Militant Atheism: Religion Or Political Affiliation?

[Woberts]

Militant atheists (the sincerely anti-theists) have been guilty of more deaths in one half century than theists have in the entire written history of mankind.

They don't kill 'in the name of atheism' (though that's the bottom line). They kill 'because you are a theist and don't deserve to live.'

they killed other people for other reasons, too, of course, but they killed people. Lots of 'em. ...and the fact that they didn't have a God to explain things to was part of the reason they could.

We ARE talking only about the 'militant' atheists, though, rignt? Personally, I figure that if it walks like a religion, and talks like a religion, it's a religion...even if the basis for it is 'there is no God and that is a truth that we can force others to acknowledge" or "there is a god, and He is Who we say He is, and we can force our beliefs on others." When the results of a belief are the same either way.....I honestly don't see much difference.

Heh, the classic "look guys, the """atheists""" killed more people!!! That means they're worse than us!!"

 

[Revoltingest]

Heh, the classic "look guys, the """atheists""" killed more people!!! That means they're worse than us!!"

The expression on your avatar makes that post hilarious.

 

[Woberts]

The expression on your avatar makes that post hilarious.

If you want a quick laugh, just imagine my avatar saying my posts. Really, any post will work. It's gotten me spurting coffee onto my desk a few times.

 

[lukethethird]

Militant atheists (the sincerely anti-theists) have been guilty of more deaths in one half century than theists have in the entire written history of mankind.

They don't kill 'in the name of atheism' (though that's the bottom line). They kill 'because you are a theist and don't deserve to live.'

they killed other people for other reasons, too, of course, but they killed people. Lots of 'em. ...and the fact that they didn't have a God to explain things to was part of the reason they could.

We ARE talking only about the 'militant' atheists, though, rignt? Personally, I figure that if it walks like a religion, and talks like a religion, it's a religion...even if the basis for it is 'there is no God and that is a truth that we can force others to acknowledge" or "there is a god, and He is Who we say He is, and we can force our beliefs on others." When the results of a belief are the same either way.....I honestly don't see much difference.

I did not know this. Does anybody else know this besides you?

 

[dianaiad]

You mean like the Roman Catholic, Hitler?

Nope. I never include him in the body count. Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, the "young turks" and others out did him. ...and don't forget parts of the French Revolution...though they got to work a wee bit earlier than the era I was referring to.

 

[dianaiad]

Heh, the classic "look guys, the """atheists""" killed more people!!! That means they're worse than us!!"

I don't remember a 'that means' in my post. the FACT is, atheist killed more people. The take away here, in the context of the thread and all the boasting BY the atheists in here about how NON violent they all are, is....'look guys, the ...atheists killed more people!!! That means that they can be every inch as nasty as any extreme theist out there, and there IS no 'kumbaya' or 'Imagine' going on here. Atheists are people. People act like people do.

And consider this. If the atheists are right, and there is no God, then what makes you do damned certain that recognizing that there isn't one would change human nature so much that everybody would suddenly be trading their guns in for soap boxes and signs? here's a hint. If people made up a God to kill for, they will....and do....kill for anything else they make up, or believe in. Atheists are NOT immune.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Nope. I never include him in the body count. Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, the "young turks" and others out did him. ...and don't forget parts of the French Revolution...though they got to work a wee bit earlier than the era I was referring to.

The French Revolution wasn't atheistic. Catholic priests were heavily involved in the early movement, and when it became anti-clerical, the aim wasn't to eradicate religion; it was to replace the established church with Ronespierre's Cult of the Supreme Being.

To the extent that the French was about theistic beliefs, it was about violent imposition of deism.

Cult of the Supreme Being - Wikipedia

 

[dianaiad]

I did not know this. Does anybody else know this besides you?

Oh, my.

20th Century Democide

This researcher went through all the body counts of all the governments he could get to. Now he was more interested in the difference between democracy/republics and totalitarian systems, but if you go through them yourself, you will see that those democidal governments (death by government) with the highest body counts tended to be officially atheist. Or rather, those governments that cracked down on the expression of religion, driving all religion into hiding, punishing by prison, fine or even death those who were religious. They would actively propagandise against the existence of a deity in meetings, in schools.

yes, Hitler's Germany had a high body count...but I personally don't count him. He himself was a theist or not depending on who he was talking to at the time, and he certainly used religion as a goad, so he doesn't count.

