(July 6, 2012 at 6:56 am)CliveStaples Wrote: Can I hate atheism for Stalin, Pol Pot, etc.? I feel like that's the way a moron tries to learn:

Damn it, here I go again....

Stalin, pol pot were corrupt communist dictators acting from their political stance. You can't really kill in the name of atheism. Simply because atheism means without theism. Essentially it means you're killing for without theism. Also those dictators killed many atheists too so it can't really be said they killed for atheism.
You can however kill for a religion. People have committed mass murder in the name of a religion and a god. Catholics during the second world war murdered around 400 to 600 thousand people in the name of god.

A common mis-understanding.
*pats on back*

People can kill for any reason and will justify it by whatever means they feel necessary. Placing the onus on religion is a very weak argument. If religion wasn't around people would be killing for another 'reason'.

This portrayal of an atheist world being utopian is pie in the sky stuff.

(July 6, 2012 at 7:08 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: People can kill for any reason and will justify it by whatever means they feel necessary. Placing the onus on religion is a very weak argument. If religion wasn't around people would be killing for another 'reason'.

This portrayal of an atheist world being utopian is pie in the sky stuff.

Quite true, being right doesn't neccesarily make you a nice person.

It doesn't however stop you being right.

But it takes religion to create this shit

http://www.icr.org/

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&...5tFNy7Q0wA

And when you try to deny reality to maintain your baseless belief in a stone age creation fairytale and worse, try to pass it off as a credible alternative then you will earn my considerable ire.

(July 6, 2012 at 7:08 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: People can kill for any reason and will justify it by whatever means they feel necessary. Placing the onus on religion is a very weak argument. If religion wasn't around people would be killing for another 'reason'.

This portrayal of an atheist world being utopian is pie in the sky stuff.

Yeah people can kill for any reason, even if the reason is 'fun'. Yobbos around here attack people for fun. Their completely amoral.

The point I'm making is that you can't really kill for atheism. You're killing for a lack of belief essentially. Besides, how has Stalin killed for atheism? Just because he was an atheist doesn't automatically mean he did it for that reason. He killed many atheists too. The religious in the past actually and openly announced why they did what they did.

Because religion is the tool used by the powerful few to control and manipulate the many.

(July 6, 2012 at 5:35 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: I find it interesting that you think i thought all atheists believe what I wrote in my first post. I didn't and still don't, I was looking to bring out those that did. Only one has admitted it, which is unsurprising. Like I've said before, I've had these discussions before and most end at the pointds made in my first post. I'm still waiting to find an explanation of why so many atheists accept Hawking's perspective when is conjecture, it seems logic falls out the window when it suits their purposes. So similar to religion, all that happens is that scientists become a replacement for ministers.

I've tried to lighten the tone as I find it very boring to be hostile the whole time, and all that happens is it becomes a diversion from the point I'm making. To me the constant hostility just shows the emotion people have towards the subject, odd given it's meant to be a logically formed view.

As a rule, I don't like what atheists stand for, I can see no point in it. When I was an atheist, I was not actively one. If someone asked me, I just didn't believe. Now I've thought about it, I'm devoutly agnostic. I accept that everyone is different and believe different things, I just intensely dislike the supposed intellectual high-ground many atheists attempt to give themselves. It just reeks of self-righteousness, again like some religious groups.

Some people believe, I don't care, they're welcome to as long as they don't impinge on me. But why form a group to disbelieve in something, it makes no sense to me at all. For any one reading this and about to cite 9/11, paedophilia, religious corruption please don't bother, it doesn't convince me of anything. Of course, if you feel the need to cathartically purge why you hate religion so much, go ahead.

---

(July 6, 2012 at 5:28 am)Creed of Heresy Wrote: Allow me to sum up the reason for Sellied's continued posts with a single emoticon.

Gringo - case and point. I don't know why they do it for acceptance amongst their peers, or are trying to annoy me.

OK, then why not call it what it is? Some people are arrogant; whether they are atheist, theist, agnostic or otherwise. I've already stated that I don't like how some of Hawking's theories are so readily accepted, just because of who he is. I don't wish to labor the point, but he does have a lot more credibility than some evangelist preacher who claims to have God's power to heal.

