Damned STUPID Priest yesterday . . .

[Amarok]

What are you actually defending the Khmer Rouge?
Buddhist monks should be exterminated because they are lazy and beg for food?

Neither hat drugs are you on 

That's the problem with authoritarian ideologies, they want to impose what they imagine is for the greater good for society at the expense of religious and individual liberty. No wander such authoritarian tendencies appeal to the non-religious and the atheists.

Seriously what drugs are you on

[The Grand Nudger]

Our, you know..hurr dur, atheists did it cuz atheism.

50/50

Nevermind the fact that they, too, were fucking buddhists, who were attacking an institution moreso than the belief system, lol.  For more interesting trivia, and again as discussed in thread, it has become exactly what it was then in recent times..leading people to feel the same way about it, despite not being khmer rouge cultists.  What we can see in this dynamic, is that the appraisal and general sentiment towards buddhist temples and monks exceeds the boundaries of the regimes ideology - it isn;t produced by that ideology, but more that the khmer rouge took advantage of that then-and-now present state of affairs to achieve it's own end, not the formation of a "godless" state (redundant, all states are godless, there is no god) or the suppression of religion..those were simply the means, but un-contested authority.

What are you actually defending the Khmer Rouge?
Buddhist monks should be exterminated because they are lazy and beg for food?

OFC not.  I'm pointing out that you're an idiot.  Unfortunately, and because you're an idiot...that escaped you.

That's the problem with authoritarian ideologies, they want to impose what they imagine is for the greater good for society at the expense of religious and individual liberty. No wander such authoritarian tendencies appeal to the non-religious and the atheists. I think it's the same line of reasoning used by Nazis to exterminate disabled and sick people. Burdens on society must be exterminated for the material progress of that society.

Are you talking about the khmer rouge here, or bloodgod?  What's the difference?

[Angrboda]

What are you actually defending the Khmer Rouge?
Buddhist monks should be exterminated because they are lazy and beg for food?

That's the problem with authoritarian ideologies, they want to impose what they imagine is for the greater good for society at the expense of religious and individual liberty. No wander such authoritarian tendencies appeal to the non-religious and the atheists. I think it's the same line of reasoning used by Nazis to exterminate disabled and sick people. Burdens on society must be exterminated for the material progress of that society.

You move goalposts more than anybody I know.

[tackattack]

---

You're trying to argue stats...lol. No one neds to deny that modern superpowers have the biggest stats. They had the nastiest weapons, after all. OFC.....modern superpowers are still chiock full with a majority of the religious....so there's that....

This is the short version of a long story.  If you'd like to argue that the religious have never been motivated by what they felt their god commanded them to do in the slaughter of others then I don't have the patience for your bullshit.  If you don't feel the need to explain how -atheism- motivates a person to kill in that same way, then..again..I don't have the patience for your bullshit.  

God told me to kill that motherfucker!

No God told me to kill that motherfucker!

Can you spot the difference? OFC atheists kill people! We might even be better at it than theists (lelz, just one more thing we're better at). The difference is that atheists do not kill people "because atheism" as the religious kill people "because religion". Now you can huff and puff from here to there and swear that no god ever commanded them to do so (and I'd agree..because there are no gods to do any commanding)...but that's not what they thought...now, is it?

---

Actually I was not trying to argue stats. I think it's pointless. I'd rather see a conversation about trying to understand human motivations to kill and whether any social construct (law, morality, etc.) can prevent people from killing others as I stated. If you want me to posit that religion is a reason for killing, it is. Lack of religion isn't a reason for killing because it topologically isn't a thing, it's a lack of a belief. Atheism doesn't motivate, but anti-theism does. It's simply the way the pendulum swings. I know of very few atheist who only hold their atheist belief in a hermetically sealed container by itself.

I think just laws can deter killing. I think just personal, societal and objective morals can deter them as well. I don't think the world is getting more secular is the only factor in increased death toll, or overpopulation, overcrowding , advancement of technology or compounded moral/social injustice. I'm not dismissing them as underlying attributive reasons either.The argument that religion kills people though is petering out and I don't think it speaks to what's more important and that's finding a better path forward.

[The Grand Nudger]

Actually I was not trying to argue stats. I think it's pointless. I'd rather see a conversation about trying to understand human motivations to kill and whether any social construct (law, morality, etc.) can prevent people from killing others as I stated. If you want me to posit that  religion is a reason for killing, it is. Lack of religion isn't a reason for killing because it topologically isn't a thing, it's a lack of a belief. Atheism doesn't motivate, but anti-theism does. It's simply the way the pendulum swings. I know of very few atheist who only hold their atheist belief in a hermetically sealed container by itself.

Yeah, find me some atheists who think that NO God told them to kill in the name of No God.  Until then, you're just passive aggressively reasserting that shit, lol.  You can try the same, again, with anti-theism..I'm an anti-theist.  Let me check my anti-theists manual of appropriate rationalizations for murder.

