I really hate fundie fucktards.

[downbeatplumb]

@Adrian, if a church can be found guilty of villifying muslims, what makes you think that atheist foundations couldn't be found guilt of villifying religion. I don't think atheism as a label is a religion or even a world view. I think it does expect extrodinary evidence for extrodinary claims. By, default rejects al intangible claims, not commonly accept by science, and a lot of atheists have unjustly been attacked by religion, and feel it right to fight back. There's nothing wrong with any of that, but without even acknowledging it I fear hate and division will continue to be the human way.

Hate and division will indeed continue to be the human way.
But if you removed all religions that would get rid of one needless sort of discrimination.
I constantly aghast that people kill over who has the best imaginary friend

[Thor]

Bullshit. You can't blame the religion for letting the child die. The mother let the child die. No one else. She is accountable only for her own actions, and her beliefs are her own, no one elses.

Yes, the mother let the child die. Because she believed the tenets of a particular religion. Someone tells you from a young age that you must follow certain rules or you will burn in hell when you die. This crap has been pounded into your head since you were a toddler. You believe this crap because everyone you know believes it. You feel as though you have no choice but to follow these rules. (You don't want to burn in hell for eternity, do you?) As a result of following these rules, your child dies.

And you want to give the religion a free pass?

Apparently you think all human beings are weak-willed, spineless *explicitive of your choice here*s who can't even think for themselves.

Not at all. If anything, it's BECAUSE these people are so strong willed that they let their children die.

The woman had the choice to reject or accept the ideas presented to her.

Yes. And in her mind, rejecting the ideas would have resulted in something worse than her child dying. Because this is what she had been taught.

Even though the ideas were imbecilic in nature, she still accepted them. That's her fault, not the religion's.

Yes, it's her fault for accepting the ideas. But the religion shares the blame for promoting these ideas.

Ultimately, a person makes their own decisions, and whether or not they have the good sense to resist foolish ideas s up to them or not.

But what if those ideas aren't believed to be foolish? It is not uncommon for young Muslims to strap bombs to their body and blow themselves up in a crowd of strangers. They think that what they are doing is good and that they will be rewarded in the afterlife. Would they be killing themselves in this way if a religion were not filling their heads with bullshit? Take away the religion and the behavior is radically different.

Imagine that your kid goes to your local public school. Throughout his entire education the school system tells the kids that it is your patriotic duty to blow up gasoline station owned by Muslims. On your kid's 18th birthday he decides to become a "true patriot" and he blows up a gas station owned by Muslims. Your kid is arrested. Would you not blame the school system for putting garbage like this into your kid's head? Or would you hold the school system blameless?

[Autumnlicious]

Bullshit. You can't blame the religion for letting the child die. The mother let the child die. No one else. She is accountable only for her own actions, and her beliefs are her own, no one elses.

Indeed, she and every other person whom enabled this heinous act should be punished and publicized to the fullest extent of the Law. Log this as one of the few times I may agree with you, however limited.

Belief and the entirety of religion is not at fault in the same magnitude as the actors (the people in this case). Those who enable that belief are to be blamed, as they have the capacity to understand the effects of it on others. The idea itself is divorced from reality and while used in this context to murder and deprive, is an unthinking object that no more may be blamed than a hammer used to commit battery.

[Edwardo Piet]

Okay then, in the People's Republic of China thousands of religious buildings were looted and destroyed during the Cultural Revolution. They acted this way because of their atheism.

How so? I'm completely and utterly unconvinced by that statement. Attempt to lay down some logic... if you wish...

EvF

[Soyouz]

I read an article about a baby being abused by his/her religious parents to make other's believe it's a sign from Allah. Here it is: uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE59L0ZC20091022

Short summary; Baby gets appearing marks from the Quran on legs and arms, Islamic people go fanatic. Obviously it's this en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dermatographic_urticaria
There you can see how far people can go just because of religion.

I discussed this with a guy on another forum, since I don't have 10 posts, apparently I can't post the link to it.. so never mind.

[Minimalist]

Okay then, in the People's Republic of China thousands of religious buildings were looted and destroyed during the Cultural Revolution. They acted this way because of their atheism.

No. They acted that way because they were trying to purge the country of western (liberal bourgeois) influences. In the case of these damned missionaries, they had a valid point. The Boxer Rebellion had a similar underlying theme and they weren't "atheists" either. In fact, purging China of foreign influence has been a recurring theme.