The Image Problem With Atheism in America

[Polaris]

Did these evil atheists do these evil things because there was no god? I'm being serious here, was that specifically their reason for doing bad things?

Aka the beaten to death "killing in the name of atheism" genetic fallacy.

Really? And who gets to deside (sic) that? You?

And you didn't answer my question. Shall I refraise (sic) it? Do you think that these atrocities (of which you haven't given any exampls (sic) btw) were caused by atheism?

Disagreeing with Islam and insulting their customs does not make one an Islamaphobe.

Historians decided that after searching through tomes of records. It's quite logical why the religious would be far less brutal in their quest for power.


So, by your logic, going up to a gay man and insulting him for being gay would not make me homophobic. That's fucking retarded.

[Bad Wolf]

Did these evil atheists do these evil things because there was no god? I'm being serious here, was that specifically their reason for doing bad things?

You know what that is? That, my pea brained friend, is a question. Not a statement about anything. I asked you, what you thought the reason was for atheists doing bad things.
It's very common for xians to say: 'this atheist did bad things, must be because he doesn't believe in god', hence why I asked what you thought. I wanted to know if you were the same.

---

Oh and look, you still haven't addressed the rest of my post, I literally quoted it for you. This ain't dodgeball son. Address my responses to your claims, or withdraw them.

[Polaris]

Don't try and pass off a question intended as a statement as an actual question.

The atrocities were caused by people such as yourself, aka people of your intellect and extremist (as in ISIS) nature. People like you just need a little incentive to go into full on Waco mode.

[Bad Wolf]

Did these evil atheists do these evil things because there was no god? I'm being serious here, was that specifically their reason for doing bad things?

Aka the beaten to death "killing in the name of atheism" genetic fallacy.

Which I have not commited.

Historians decided that after searching through tomes of records. It's quite logical why the religious would be far less brutal in their quest for power.

Would be? No no no. We were talking about past atrocities committed by atheists and theists. You claimed that athiests did worse, I disagreed with your statement and asked who decided this, implying that it isn't up to you and that I would like to see how you got there. Saying 'historians say so' is not a satisfactory answer. Which historians? What study or investigation did they do to come to this conclusion? Can you link me to this study? And no, you don't just get to claim it's logical without explaining how.

So, by your logic, going up to a gay man and insulting him for being gay would not make me homophobic. That's fucking retarded.

You're fucking retarded. You are comparing Islam (a religion and a choice) to homosexuality (a sexual orientation and not a choice). Apples and oranges you chucklefuck. Of course insulting a homosexual for being gay would be homophobic. Disliking and insulting a religion that has caused thousands of deaths and to this day inspires suicide bombings and terrorism across the globe, is not Islamaphobic. There are actual legitimate reasons for not liking Islam, unlike homosexuality.

---

Don't try and pass off a question intended as a statement as an actual question.

Don't try and presume that you know what i'm thinking. You aren't psychic. I am the expert on me and what I think, and i'm telling you that it was a legitimate question not a statement in any way.

The atrocities were caused by people such as yourself, aka people of your intellect and extremist (as in ISIS) nature. People like you just need a little incentive to go into full on Waco mode.

You know nothing, absolutely nothing about me. Therefore, you are quite unjustified when you call me an extremist. What is an atheist extremist? See this is another one of those questions, those things that you are supposed to answer. What does an atheist extremist do, in your eyes, to be labelled as such?

[Polaris]

All historians...it's simple facts. I have not heard of one single historian disagreeing with that premise. They compared all the wars throughout history and shifted through the damages those wars caused and the rationale for those wars being waged. If you're trying to gain moral high ground over the religious, you're going about it the wrong way.

It's logical because religion has an incentive for people to agree with staying in line lacking in non-religious societies. A fear of damnation does a lot to incentivize the people to follow suit.

Who says homosexuality is not a choice? You just live in a society that frowns upon homosexuality. "Oh no, a few Moslems kill people, so I am going to be a hick towards them all regardless of who they are." Remind me how you are different than those Fundies you people like to whine about... Less stupid? No. Less culturally ignorant? No. Less stereotypically American? No.

