Yes, prior to becoming the founder of the Khmer Rouge, he was Buddhist, potentially a catholic, though we cannot be sure of the latter. The man burned entire libraries to the ground, so obviously he didn't let many records of himself be written, most of what we know comes from witnesses.
And no, Marxism is not, by definition, atheistic. That's Leninism, and Leninism is what we've seen from Russia, Cambodia, China [to this day, too], and North Korea. Truth be told we've never seen Marxism in real practice, and likely never will. However, communism as we've seen, and communism as it is known, is based in Marxism, hence why the defining term tends to be "Marxist communism" even if we've never seen Marxism in practice, since communism as we know it is derived from it. But Leninism is the bastard son of Marxism. Marxism stated that religion was not an enemy or an ally; it was something to be left alone, and that people would depart from it of their own accord through learning and study, or they would not, and it did not matter either way. Leninism however frowns upon religion as something to be avoided, like a disease. And where Marxism basically stated that the people were the power, Leninism invokes dictatorship, a "worker for the workers." And when you give a dictator power, ABSOLUTE power, in fact, as Leninism does, you induce totalitarianism. Hence why we've seen what we've seen in communist nations.
Hence why people educated on the topic of communism will tell you "true communism never came to be." Because alas, it did not. If it had, the conversation on atheist dictators we have had would never have come to be. But we can learn from history and realize that secularists do not need to be anything more than secularists. It is important to note that secularism is the most beneficial attachment to both theism and atheism, because when religion is kept personal and private, it ceases to harm anyone, as the same can be said of any ideology.
The church allows for salvation only if you repent for it [deathbed conversions basically]. I have no intention of repenting, however, since it would be the height of hypocrisy for me to live my life as an atheist, only to turn around and repent out of a fear of damnation...which is ultimately what happens with everyone. The fear of death and the hope for eternity and the worry of what they think will come after. But THIS would segue into an extremely long discussion down a different path so I'll stop before I start walking it.
Also to butt in to your other discussion, there IS documented evidence that most parents teach the idea of god to their children in some way, I've actually seen it but fuck me I can't find it. It was somewhere in the high 80 percentile of parents admitting that they basically taught their children about god or instilled god-worshiping/fearing/respecting habits in their children at a young age even if they themselves were not very devout. It's kind of a practice a bit like circumcision or saying "bless you" when someone sneezes or me saying "GOD FUCKING DAMMIT!!" every time the lag kicks in in the middle of a match of Battlefield 3 and screws me out of a kill; it's just a socially-accepted behavior.
Honestly I had several of my foster families try to teach me about god but it was the first one to be nice to me that actually made the teachings stick. She was a simple woman and truth be told she didn't really read much of the bible. Also: Yes, we DO have the authority to interpret scripture; we are literate, possessing reasoning abilities and higher cognitive functions for discernment. Saying otherwise is like saying we do not have the authority to interpret the US Constitution. In fact, Timothy 2:5 is pretty unambiguous in that: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
I mean, granted, he THEN goes on to blather on for another ten verses or so about how women need to be submissive, servile, meek, quiet, docile, modest, are natural-born sinners because they're in the image of Eve yadda friggin' yadda primitive woman-hatred stuff, but he made the claim that there is one god, and Jesus is the only person between god and men. The catholic church has zero claim to be putting themselves anywhere between god/jesus and mankind and yet they do so anyway.
And yes, I know the whole thing that Jesus founded the Catholic Church...except that Catholic means "universal," not "made of a hierarchy where certain men are more in authority than others." And another thing, what is with the Catholic church calling their priests "father?"
"Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Matthew 23:9
And the rosary??
"And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. Matthew 6:7
And Catholicism says that Mary was a virgin and remained one after Jesus was born:
"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? "And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" Matthew 13:55-56
Now, with all these things in my mind, I start to understand why the Catholic church forbids just anyone from interpreting scripture: Because they are going against it and they don't want members of their church to start thinking about that.
Truth be told, I find it all a load of hooey, obviously. Snakes talking and an apple inducing sin [now if it was a bundle of grapes THEN I'd be like 'oh fuck yeah, that was the fruit of sin'] and all of humanity supposedly coming from two people without inducing catastrophic congenital illnesses that would have wiped us all out after our tenth generation or so and the world being created 6000 years or whatever ago despite all evidence to the contrary, dudes rising from the grave and working alchemy by turning water into wine even though that's chemically impossible and how if that happened the universe would basically break down because the laws of chemistry if broken once would cease to have an effect and if one law of the universe breaks why not the rest and then there's the whole thing about Jesus dying for our sins supposedly being what made the sacrifice so meaningful except then he comes BACK to life which makes his sacrifice utterly pointless and then he floated into the sky even though we all know that there is no heaven on/in the clouds and beyond the sky is nothing but SPACE...so...maybe he floated into space and died again...??