The great social experiments that existed around him...like soviet Russia, Albania, etc., certainly do.

In fact, if you go through those nations listed, you will find that there hasn't been even one officially anti-theist government that was NOT democidal. Not one. You CAN find theocracies that were not, but so far? Not one officially anti-theist one.

My take away from it is....secularization is the only way to go. Government and religion should have nothing at all to do with one another. In any way.

 

[viole]

Exactly. This thread is "Earthling is annoyed and irritated by outspoken atheists". Um.......

Aww.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It's problematic in that there is such a stark contrast to the militant atheist and the average atheist on the street that finds the militant atheist somewhat embarrassing. The so called "militant" atheist is outspoken where the average atheist doesn't see the sense in directing that much attention on themselves. The average atheists doesn't bother themselves with the nonsensical doings of the believer. They don't care if the Nativity Scene is in the courtyard, or Christmas lights strung up at the local post office or whatever. 10 Commandments in the courthouse? Who cares? It's all corrupt nonsense anyway.

But if you talk to some of the militant atheists, once you get passed the bumper sticker slogans, billboard blasphemy, and incessant and inane ramblings about evolution, education and ecclesiastical society, it narrows down to politics.

They don't like people who vote opposite of them if those other people happen to believe in God. So, if they vote that its okay to kill babies if those babies are unwanted it pisses them off if someone believes in God and votes it isn't okay to kill babies. So the believers have no right to express their concern over the matter because they believe in God and this influences them? The whole of civilization is based upon such a belief.

It makes absolutely no sense. If one were to make a documentary on the militant atheists it would be like watching political convention. Nothing makes sense and everything seems like something it isn't.

@Revoltingest is correct, this is pretty much a generalized rant.

I can't help but notice that you use the term "kill babies" when I presume what you mean is abortion. And while I don't happen to like abortion used instead of contraception, I can still see times when a woman must absolutely be given complete right over her own body. Accidents, and rapes, do happen, sadly enough.

As a matter of fact, growing up in a basically Christian nation (Canada), I can remember when condoms had to be sold with the message "Sold for the prevention of disease only" prominently on the package, because even contraception was considered -- by the believers -- to be sinful. Of course, everybody knew what they were using them for anyway, which simply made everybody a liar. A neat trick, in the name of religious belief.

In that same Christian nation, I happened to grow up gay, which, by dint of Christian wisdom, was very wrong of me, so that I could be put in jail. For loving! Nice work.

No, most atheists just wish that believers would do their believing without trying to rope the rest of us in and force us to behave in ways that we don't believe. (In fact, most believers don't really believe what they like to say they do. You want the 10 commandments in the courthouse? What's the percentage of believers, do you think, who break the 6th? One of the 10 MOST IMPORTANT THINGS the suppose God to have proclaimed, and it doesn't get paid all that much attention to by over one third of those who made a vow to the contrary.

 

[BilliardsBall]

It's problematic in that there is such a stark contrast to the militant atheist and the average atheist on the street that finds the militant atheist somewhat embarrassing. The so called "militant" atheist is outspoken where the average atheist doesn't see the sense in directing that much attention on themselves. The average atheists doesn't bother themselves with the nonsensical doings of the believer. They don't care if the Nativity Scene is in the courtyard, or Christmas lights strung up at the local post office or whatever. 10 Commandments in the courthouse? Who cares? It's all corrupt nonsense anyway.

But if you talk to some of the militant atheists, once you get passed the bumper sticker slogans, billboard blasphemy, and incessant and inane ramblings about evolution, education and ecclesiastical society, it narrows down to politics.

They don't like people who vote opposite of them if those other people happen to believe in God. So, if they vote that its okay to kill babies if those babies are unwanted it pisses them off if someone believes in God and votes it isn't okay to kill babies. So the believers have no right to express their concern over the matter because they believe in God and this influences them? The whole of civilization is based upon such a belief.

It makes absolutely no sense. If one were to make a documentary on the militant atheists it would be like watching political convention. Nothing makes sense and everything seems like something it isn't.

I think all should be allowed to choose abortion. Simply vote for abortion at birth, then when the child reaches 18 and independence it can choose whether to be dismembered surgically without anesthesia or to be drowned horribly in acid or a saline solution. Let's keep politics out of religion and atheism. I agree.

