Atheist terrorists are as bad as any other religious extremist

Originally posted by BagBing
reply to post by Annee

 

I don't remember this, but my mother recounts a story from when I was around five years old. At school we sung children hymns like most do. We'd done some nativity thing at christmas and apparanetly I said to her "but he's not real though, is he?". Yet at the time I believed in santa!

Religion has never sat comfortably with me, especially as I got older and had to endure a religious nutter for a headmaster - whose young son had tragically died in a rubgy game. The headmaster needed some form of comfort, which is fine in itself, but was hell bent on converting everyone else. That was it for me.

Public school?

Why are you singing hymns and doing a nativity thing?

That is "self supporting" - - isn't it?

reply to post by Annee


In England, back in the 70s, that's what all young children did! It was more of a cultural thing than religious.

reply to post by daskakik


I'm not saying that atheism is a religion and I completely disagree with the OP. My only point is that someone can use their lack of belief as a galvanizing force to take their craziness to a level of extremity that could create a possibility of heinous acts. In essence; to a crazy person atheism could be a religion. To a crazy person Lego or Harry Potter can be a religion. The point is they are crazy and take whatever they believe or don't believe to the extreme.

A lack of belief isn't a belief...but when you're crazy it can be

reply to post by acuna


Right but that would only be in the mind of that crazy person and is the reason that others who share the label are posting that a few examples are the exception and not the norm.

Also milominderbinder posted proof that Stalin didn't really have it out for all religions and even used it when it suited him. He also backed the Communist Uyghur Muslim separatists. So how anti-theist he really was is not that clear.

After Nazi Germany's attack on the Soviet Union in 1941, Joseph Stalin revived the Russian Orthodox Church to intensify patriotic support for the war effort. On September 4, 1943, Metropolitans Sergius, Alexy and Nikolay had a meeting with Stalin and received a permission to convene a council on September 8, 1943, which elected Sergius Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.

Russian Orthodox Church - Stalin Era

reply to post by daskakik


Definitely the exception and not the norm with in any group.

Originally posted by acuna

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by acuna
reply to post by trysts

 

I agree with most of your post but you can murder in the name of Atheism. For example if as an atheist I believe that anyone with dogmatic religious belief need to be killed off and I start killing them I am in effect killing in the name of atheism, or because of my atheism.

I think most of these types of killing should be attributed to extremism. While there are less extremist atheists (if any all), it is extremists nonetheless.

How can some people "get it" so quickly and easily and others not at all. Well said acuna
Its not difficult.

As for my position of atheism as a religion, let me explain it again
There is no evidence that God exists (Some but obviously questionable)
There is no evidence God doesnt exist
The default position should then be agnostic. Atheists choose atheism. Atheists by faith choose not to believe, outside of the logical position of "I dont know".
The new atheist movement has become a religion. They congregate and proselytise and push their agendas, even political.
Enjoy

Thanks for the support. I'm not sure that I agree that atheism is a religion. You can't say that a lack of a belief is a belief. I think modern atheists get together are because they/we are finally feel that we're not alone and are tired of religion running rampant and as a minority want to be heard.

Can we really say that there is no evidence that any god doesn't exist? We can't say that there isn't any evidence that unicorns don't exist. Seems like kind of a conundrum.

I think god is a creation of man to explain the natural world. The more we learn about how the natural world works the less we need to believe the traditional view of god.

edit on 19-7-2012 by acuna because: Had to add and specify

I am not suggesting all atheists are religious but there are many who are and its increasing.

You can not look at the complexity of the universe and outrightly deny intelligent design. Dawkins (The atheist head proselytiser) believes its possible, we could have been seeded by little green men,
www.youtube.com...
even the high priest of new atheism struggles with many issues pertaining to evolution.

Its not black and white, its not simple and its not over by a long shot

Atheism is a choice to believe in no god/s, its not a neutral position. It is a faith, as I see it.


Science cant prove God exists or doesnt exist so a neutral attitude is the scientific position. Science is repeatable observable and testable, outside of those parameters you have to operate in faith. Atheism is a faith.

The evidence or lack thereof for unicorns doesnt mean they didnt exist, it indicates they may well be myth or evidence for their existence is yet to be found or they are not the animal we are lead to believe they are in modern folklore
Maybe a unicorn was a rhino, a dear, an animal now gone that had a single horn that looked similar to a horse yet was changed by folklore to look exactly like a horse for easy description.

reply to post by acuna


Sure but even the examples in the OP may not have been crazy atheists. For all we know they could have believed to be doing gods work. Don't ask me how, just remember that they were crazy.

