thoughts on the inside.

In my belief the energy/soul intelligence always exists. All you have is yourself and your own integrity.

Originally posted by Xtrozero
I have some problems with the study that even in the study they talk about. They stated, and rightly so, that there are more rapes in America because more women are willing to report it, so in reality there are no more or less compared to other 1st world countries.

I'm not certain you can draw that conclusion definitely based on likelihood to report alone.

So this also means there are a huge number of reasons other than religion or lack of that drive cultures to be as they are.

Yes. I, and the man in the second video, admit that society is too complex to make definitive conclusions based on such limited data points.

To give you an example: Does violence on TV create violence in children? On the surface we all say yes! But there are many factors to look at. What if violent kids just like to watch violence on TV too? That would skew the whole theory would it not?

There's much evidence that fantasy violence tends to reduce the likelihood of actual violence.

If we look at Sweden, is it really the lack of religion that has created their culture as it is? I cannot answer that and neither does the report. Off the top of my head I can come up with 10 to 20 disparities that might or might not be a reason for their lifestyle, and if I did a serious study that number would greatly increase.

I'm uncertain as to whether the correlation indicates causation or not. All these studies do is compare religiosity with sociological problems. Certain factors other than religion come into play.

Since Sweden has an extremely low immigration number and the US has the highest in the world I can just as easily say immigration is the factor for the differences....

Sure you can say that. Can you establish the correlation statistically with data from ISSP, GPI or some other statistical data?

[edit on 1-6-2010 by traditionaldrummer]

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Since Sweden has an extremely low immigration number and the US has the highest in the world I can just as easily say immigration is the factor for the differences....

Don't you need to look at percentage per capita when comparing numbers between a large populated country and a smaller one?