Dad beheads son for Jesus.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Thor

Again you are missing a key point, you can kill in the name of God, you can't kill in the name of non belief So you can't have it both ways.

Just because Stalin and those others didn't believe in god, they had beliefs that lead to their killings. They believed that they controlled their environment. They believe that the ends justified the means. They believed that their goals were god.

Originally Posted by Thor

Religion can allow mass murder in the name of God, with full justification and acceptance by all its followers who deem themselves good moral human beings.

And Stalin believed in mass murder because he had one life time to achieve his goal which was communist revolution in his time. Stalin probably believed that he was doing the right thing, as did Mao and the Kims. They didn't kill for the thrill of the jollies they believed that the actions that they were taking would not only allow them to control their universe, but allow them to better lives for their fellow mans. And its funny, because Mao and Stalin and the others certainly had followers that believed in that message of pragmitism and ruthlessness were the only paths to success.

Originally Posted by Thor

Atheism is a proposition that is simply non belief in god(s). How can that equate to the end result that Atheists commit murder for lack of belief?

Because of people who didn't believe in god, and didn't believe in ultimate judgement and believed that they only had a lifetime to define their work can just as easily justify murders. I hate the fact that the biggest argument that anti-religion types have is that the extreme fringes, or the unevolved extremists are a snap shot of what religion is and its bull. Islam dosen't tell people to go out and massaccre, but the messages of flawed extremist are sure helping it gain that reputation. Same with catholics, and others.

Guess what though, mans inate nature leads us to violence, murder war and jealousy, thats in our genes and its probably something that we will never over come, but its the stupid, the charasmatic and the evil that twist religious messages, and its the simple minded that use those factions lead by flawed men that use it for an argument.

Originally Posted by Thor

The apologetic counter point can be found here if you are intersted:

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.p...ury_atrocities

Some quotes:

Its not a terrifically great argument because there was never a true religeous argument to the Hitler effect, he didn't recruit based on the holocaust, however he did argue and recruit based on the argument not that the Jews weren't christians, but that jews were a threat to the economic survival of the third reich, that they were responsible for all of the bad things that happened and were responsible for the down fall of the aryan race. He didn't position jews as a religion, but as a subhuman race.

The other flawed argument is that he suddenly equated numbers, its irrelevant asking how many people would have died in the crusades in the modern age, because frankly it seems that the religion responsible for the crusades has grown past the need for indescriminate slaughter like that except for the fringe elements.

However we still see Kim Jong Ill for example slaughtering his people in an extremely efficient manner through pragmatic policies. We saw the Chinese Politburo had no problem in using modern technology to kill unarmed students.

At the worst there is no difference between atheist killers and radical religeous killers, its just their justifications that differ.

It just pisses me off when I continually come to this board and see the whole religion causes all the problems in the world when thats simply not true.

And I'm a guy who left the church a long time ago.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Dion

You forgot about to add in Lenin, Stalin, Mao Tse-tung who are directly responsible for the annihilation and butchering of more than one hundred million people

*Sigh* Athiests

IF you actually paid attention to any previous postss you might understand that these people did what they did for political reasons...not atheism. Perhaps you should do some research LOL.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Guess what though, mans inate nature leads us to violence, murder war and jealousy, thats in our genes and its probably something that we will never over come

You make a lot of great points, but unfortunately, any appeal to what is 'man's innate nature' immediately invalidates your argument.

There is no such thing as 'human nature'. To be human is to have the ability to make conscious choices and to reason. Every single person has this ability, however much it seems they don't. To claim that human nature is the cause of any behavior is to create an excuse for that behavior.

Secondly, any attempt to lump all human behavior together into what is and is not 'human nature' is bound to fail simply because you can always find myriad exceptions to every situation. It's the same thing as claiming that 'all men are competitive' or 'all asians are in gangs'. They're ridiculous statements to make, so claiming that people are innately violent, jealous or anything else is as ridiculous because there are millions and millions of people who aren't violent, who don't base their decisions on jealous impulses etc. etc.

Yes, you are correct that there is perhaps unfounded animosity towards religions on this board. However, if you're going to make a point about it, you have to refrain from referencing "human nature" if you want your point to stick.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Just because Stalin and those others didn't believe in god, they had beliefs that lead to their killings. They believed that they controlled their environment. They believe that the ends justified the means. They believed that their goals were god.

And Stalin believed in mass murder because he had one life time to achieve his goal which was communist revolution in his time. Stalin probably believed that he was doing the right thing, as did Mao and the Kims. They didn't kill for the thrill of the jollies they believed that the actions that they were taking would not only allow them to control their universe, but allow them to better lives for their fellow mans. And its funny, because Mao and Stalin and the others certainly had followers that believed in that message of pragmitism and ruthlessness were the only paths to success.

So if Stalin was Religious, he would not believe in mass murder because there was an afterlife and God to answer to? So therefore Atheism leads to such actions because those Atheists don't fear repercussions of God?