 

[Altfish]

Nope. I never include him in the body count. Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, the "young turks" and others out did him. ...and don't forget parts of the French Revolution...though they got to work a wee bit earlier than the era I was referring to.

It was not non-belief that drove them on, it was their ideology and power grab

 

[dianaiad]

It was not non-belief that drove them on, it was their ideology and power grab

....and part of their ideology was that religion was a bad thing, that there should be no religion, and those who insisted upon being religious were more useful dead.

Just because atheists had OTHER reasons to kill people as well didn't absolve them from killing because they preferred atheism.

As to that....the theocracies that were guilty of democide were 'killing in the name of God...' but generally they had to twist the teachings of whatever god they were killing in the name of. They too were doing so for their 'ideology' ...but mostly for the power grab. The Crusades come very strongly to mind. Saving the Holy Land from the infidel was the excuse...but the REASON was to conquer, grab....and find occupations for their barons (and land and income) that didn't involve looking with avarice at the throne at home.

In the final analysis, the killing is all about personal power for the leaders, or land grabs. It's never really about God. What I resent, and resent mightily, is this claim by atheists that somehow there is a moral high ground that atheists hold...that theists do not hold.

It's all there in "Imagine"....and a more stupid song I have NEVER heard.

I mean, really. if you atheists are right, and there is no god, then there is no god to blame. Just us. And there is nothing about there NOT being a god that would prevent atheists from being just as bloody minded as any theist.

And nothing does. Because they are. Just like the rest of us.

 

[Altfish]

....and part of their ideology was that religion was a bad thing, that there should be no religion, and those who insisted upon being religious were more useful dead.

Just because atheists had OTHER reasons to kill people as well didn't absolve them from killing because they preferred atheism.

As to that....the theocracies that were guilty of democide were 'killing in the name of God...' but generally they had to twist the teachings of whatever god they were killing in the name of. They too were doing so for their 'ideology' ...but mostly for the power grab. The Crusades come very strongly to mind. Saving the Holy Land from the infidel was the excuse...but the REASON was to conquer, grab....and find occupations for their barons (and land and income) that didn't involve looking with avarice at the throne at home.

In the final analysis, the killing is all about personal power for the leaders, or land grabs. It's never really about God. What I resent, and resent mightily, is this claim by atheists that somehow there is a moral high ground that atheists hold...that theists do not hold.

It's all there in "Imagine"....and a more stupid song I have NEVER heard.

I mean, really. if you atheists are right, and there is no god, then there is no god to blame. Just us. And there is nothing about there NOT being a god that would prevent atheists from being just as bloody minded as any theist.

And nothing does. Because they are. Just like the rest of us.

They also all had beards

 

[Sanzbir]

or Christmas lights strung up at the local post office or whatever.

I suspect that it's just people who don't like the holidays in general and want any excuse to remove even secular Christmas decorations.

Nevermind all of us non-Christians who decorate and like the general Yuletide aesthetics. The pretext of them speaking on behalf of all us non-Christians and removing these decorations as to not offend us is just an excuse for general humbuggery.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Definition of militant atheist: An atheist who has become insufferably elitest

You misspelled elitist.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Wah! Wah! Wah! None of you have anything to say.

Nobody on this thread can hold a candle to your whining, and nobody on this thread has posted more militantly than you.

Some of you guys make me want to puke. ****ing hell.

Understood. You've been puking all over this thread. Just make sure to get a mop and a bucket before you leave.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

....and part of their ideology was that religion was a bad thing, that there should be no religion, and those who insisted upon being religious were more useful dead.

I don't think it was quite that simple, but it doesn't really matter.
Atheists have all sorts of philosophies, and they are just as capable of fanatacism around a political belief than anyone else. Atheism is proof against nothing, other than theistic belief.

Just because atheists had OTHER reasons to kill people as well didn't absolve them from killing because they preferred atheism.

Who's absolving them? Killers are killers. When we get told they killed because of atheism, it seems a nonsense, but can atheists be fundamentalist sociopaths happy to watch the world burn for their beliefs? Sure.

As to that....the theocracies that were guilty of democide were 'killing in the name of God...' but generally they had to twist the teachings of whatever god they were killing in the name of. They too were doing so for their 'ideology' ...but mostly for the power grab. The Crusades come very strongly to mind. Saving the Holy Land from the infidel was the excuse...but the REASON was to conquer, grab....and find occupations for their barons (and land and income) that didn't involve looking with avarice at the throne at home.