I'll give you an example that is perhaps better suited to illustrate your point: Atheists who accept tenuous links that seemingly paint one religious or another in a bad (Worse) light, without doing the research for themselves. They don't bother to check the chapter/verse/quote given, because it comes from what they believe to be a trusted source - other atheists.

Also, while I agree with a lot of what militant atheists do; at least in their doggedness at stopping religion from encroaching on government and law, sometimes it goes a little too extremist. By which I mean, when outright propaganda and lies are used, it takes away from what the movement should be about. Plus you have the victims who go into a religious debate armed with this piece of info, which turns out to be completely untrue.

I don't like self-righteous people in general, however, it is pretty difficult to assign that label to any one group of people, when you think about it. The majority of us are self-righteous to some degree. It's a very dominant human trait, which has its uses. It is also a trait that I think will die out in time, as we evolve socially and create more advanced supporting technologies. As for now, don't let it frustrate you too much, there are more productive things you could ponder on.

Selliedjoup Wrote:I just intensely dislike the supposed intellectual high-ground many atheists attempt to give themselves. It just reeks of self-righteousness, again like some religious groups.

Oh, the irony.

(July 6, 2012 at 7:04 am)Ace Otana Wrote: Damn it, here I go again....

Stalin, pol pot were corrupt communist dictators acting from their political stance. You can't really kill in the name of atheism. Simply because atheism means without theism. Essentially it means you're killing for without theism. Also those dictators killed many atheists too so it can't really be said they killed for atheism.
You can however kill for a religion. People have committed mass murder in the name of a religion and a god. Catholics during the second world war murdered around 400 to 600 thousand people in the name of god.

A common mis-understanding.
*pats on back*

???

You can kill for atheism. It's a worldview, an ideology--or at least there are belief systems that implement it, in the same way that theism is an ideology that various belief systems implement.

Under Communism, religion was a threat to the dominance of the state. So they eliminated it. If killing people to stamp out religion isn't atheist...well, I don't know what is.

(July 6, 2012 at 8:07 am)CliveStaples Wrote: It's a worldview, an ideology

No, no and no. It's not a world view and not an ideology. It's a response to theism, nothing more.

Quote:Under Communism, religion was a threat to the dominance of the state. So they eliminated it. If killing people to stamp out religion isn't atheist...well, I don't know what is.

Killing people to stamp out religion isn't 'atheist' no. Atheism is one thing and one thing ONLY! The lack of belief in a god or gods. Without theism. The absence of belief. Stalin was removing any threat to his dictatorship. Atheist or theist.

Also remember, many atheists were killed too. So how is it connected to atheism?
You can't name any event where people are killed in the name of atheism or if you will - the name of lack of theism. It's never happened. Religion on the other hand, we've got thousands of events committed in the name of religion/god.

(July 6, 2012 at 8:07 am)CliveStaples Wrote:

(July 6, 2012 at 7:04 am)Ace Otana Wrote: Damn it, here I go again....

Stalin, pol pot were corrupt communist dictators acting from their political stance. You can't really kill in the name of atheism. Simply because atheism means without theism. Essentially it means you're killing for without theism. Also those dictators killed many atheists too so it can't really be said they killed for atheism.
You can however kill for a religion. People have committed mass murder in the name of a religion and a god. Catholics during the second world war murdered around 400 to 600 thousand people in the name of god.

A common mis-understanding.
*pats on back*

???

You can kill for atheism. It's a worldview, an ideology--or at least there are belief systems that implement it, in the same way that theism is an ideology that various belief systems implement.

Under Communism, religion was a threat to the dominance of the state. So they eliminated it. If killing people to stamp out religion isn't atheist...well, I don't know what is.

Bullshit, religion would've been quite happy to cosy up to the communist state and endorse it's authority as it had many times before and since.

Stalin eliminated anyone who he thought would be a threat to his position. Religion was not a factor.

And you have yet to demonstrate anyone actually committing atrocities in the actual name of religion.