Because of people who didn't believe in god, and didn't believe in ultimate judgement and believed that they only had a lifetime to define their work can just as easily justify murders. I hate the fact that the biggest argument that anti-religion types have is that the extreme fringes, or the unevolved extremists are a snap shot of what religion is and its bull. Islam dosen't tell people to go out and massaccre, but the messages of flawed extremist are sure helping it gain that reputation. Same with catholics, and others.

I argue against actions, nothing else, as do most of us. Actions like fights against stem cell research, abortions, creationism in schools, killings in the name of God, repression of women, child brides, no education for girls, censorship and depredation of free speech, anti-science attitudes, etc..

I specifically deal with actions, and the resulting consequences of such actions.

Guess what though, mans inate nature leads us to violence, murder war and jealousy, thats in our genes and its probably something that we will never over come, but its the stupid, the charasmatic and the evil that twist religious messages, and its the simple minded that use those factions lead by flawed men that use it for an argument.

Murder isn't innate, its certainly always there though, but to deny that religion can be used as an excuse for murder, rape, and genocide is ridiculous. Atheism can't logically justify those things, crazy people can justify anything but not from a perspective of non belief. Atheists vary widely on all kinds of belief, so to say that non belief is a belief system and you could just pigeon hole us you would be making a mistake you claim 'Atheists' make about Religious people.

Its not a terrifically great argument because there was never a true religeous argument to the Hitler effect, he didn't recruit based on the holocaust, however he did argue and recruit based on the argument not that the Jews weren't christians, but that jews were a threat to the economic survival of the third reich, that they were responsible for all of the bad things that happened and were responsible for the down fall of the aryan race. He didn't position jews as a religion, but as a subhuman race.

The attitude against Jews was propogated for the last 2000 yrs in Religious terms, Hitler was closely tied to the Roman Catholic Church and he had a very religious nation buy into centuries old stereotypes of Jews to help him eradicate them from the great nation he was creating. To deny that Religion had nothing to do with why he singled out Jews you have to deny the previous thousands of years of history.

The other flawed argument is that he suddenly equated numbers, its irrelevant asking how many people would have died in the crusades in the modern age, because frankly it seems that the religion responsible for the crusades has grown past the need for indescriminate slaughter like that except for the fringe elements.

And if tommorow we find out Iran has 100 nuclear missles that can reach North American soil you'll sleep soundly at night assured Islamic zealots won't launch on us?

However we still see Kim Jong Ill for example slaughtering his people in an extremely efficient manner through pragmatic policies. We saw the Chinese Politburo had no problem in using modern technology to kill unarmed students.

North Korea is a cult of personality, the dear leader Kim Jong Il is considered son of God, his dead father the Glorious leader is still the leader of the country since he IS God and is worshiped as such.

At the worst there is no difference between atheist killers and radical religeous killers, its just their justifications that differ.

It just pisses me off when I continually come to this board and see the whole religion causes all the problems in the world when thats simply not true.

And I'm a guy who left the church a long time ago.

Firstly, if you don't see the difference of killing in the name of God over Killing cause your crazy, you are missing something key. The power of killing "in god's name" is much more dangerous to the world than anything we non belief can create.

The vast majority don't blame Religion and assume Religion is the cause of all things bad. Like most of us who debate here regularily, we debate the 'actions' of Religion and criticize them accordingly.

The fact we repeatedly see the same argument about Communism, Hitler, North Korea being examples of why Atheism is inherently to blame in those situations is something that frustrates us here because its a point repeatedly refuted by some of our greatest thinkers including Religious thinkers.

So we get tired of this comparison because its a point that shows little understanding of those regimes, history, and understanding of what Atheism is.

But I'm sure I'll hear this point till I'm dead and buried in the ground, so really why get frustrated at points like this.

[Finny61]

Regarding human nature, is man not the only warm blooded creature on the earth that kills its own kind with intention?

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Frank the Tank

But this guy is CLEARLY saying God told him to do it, so it is somewhat fair to bash religion here. If he was an atheist would the outcome be any different? Probably not, but he is somewhat trying to justify his actions through religion.

So the Son of Sam killings can be blamed on all dogs?

[photon]

Originally Posted by Finny61

Regarding human nature, is man not the only warm blooded creature on the earth that kills its own kind with intention?

No, other primates kill their own as well. Battles for domination, "wars" on splinter factions, take over groups and kill all the children, stuff with intention.

Orangutans commit rape, even against human females.

I've read of other species that kill their own species, but the less intelligence the harder it is to ascribe intent.

[Biff]

There is a nasty sub-culture of genocidal amoeba running amok in Papua New Guinea....and gerbils will eat each other.

Oh the lost innocence of my childhood.

I miss my amoeba.

[Locke]

I've beheaded more for less.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Cheese

IF you actually paid attention to any previous postss you might understand that these people did what they did for political reasons...not atheism. Perhaps you should do some research LOL.