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by acuna

 

Right but that would only be in the mind of that crazy person and is the reason that others who share the label are posting that a few examples are the exception and not the norm.

Also milominderbinder posted proof that Stalin didn't really have it out for all religions and even used it when it suited him. He also backed the Communist Uyghur Muslim separatists. So how anti-theist he really was is not that clear.

After Nazi Germany's attack on the Soviet Union in 1941, Joseph Stalin revived the Russian Orthodox Church to intensify patriotic support for the war effort. On September 4, 1943, Metropolitans Sergius, Alexy and Nikolay had a meeting with Stalin and received a permission to convene a council on September 8, 1943, which elected Sergius Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.

Russian Orthodox Church - Stalin Era

Communism (atheism) hates the church

Between 1945 and 1959 the official organization of the church was greatly expanded, although individual members of the clergy were occasionally arrested and exiled. The number of open churches reached 25,000. By 1957 about 22,000 Russian Orthodox churches had become active. But in 1959 Nikita Khrushchev initiated his own campaign against the Russian Orthodox Church and forced the closure of about 12,000 churches. By 1985 fewer than 7,000 churches remained active. It is estimated that 50,000 clergy were executed by the end of the Kruschev era.[20] Members of the church hierarchy were jailed or forced out, their places taken by docile clergy, many of whom had ties with the KGB.

The atheist communists exploited the church then tried to destroy it.
To me that is terrorism orchestrated by communist atheists.Its not just about Stalin its about atheist inspired ideologies of terrorism

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by acuna

 

Sure but even the examples in the OP may not have been crazy atheists. For all we know they could have believed to be doing gods work. Don't ask me how, just remember that they were crazy.

Tell me why were they crazy, how could they do it for God if they didnt believe in God (silly isnt it) many people agreed and followed their ideals, they were supported in their attacks on religion. Were millions of people crazy and what do you base your judgement of crazy on
Pol Pot wasnt the only Khmer Rouge member who killed millions, he had lots of help. Was every one crazy>
Mao in China had an army of crazies, why were they crazy. Is atheism a crazy ideal?
I agree then.

reply to post by borntowatch


There certainly is a lot to think about and lots of ways to think about it.

Originally posted by borntowatch
Communism (atheism) hates the church

Sorry but communism is not a living thing and therefore is unable to love or hate.

The atheist communists exploited the church then tried to destroy it.
To me that is terrorism orchestrated by communist atheists.Its not just about Stalin its about atheist inspired ideologies of terrorism

You could see it however you want but all I see is hyperbole. You pointed Stalin out because he has the highest body count but it backfires when it is shown that he wasn't really completely against religion.

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by borntowatch
Communism (atheism) hates the church

Sorry but communism is not a living thing and therefore is unable to love or hate.

The atheist communists exploited the church then tried to destroy it.
To me that is terrorism orchestrated by communist atheists.Its not just about Stalin its about atheist inspired ideologies of terrorism

You could see it however you want but all I see is hyperbole. You pointed Stalin out because he has the highest body count but it backfires when it is shown that he wasn't really completely against religion.

So nazi doctrine and propaganda didn't promote hatred of the Jews? Sorry, but that's a weak argument.

reply to post by DeadSeraph

Actually, it didn't. It was used to promote hatred of the Jews.

The people in power may have hated the church but when those changed so did the amount of acceptance. This is why singling out Stalin should limit the scope to Stalin and not what those that came before or after him may have done.

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

Actually, it didn't. It was used to promote hatred of the Jews.

The people in power may have hated the church but when those changed so did the amount of acceptance. This is why singling out Stalin should limit the scope to Stalin and not what those that came before or after him may have done.

So then how does this in any way prove that the OP is incorrect? I fail to see your point...

Look. ATS is FULL of comments from atheists who merrily chirp about how the world would be a better place if the religious nut jobs would all just die. That is not even close to an exaggeration, it is a fact. It is not a stretch of the imagination to consider the fact there are atheist crazies out there who would gladly put such a plan into action (as the OP pointed out, some have even tried). The entire premise of the thread is contained in the title, yet still we have atheists here denying this very simple truth.

So let me ask every atheist in this thread: Are atheist terrorists (extremists, murderers, whatever you wish to call them) better than religious ones? Is the blood on their hands justified because they don't believe in God? It's a simple yes or no question. Judging from the bulk of the replies, the answer is apparently "yes".

