If Only The Romans

[Esquilax]

Because of leaders like Kim Jon Un, Mao Tse Tung, Joseph Stalin, among others. These guys have a very bad record on humans rights. I mean they're murders and persecutors. Maybe there's some good good atheist leaders out there somewhere.

Have you taken a look at modern atheist leaders, rather than just the few that happen to agree with the position you've already accepted? Australia had an atheist leader for a while: no murders. Or, hell, you can actually, like, look back into the past and see plenty of leaders who weren't the three you theists always seem to pick: Here's a list. It took me five minutes to find. So how dare you pretend that those three examples- none of whom committed their atrocities in the name of atheism- are perfectly representative? Doesn't that seem a little.... dishonest, to you?

But because I'm not one to be dishonest in service to my ideological presuppositions, let me take a minute to help you out using the research you evidently didn't want to do yourself. If you wanted to find an atheist who actually was a poor leader in service to atheism (it's a debatable point, but possibly the strongest example in your favor I've come across) here's Enver Hoxha of Albania, who turned his country into an atheist state and arrested priests and religious practitioners for show trials. This is as close as you will come, in my experience, to an atheist leader whose human rights violations can be directly tied to his atheism. I give you this so that maybe you and your fellow presuppositional knuckleheads (don't think I haven't noticed that you've also defined "true christianity" by only positive attributes. That's some prime fiat dishonesty there) can at least be historically accurate when you try to misrepresent the history of atheism in politics. It's on me.