Nope, simply being a theist aint in there.  Mostly, because anti- theism is a stance against -theism-...not the fucking people..ya twat.  If people could manage to keep gods dick in their own pants I wouldn't be an anti-theist to begin with.  I'd gladly shiv the beliefs themselves, though, if there were any way to do so. Any suggestions?

It's cool, we can let it slide, between us. 

I think just laws can deter killing. I think just personal, societal and objective morals can deter them as well. I don't think the world is getting more secular is the only factor in increased death toll, or overpopulation, overcrowding , advancement of technology or compounded moral/social injustice. I'm not dismissing them as underlying attributive reasons either.The argument that religion kills people though is petering out and I don't think it speaks to what's more important and that's finding a better path forward.

IDK that they can deter killing, but they certainly give us some standard and just means to handle things when a killing has occurred.  There's a need to prevent a repeat occurrence.  Insomuch as our laws fail to do that I think they need work.  More rehabilitation, more behavioral modification..less retribution and killing-in-kind.  

Religion doesn't kill people, no more than god kills people...gods and their religions motivate people to kill people.  It's always the people doing the killing.  If theism weren't such an effective magnifier of the worst of human nature then it wouldn't be a problem.  It is, so it is..unfortunately. I respect that fact that your beliefs don't seem to motivate you to kill...but that was true for every believer before the moment they killed for their various princes of peace. It's worth keeping your eye on.

[tackattack]

You are absolutely right Gae, I was incorrect and sloppy again, thanks for calling me on it. I didn't mean anti-theist I meant anti-religious, which is different from atheism and anti-theism.

Certainly morality can deter killing. I see your point in laws being reactionary and detaining related and agree. Beliefs do motivate people, whether fear of reprisal, religious beliefs, etc. What does anti-theism propose as a social motivator or set of beliefs that motivate people?

Why do you feel theism is an effective magnifier of the worst in human nature and why do you feel that's so?

[Amarok]

 What does anti-theism propose as a social motivator or set of beliefs that motivate people?

anti-theism is too imprecise a term in terms motivation

[The Grand Nudger]

You are absolutely right Gae, I was incorrect and sloppy again, thanks for calling me on it. I didn't mean anti-theist I meant anti-religious, which is different from atheism and anti-theism.

Religions aren't people..either, all the wanting to shank religion in the world won't amount to wanting to shank a person.  You're just reasserting the same thing in other words. You can refer back to my exposition of the motivations of the khmer rouge both as they stated them and as they were to see why this will never amount to anything more than amateur jingoism.

Certainly morality can deter killing. I see your point in laws being reactionary and detaining related and agree. Beliefs do motivate people, whether fear of reprisal, religious beliefs, etc. What does anti-theism propose as a social motivator or set of beliefs that motivate people?

Even the religious are mostly motivated by a mountain of things other than religion.  Most of them don't stop to wonder whether or not jesus would order the steak or the salad, knamean?  I don't see any need to offer a replacement for religious motivation, as nothing worthwhile will be lost to need replacing.  It's like you asking what I would replace a parasite with, after having removed it. Nothing.

Why do you feel theism is an effective magnifier of the worst in human nature and why do you feel that's so?

Mostly because religion, not unique in this but in the set...gives us a dangerous certainty in whatever we happen to be doing.  It can subvert our better judgement and, while it does so, convince us that this antithetical judgement is THE BEST judgement.  Then theres it's institutional nature...which means that..when it inevitably goes south, it's not just one deranged asshole on the crazytrain to boomtown.

So, some homophobe might be uncomfortable around gay people..but it takes a believer to think that the lord of creation hates queers and wants them dead-ed...and that it would be good and godly to fulfill that creators wish or at least make it as hard as possible to just wake up and breath every day. Rinse and repeat with every outgroup as each religion sees it. Imagine a whole country full of these fuckers....and then remember that I'm living in one.

A persons decency has an inverse relationship to their fundamental religiosity. We can all tell the nutters (the irreligious and the moderately religious alike) by how seriously they take the most seriously fucked up things they find in their respective magic books.

Even more simply..though, to be asked why I might think that a gaggle of life rejecting faiths that spent their first few thousand years annihilating all life affirming faith..and in which all members now dream of the apocalypse........is absurd, on it's face...to me. Ultimately, these were the winners in the wars the gods waged with mens bodies and minds as proxies..and if we hit the reset button..I;d expect an equally barbaric set of faiths to win out yet again. Red in tooth and claw actually applies to the gods just as aptly as any other animal. Any religion not willing to go toe to toe in atrocity ends up the victim, not the victor.

[Angrboda]

Hill and his fellow abortion clinic killers, however, appear to operate by another set of rules.
Like many suicide bombers, Hill wrote that he expected to be rewarded for his actions in heaven.
He went to his death at peace with what he had done.

[Cherub786]

There's no such thing as "homophobia". Phobia is an irrational fear of something.