It's ironic that hypocrisy is an accusation often leveled at theists by the atheist community yet they are completely blind to it when it runs so rampant in their own.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Are christian murderers better or worse than atheist murderers?

I think that every atheist on here would answer that they are the same. That isn't the problem with the OP though. The problem with the OP is that it goes on to claim that atheism and anti-theism are the same when they are not.

Then it even goes on to try to tell atheist how they are part of a "bloody and silly religion" which is violent and with no values.

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

Are christian murderers better or worse than atheist murderers?

I think that every atheist on here would answer that they are the same. That isn't the problem with the OP though. The problem with the OP is that it goes on to claim that atheism and anti-theism are the same when they are not.

Then it even goes on to try to tell atheist how they are part of a "bloody and silly religion" which is violent and with no values.

edit on 19-7-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

-Atheists have proposed "atheist temples". Pretty sure only religions build temples.

-Atheists have proposed the death of the worlds theists would leave it a better place (some have even put this plan into action)

-atheism and anti-theism go hand in hand. While not ALL atheists are opposed to theists (and vise versa), some are. The same can be said for religious extremists and moderates.

I see no problem with the OP. At least have the nuts to call a spade a spade and condemn the actions of those among you who are just as terrible as those among us who are equally terrible. Why beat around the bush?

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

Are christian murderers better or worse than atheist murderers?

I think that every atheist on here would answer that they are the same. That isn't the problem with the OP though. The problem with the OP is that it goes on to claim that atheism and anti-theism are the same when they are not.

Then it even goes on to try to tell atheist how they are part of a "bloody and silly religion" which is violent and with no values.

edit on 19-7-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

No I didnt, you may assume that, maybe I inferred that but that is not accurate
Atheist terrorists are as bad as any other religious extremist
The new atheism has blurred the line between anti- theism and atheism, thats evident. And again I am not saying ALL ATHEIST, maybe soon but not just yet.

Religious extremists who kill people are all crazy nutters, not in their right mind and can in no way be considered real religious people...stupid argument isnt it?
So why is it being used as an excuse for atheists communists here?
I will not justify those religious zealots and extremists who kill yet here now some atheists are using "craziness" as an excuse for atheist mass murderers.
Thats despicable.
Thats an excuse
Thats gutless
Thats akin to condoning it

Atheisms death toll is higher than religions death toll, Hitler to a degree was inspired by Darwinism
www.trueorigin.org...

You are all fighting shadow's, making up an argument that doesnt exist, an argument I havnt made to try land a punch.
There is no problem with the OP, the problem is your comprehension skills.

Atheism is violent
Darwins book title states that clearly "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"
Favoured races, struggle for life; that infers violence. Also if we are animals we have no moral structure than what the book title states. Atheism is founded on violence and has no moral structures outside of survival.
Just as it states. They are facts according to Darwin, not me.

reply to post by borntowatch


Your logic and your arguments have been shown to be full of holes. Like I said your title is accurate but then you try to drag other fallacies into it in the OP. No point in posting it again if you didn't get it the first time around.

Originally posted by DeadSeraph

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

Are christian murderers better or worse than atheist murderers?

I think that every atheist on here would answer that they are the same. That isn't the problem with the OP though. The problem with the OP is that it goes on to claim that atheism and anti-theism are the same when they are not.

Then it even goes on to try to tell atheist how they are part of a "bloody and silly religion" which is violent and with no values.

edit on 19-7-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

-Atheists have proposed "atheist temples". Pretty sure only religions build temples.

-Atheists have proposed the death of the worlds theists would leave it a better place (some have even put this plan into action)

-atheism and anti-theism go hand in hand. While not ALL atheists are opposed to theists (and vise versa), some are. The same can be said for religious extremists and moderates.

I see no problem with the OP. At least have the nuts to call a spade a spade and condemn the actions of those among you who are just as terrible as those among us who are equally terrible. Why beat around the bush?

edit on 19-7-2012 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)

Wow great post, researched your points.
Amazing

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by borntowatch

 

Your logic and your arguments have been shown to be full of holes. Like I said your title is accurate but then you try to drag other fallacies into it in the OP. No point in posting it again if you didn't get it the first time around.

Your opinion is valued, dismissed but valued.
Plenty of others agree with what I have written, though its not my idea, I have just passed on others views I have read or heard.
Dead Seraph buries your argument completely. Atheist temples???