Sorry: Atheists Didn't Torch Those Churches. . .

[ashai]

No. I just don't think atheists tend to hate theists--certainly not enough to burn down churches. I think most theists view theism in a rather passive manner as an interesting psychological phenomenon. I know I only get upset when religion violates the separation of church and state. Yet, I would never advocate the burning of churches OR government facilities.

I think more hate is generated between conflicting religious sects (Jews vs. Muslims, Catholics vs. Protestants, etc.). Such hostilities have fueled many wars and caused much bloodshed.

And no, I don't hate Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or the Invisible Pink Unicorn, either.

PEACE.

Ushta

Unfortunatrely the record of history is not quite as optimistic about atheists as you are . People were butchered for believing by Mao, Pol Pot and Stalin and even under Lenin. During the Spanish Civil war, communists killed and raped nuns and butchered priests.

What is the difference between Torquemada, and Timur the Lame and Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot?

To point out that there have been more people killed in the name of religion, while true, ignores the fact that atheism has always been a miniscule minority and thus mathematically has less hom:banghead3 icidal maniacs And ... not believing in fictional characters has nothing to do with the supposed ethical superiority of Atheists

Ushta te
Ashai

 

[ashai]

It's rediculous to imply that either atheists or Christians (theists) are more or less likely to commit crimes and/or hurt people.

Ushta

Precisely what I am saying .:bow: Until we understand as a race, tha evil , or good for that matter is a choice that any one can make, we will be always blaming each other and never solve anything:tsk:

Ushta te
Ashai

 

[ashai]

Do you truly believe the opposite?

Ushta

No I dont.:tsk: Why? Do you imply that I do? Where do you get that idea? Certainly not from anything I have ever written

Ushta te
Ashai

 

[ashai]

History indicates otherwise. I'm talking about wars as well as terrorism.

Ushta

Huh? You mean Pol Pot, Mmao, Stalin, Lumumba in the Congo, the Viet Cong , the Noth koreans and hundreds of others are not historical? or is it that they all converted prior to murdering believers? PLLEESSZZEE!
:biglaugh:

I would rather say ... this is the way its been:
:seesaw:

Ushta Te
Ashai

 

[Majikthise]

I completely disagree.
Agreed 100%.

Other than pointing out that the churches burned were Baptist, I did not see that the article mentioned the boys' religious affiliations. Since they are college students, it is most likely that they are atheist, agnostic, or non-practicing of whatever faith their parents may have had. People who are truly practicing any legitimate religion would never purposely damage or destroy another house of worship.

Except for the statement about the article not mentioning the boy's religions, this paragraph is utter crap.
Rich is right. True atheists, one's who don't believe in god(false atheists being god haters and simple rebels), have no doctrine to tell them any religion is offensive to their belief system. Many religions ,on the other hand, do spell out the fact that other religions ,or the lack there of, are in direct violatin of their god's word and should be dealt with with varying forms of "persuasion".
This persuasion may include forms of cohersion such as proselytizing, societal ostracism, threats, outright physical punishment and executions or destruction of icons and houses of worship.
It's not about superiority , it's about motive.