You can be an extremist regardless of your religious beliefs. Many of the extremists out there aren't even religious. The comment about the ISIS was about how easily cajoled and conned you can be into doing the evil bidding of others....you come off as one who would be easy to manipulate as in a cult. Your extremism is your inability to stop acting like a warhawk Yank like those Southerners with signs like "The South will Rise Again", yee haw.

[Bad Wolf]

All historians...it's simple facts. I have not heard of one single historian disagreeing with that premise.

Really? Then where is the link? Where is the evidence?

They compared all the wars throughout history and shifted through the damages those wars caused and the rationale for those wars being waged.

No they didn't, you know how I know they didn't? because it would be impossible. In the 2000 years that xianity has been around, they have not recorded every witch burning, every stoning, every lynching, every murder ever committed for religious reasons. They haven't because they couldn't because it would be practically impossible to do. Whereas in the modern day, we can record everything that happens, we know how many people died in the all the wars, we know what fallen regimes did to their civilians, we know how people died.

If you're trying to gain moral high ground over the religious, you're going about it the wrong way.

You really don't get my point do you? I challenged you on your assertion that atheist atrocities were worse than theist ones, because I know that its a ridiculous statement to make and impossible to back up with evidence. I don't, for one second, believe the opposite is true (that theists have done worse than atheists) simply because I would't be justified in believing that because there is not enough evidence.

It's logical because religion has an incentive for people to agree with staying in line lacking in non-religious societies. A fear of damnation does a lot to incentivize the people to follow suit.

Oh really? Well, why didn't this fear of damnation prevent all the stonings? All the witch burnings? All the crusades? Oh wait! I know! Because their holy book, specifically tells them to do these things. I agree with you, its perfectly logical that a fear of hell would make people behave, however, it simply isn't the reality we live in.

Who says homosexuality is not a choice?

People who don't understand science.

You just live in a society that frowns upon homosexuality.

Really? Which society is that? Do you even know where I live?

"Oh no, a few Moslems kill people, so I am going to be a hick towards them all regardless of who they are."

Oh look, misrepresenting me again, what is this? The third time? The sentence you just said is an example of Islamaphobia. Hating someone because they are muslim, regardless of who they are. I do not do this. I hate their religion. There is a difference between a religion and the people of that religion. I hate the activities of the bad muslims, this doesn't mean I hate all muslims. I think you are doing this on purpose because it would be so much easier for you to dismiss me as an islamaphobe than actually consider my position.

Remind me how you are different than those Fundies you people like to whine about... Less stupid? No. Less culturally ignorant? No. Less stereotypically American? No.

Oh this is sweet, this is so sweet. Want to know why? I'll give you a hint. I'm not American.

You can be an extremist regardless of your religious beliefs. Many of the extremists out there aren't even religious. The comment about the ISIS was about how easily cajoled and conned you can be into doing the evil bidding of others....you come off as one who would be easy to manipulate as in a cult. Your extremism is your inability to stop acting like a warhawk Yank like those Southerners with signs like "The South will Rise Again", yee haw.

Your reading comprehension is awful, I know this now and will try to put my words in simpler terms for your benefit.
Firstly, you know why ISIS members can be cajoled into doing the evil bidding of others? Because those 'others' claim to be spreading the message of their particular god. These ISIS members have been indoctrinated since birth to believe that their religion is the one true religion and that there is no greater honour than to die for their religion. They will be rewarded in death. Sound familiar? That because it is exactly the same as your religion.

Secondly, since i'm a skeptic, a free thinker, a humanist, free of religious indoctrination, I take issue with your assertion that I would be easy to manipulate in a cult. I assess every situation I find myself in using my own thoughts and knowledge. I actually think about what i'm doing unlike cult members.

Thirdly, you have evaded my question again. I'm an extremist because I act like a 'warhawk Yank'? How exactly does a 'warhawk yank' act like? What are their beliefs and how do they act upon them?

[archangle]

Just look around this site.

Case closed.

[Thumpalumpacus]

ITT...a bunch of Yanks making excuses for letting the religious do what you should be doing.

ITT ... a Limey acting as if he understands America, based on one biased article he read online.

[Mister Agenda]

Polaris, as someone who only wishes you the best, I advise you to start considering your posts more carefully before hitting the 'Post Reply' button.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I didn't even see it. I don't tend to notice comments that don't pass muster.

I'm sure that keeps your views comfy-cozy.