11 Nov 07
Originally posted by whodeyTo some extent, yes. However one or the other worldview might be more conducive to certain actions.
If atrocities have been carried out by those who are religious as well as those who disdain religioun, what does this say about either those who are both religious and not religious? Does it not say that perhaps the motivating factor lies at the heart of mans nature and not religion per sey?
11 Nov 07
Originally posted by jaywillI'm sure there were plenty of people treated for atheism. Atheism in the past has not been considered the normal state by the Christian establisment.
I was wondering what was taking so long for someone to come to the defense of Atheism.
However, some people were treated as mentally ill for their belief in God per se. That was an atrocity.
11 Nov 07
Originally posted by jaywillThe Nazis were some bizaare mix of atheism, Christianity and old Germanic pagan religion. I'd have to see a damn good argument to accept that the Nazis acted in the name of atheism.
Nazi and Marxist persecution of Christians:
http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/archive-2006-0215-christian_holocaust.htm
11 Nov 07
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThe Nazi's persecuted those they didn't consider belonging to the Aryan race. If you were anything else they'd burn you alive in an oven, or send you to a gas chamber.
The Nazis were some bizaare mix of atheism, Christianity and old Germanic pagan religion. I'd have to see a damn good argument to accept that the Nazis acted in the name of atheism.
It is CLEAR and very well documented what "values" they promoted and there was never, a mention of atheism. Only various twisted mentions of the opposite. They were not atheists to any small degree.
Anyone who says they acted this way because they were atheists is someone desperate to accuse atheists of something--someone who is looking to find symmetry between "atheist" wars and religious ones.
It is such a stupid claim it hardly deserves the time it took me to respond, but I've got things to procrastinate so I wrote it anyway.
11 Nov 07
Originally posted by The Dude 84I make mine your words
The Nazi's persecuted those they didn't consider belonging to the Aryan race. If you were anything else they'd burn you alive in an oven, or send you to a gas chamber.
It is CLEAR and very well documented what "values" they promoted and there was never, a mention of atheism. Only various twisted mentions of the opposite. They were not atheists to an ...[text shortened]... e time it took me to respond, but I've got things to procrastinate so I wrote it anyway.
17 Jun 08
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesHow about some atrocities committed by others in the name of religion?
Name some atrocities that have been carried out in the name of atheism.
Pre-20th century:
-The Crusades
-The Hundred Years' War
-The Salem Witch Trials
20th century:
-The Holocaust
-The KKK's wars on non-Protestants
-Hindu-Muslim tensions and wars
-Tibetian struggle for independence
21st century:
-9/11 attacks
-The "War on Terror," a.k.a. Christians killing Muslims
And that's just some of them
20 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThe Nazis were in no way atheist. Hitler believed he was committing the atrocities that he did in the name of God. Atheists in Germany were rounded up and sent to labor camps. In addition, atheism is a trademark of communism/socialism, and Nazism was a stark contrast to that.
The Nazis were some bizaare mix of atheism, Christianity and old Germanic pagan religion. I'd have to see a damn good argument to accept that the Nazis acted in the name of atheism.
In other words, you are right.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
20 Jun 08
Atrocities are carried out by people. If there was not religion it would happen. If there was religion it would happen. It is irrespective of religious belief.
Further, it's not a contest; so just because someone can name more religious atrocities doesn't mean the anti-theist side wins. Just because someone can name more atrocities with no religious ties to them doesn't mean that the theists win.
When atrocities happen (and after) there are no winners.
20 Jun 08
3 edits
Originally posted by The Dude 84Your knowledge of history is the joke here.
As for atheist wars, no such thing has ever existed. People who don't understand this do not understand causality.
Because an atheist kills someone doesn't mean it's because of his atheism. Stalin's purges wiped out lots of atheists too. Just because he killed religious people and took down all signs of religions doesn't mean he was against religion ...[text shortened]... d in a similar manner he would have done the same thing to them.
This thread is a joke.
Under Stalin there were severe laws against criticizing atheism and penalties included imprisonment (and often in gulags). How are laws against criticizing atheism not done in its name?
The fact is that vistesd is correct. Atrocities "done in the name of X" are poor arguments for justifying belief, one way or the other.
Edit - My spelling is funny, too.
Edit 2 - If the last sentence has not sunk into you yet, just think of some recent atrocities done in the name of democracy.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by The Dude 84Stalin was an atheist and he did kill people because they weren't. As an atheist, I'm not proud of that, just like the Christians aren't proud of the Holocaust, but I accept it as the truth, because it was. Stalin did kill millions of Russians because they were not atheist. About a third of those killed in his purge were killed because they were religious.
As for atheist wars, no such thing has ever existed. People who don't understand this do not understand causality.
Because an atheist kills someone doesn't mean it's because of his atheism. Stalin's purges wiped out lots of atheists too. Just because he killed religious people and took down all signs of religions doesn't mean he was against religion ...[text shortened]... d in a similar manner he would have done the same thing to them.
This thread is a joke.
I am not advocating Christianity, nor am I saying that all atheists should be judged according to the actions of Stalin, or, say Pol Pot. Most atheists, like most Christians, most Jews, most Muslims, most Hindus, most Buddhists, most Taoists, most Sikhs, most Jains, and most other religious groups do not openly want to kill anyone based on difference of faith.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by whodeyAsk Bill Gates.
Who needs a banner when one sees him closing down church's and waging war with those who are religious. Are you denying that such activities took place? If you were so much as caught with a Bible in the former USSR you were in bad shape.
When you're in the business of squashing competition, one of the most effective ways is disabling their organisation.
Stalin was destorying a competing power structure, rather than doing anything for a-theological reasons.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by scherzoI disagree, at least in Stalin's reasons, if not actions.
Stalin was an atheist and he did kill people because they weren't. As an atheist, I'm not proud of that, just like the Christians aren't proud of the Holocaust, but I accept it as the truth, because it was. Stalin did kill millions of Russians because they were not atheist. About a third of those killed in his purge were killed because they were religious.
...[text shortened]... d most other religious groups do not openly want to kill anyone based on difference of faith.
Stalin acted in the way he did to stamp out the competition - its a plan of action all in the communist manifesto (apparently), first you consolidate ppower, and wipe out competing structures, then you can start your communist regime. Stalin never really got round to the second part, unfortunately.
But, Stalin was wiping out the competitor for the souls of people, and thats all. His purge was not on religious grounds, at least from any evidence that I've seen presented.....
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by scottishinnzProof: Stalin created a student army of atheists, similar to the Gestapo in Nazi Germany or the Red Army in Maoist China. The group was called the League of Militant Godless (or the League of Militant Atheists, the Society of the Godless, or the League of Belligerent Atheists, depending on the translation you get). They sent millions of theists to labor camps to work until they died, or they simply went to houses and killed theists.
I disagree, at least in Stalin's reasons, if not actions.
Stalin acted in the way he did to stamp out the competition - its a plan of action all in the communist manifesto (apparently), first you consolidate ppower, and wipe out competing structures, then you can start your communist regime. Stalin never really got round to the second part, unfortu ...[text shortened]... s purge was not on religious grounds, at least from any evidence that I've seen presented.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_the_Godless
http://www.darkfiber.com/atheisms/atheisms/soviet.html
http://www.jstor.org/pss/125428
Again, I am not trying to condemn atheists for their actions. I am myself a devout atheist. However, every group commits shameful actions at one time or another. Atheists are no exception, and that's true whether you are atheist or not.