AUGH!!
And no, Marxism is not, by definition, atheistic. That's Leninism, and Leninism is what we've seen from Russia, Cambodia, China [to this day, too], and North Korea. Truth be told we've never seen Marxism in real practice, and likely never will. However, communism as we've seen, and communism as it is known, is based in Marxism, hence why the defining term tends to be "Marxist communism" even if we've never seen Marxism in practice, since communism as we know it is derived from it. But Leninism is the bastard son of Marxism. Marxism stated that religion was not an enemy or an ally; it was something to be left alone, and that people would depart from it of their own accord through learning and study, or they would not, and it did not matter either way. Leninism however frowns upon religion as something to be avoided, like a disease. And where Marxism basically stated that the people were the power, Leninism invokes dictatorship, a "worker for the workers." And when you give a dictator power, ABSOLUTE power, in fact, as Leninism does, you induce totalitarianism. Hence why we've seen what we've seen in communist nations.
Hence why people educated on the topic of communism will tell you "true communism never came to be." Because alas, it did not. If it had, the conversation on atheist dictators we have had would never have come to be. But we can learn from history and realize that secularists do not need to be anything more than secularists. It is important to note that secularism is the most beneficial attachment to both theism and atheism, because when religion is kept personal and private, it ceases to harm anyone, as the same can be said of any ideology.
The church allows for salvation only if you repent for it [deathbed conversions basically]. I have no intention of repenting, however, since it would be the height of hypocrisy for me to live my life as an atheist, only to turn around and repent out of a fear of damnation...which is ultimately what happens with everyone. The fear of death and the hope for eternity and the worry of what they think will come after. But THIS would segue into an extremely long discussion down a different path so I'll stop before I start walking it.
Also to butt in to your other discussion, there IS documented evidence that most parents teach the idea of god to their children in some way, I've actually seen it but fuck me I can't find it. It was somewhere in the high 80 percentile of parents admitting that they basically taught their children about god or instilled god-worshiping/fearing/respecting habits in their children at a young age even if they themselves were not very devout. It's kind of a practice a bit like circumcision or saying "bless you" when someone sneezes or me saying "GOD FUCKING DAMMIT!!" every time the lag kicks in in the middle of a match of Battlefield 3 and screws me out of a kill; it's just a socially-accepted behavior.
Honestly I had several of my foster families try to teach me about god but it was the first one to be nice to me that actually made the teachings stick. She was a simple woman and truth be told she didn't really read much of the bible. Also: Yes, we DO have the authority to interpret scripture; we are literate, possessing reasoning abilities and higher cognitive functions for discernment. Saying otherwise is like saying we do not have the authority to interpret the US Constitution. In fact, Timothy 2:5 is pretty unambiguous in that: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
I mean, granted, he THEN goes on to blather on for another ten verses or so about how women need to be submissive, servile, meek, quiet, docile, modest, are natural-born sinners because they're in the image of Eve yadda friggin' yadda primitive woman-hatred stuff, but he made the claim that there is one god, and Jesus is the only person between god and men. The catholic church has zero claim to be putting themselves anywhere between god/jesus and mankind and yet they do so anyway.
And yes, I know the whole thing that Jesus founded the Catholic Church...except that Catholic means "universal," not "made of a hierarchy where certain men are more in authority than others." And another thing, what is with the Catholic church calling their priests "father?"
"Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Matthew 23:9
And the rosary??
"And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. Matthew 6:7
And Catholicism says that Mary was a virgin and remained one after Jesus was born:
"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? "And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" Matthew 13:55-56
Now, with all these things in my mind, I start to understand why the Catholic church forbids just anyone from interpreting scripture: Because they are going against it and they don't want members of their church to start thinking about that.
Truth be told, I find it all a load of hooey, obviously. Snakes talking and an apple inducing sin [now if it was a bundle of grapes THEN I'd be like 'oh fuck yeah, that was the fruit of sin'] and all of humanity supposedly coming from two people without inducing catastrophic congenital illnesses that would have wiped us all out after our tenth generation or so and the world being created 6000 years or whatever ago despite all evidence to the contrary, dudes rising from the grave and working alchemy by turning water into wine even though that's chemically impossible and how if that happened the universe would basically break down because the laws of chemistry if broken once would cease to have an effect and if one law of the universe breaks why not the rest and then there's the whole thing about Jesus dying for our sins supposedly being what made the sacrifice so meaningful except then he comes BACK to life which makes his sacrifice utterly pointless and then he floated into the sky even though we all know that there is no heaven on/in the clouds and beyond the sky is nothing but SPACE...so...maybe he floated into space and died again...??
AUGH!!