Again, I think you're oversimplifying, but I get your point.
Still, the Crusades were called for by the head of the largest Christian Church body there is. Its difficult for the Catholic Church to decry their responsibility, just like it's hard for communists to decry responsibility for those atrocities. Their specific beliefs helped enable and inflame the situation. General theism or atheism is beside the point. The difference with the communists is that they hard-wired atheism into their ideology, and also did 'fun' things like form the League of Militant Atheists. Unlike the Pope, they have no rights to speak for atheists, and we are not a coherent or clearly defined body. So basically, sure, atheists can be murderous pigs, just like anyone else. But atheism is a nothing. It doesn't inform action. Whatever the person believes informs action.

In the final analysis, the killing is all about personal power for the leaders, or land grabs. It's never really about God. What I resent, and resent mightily, is this claim by atheists that somehow there is a moral high ground that atheists hold...that theists do not hold.

There are plenty of religious leaders who would disagree. And plenty of Christian soldiers who would too.
Atheism doesn't hold any 'high moral ground'. People who claim it does are wrong. It happens.

It's all there in "Imagine"....and a more stupid song I have NEVER heard.

Really? I could name a bunch.
The Battle Hymn of the Republic comes to mind...

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord

He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored

He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword

His truth is marching on

I mean, really. if you atheists are right, and there is no god, then there is no god to blame. Just us. And there is nothing about there NOT being a god that would prevent atheists from being just as bloody minded as any theist.

All true. Did someone say that was not true? Did an atheist somewhere blame God? That seems bizarre.
Atheists ALL have beliefs, and can be bloody minded for those beliefs.

And nothing does. Because they are. Just like the rest of us.

Look at this another way. Do you think Jains are as violent as Boko Haram? No?
Specific types of theism can impact on people's actions in terms of violence, both for better and for worse. Theism, as an umbrella term, isn't informative about the specific theistic beliefs. Atheism, on the other hand, does neither. It is not pacifist, nor aggressive. Atheists all have beliefs, and depending on what those are, they can be pacifist or aggressive. The communists mentioned were extreme fundamentalists (in terms of the leadership). Secular Humanists are much more pacifist. But atheism? In and of itself? It is meaningless.

 

[SomeRandom]

I think all should be allowed to choose abortion. Simply vote for abortion at birth, then when the child reaches 18 and independence it can choose whether to be dismembered surgically without anesthesia or to be drowned horribly in acid or a saline solution. Let's keep politics out of religion and atheism. I agree.

I think we call that euthanasia. If a zygote can't feel pain then I don't know what use anaesthetic would even be. Perhaps if it's at a stage where it can feel pain, then sure anaesthetic should be used in abortion. Think it is last I heard.
Adult humans all feel pain. So I don't know how many medical practitioners would refuse to use anasthetic. Maybe you can find one if that is your wish I suppose. I'd question their ethics, but to each their own.

Watching people be forced to be kept alive against their wishes will haunt me till my dying breath. People withering away in agony, starving themselves so they don't burden their family or are disgusted with living life on a hospital bed. So I'm all for people choosing to be euthanised (or aborted, if you like.) I think some of those people would welcome being drowned in acid.

See, I can pull out the emotional card too. I have seen behind the hospital curtain.

 

[lukethethird]

Oh, my.

20th Century Democide

This researcher went through all the body counts of all the governments he could get to. Now he was more interested in the difference between democracy/republics and totalitarian systems, but if you go through them yourself, you will see that those democidal governments (death by government) with the highest body counts tended to be officially atheist. Or rather, those governments that cracked down on the expression of religion, driving all religion into hiding, punishing by prison, fine or even death those who were religious. They would actively propagandise against the existence of a deity in meetings, in schools.

yes, Hitler's Germany had a high body count...but I personally don't count him. He himself was a theist or not depending on who he was talking to at the time, and he certainly used religion as a goad, so he doesn't count.

The great social experiments that existed around him...like soviet Russia, Albania, etc., certainly do.

In fact, if you go through those nations listed, you will find that there hasn't been even one officially anti-theist government that was NOT democidal. Not one. You CAN find theocracies that were not, but so far? Not one officially anti-theist one.

My take away from it is....secularization is the only way to go. Government and religion should have nothing at all to do with one another. In any way.

Do you have trouble sleeping?