Perhaps you should save your holier than thou comments for someone who gives a tinkers damn. I've read the posts in this thread and tend to agree with what CC has posted in his #69 post. Or did you miss my thank you for his remarks.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Finny61

Regarding human nature, is man not the only warm blooded creature on the earth that kills its own kind with intention?

Loads of animals do it. First thing a male lion will do on taking over a pride is kill all the young.

We are however the only species (that I know off) that will invest copious amounts of energy in ensuring the survival of the elderly, sick and less fortunate.

[Sly]

Wow... that's just....

[awildermode]

Originally Posted by Sly

Wow... that's just....

just what? did you get...cutoff?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Thor

But you don't seriously think lack of belief in God = mass murder? Communism tries to force belief, which never works, and Lenin/Stalin/Mao were cult of personality regimes which mimic Theocracy rule of religious states.

Or do you follow the tired argument of atheism > communism > mass murder because of atheism?

I still think Lenin/Stalin did evil things was because of their lack of faith in the Flying Spaghetti Monster; hopefully a lesson learned by all of humanity today. All hail FSM!

Religous and Non-Religious rulers are very similar when it comes to justifying there actions. They are all based on maintaining power and have very little to do with any set of beliefs.

Religion has proven to be an effective tool at placating the masses becasue people will sacrifice now for a better life later. Thus people can understand that although there lives suck because of the current establishment this establishment is still working for them for the next life.

Non-Religious themed dictators have to find different ways to get people to accept poor conditions and they generally use Nationalism. Nationalism in many of these cases has replaced religion as the placater. Blame a minority for all of your problems and kill them in the name of the greater good of the country. Very similar to a theocracy.

My belief is that those at the top of theocracy's belief in God is very low. (Just need to look at Republican Congressmen) They understand that those whjo believe in God can be manipulated in much the same way that stirring up fierace nationalism can allow people to be manipulated. So in the end I blame the individuals using the gun and not the gun itself.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Dion

Perhaps you should save your holier than thou comments for someone who gives a tinkers damn. I've read the posts in this thread and tend to agree with what CC has posted in his #69 post. Or did you miss my thank you for his remarks.

ROFLMAO...talk about holy! Here for you and my friend CC

Real Edumucation

While it is true that Joseph Stalin (1879-1953), Mao Zedong (1893-1976) and Pol Pot (1925-1998) were all atheists, this is not the only thing they have in common. They were also men, political leaders and communists. Merely citing common denominators does not establish the cause of their actions. It is important to consider what was the main driving force in their committing atrocities against their own people.

...in no case is atheism central to the building of these dogmatic positions. Atheism embodies no particular ideology, world view or dogma and cannot be justified as any significant factor in the activities of these people. If anything, the lack of belief in a supernatural overlord leaves one to respect the importance of all of mankind peacefully coexisting, because unlike in religious doctrine, the penalties one may face for immoral acts are often levied in the material world, during the life of the perpetrator. Indeed to the founder of communist doctrines, Karl Marx (1818-1883), atheism, was just a stage on the path to communism, and it was ultimately "unreal" and "no longer needed" by socialism and communism. This is what Karl Marx himself said about atheism: Atheism as a denial of this unreality; has no longer any meaning, for atheism is a denial of God and tries to assert through this negation the existence of man; but socialism as such no longer needs this mediation...
It is important to pause for a moment and consider this statement carefully. If Karl Marx, the intellectual founder of Marxism and communism, repudiated atheism as meaningless and no longer needed, how then could atheism be considered the cause of the atrocities committed under communism?

Edumucation

Are atheists communists? Of course not. Some atheists are communists, and communists have been taught to be atheists, but becoming an atheist doesn't affect your politics.
Many people who have been classified as atheists have simply been raised under a communist regime. These are atheists by default or convenience, not atheists by conviction, personal experience or logical deduction. They are wide open for conversion, partly because they haven't been exposed to any religions, they have very little natural immunity like children raised in over-clean houses. In contrast atheists in Europe and America tend to be atheists by personal choice. Very few people are forced to be atheists against their will, while they are impressionable. Religious indoctrination of children will, one day, be accepted as the crime against humanity that it is.


- Albert Einstein, Out Of My Later Years:
"One strength of the Communist system ...is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion."

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Cheese

ROFLMAO...talk about holy! Here for you and my friend CC

Real Edumucation

While it is true that Joseph Stalin (1879-1953), Mao Zedong (1893-1976) and Pol Pot (1925-1998) were all atheists, this is not the only thing they have in common. They were also men, political leaders and communists. Merely citing common denominators does not establish the cause of their actions. It is important to consider what was the main driving force in their committing atrocities against their own people.

...in no case is atheism central to the building of these dogmatic positions. Atheism embodies no particular ideology, world view or dogma and cannot be justified as any significant factor in the activities of these people. If anything, the lack of belief in a supernatural overlord leaves one to respect the importance of all of mankind peacefully coexisting, because unlike in religious doctrine, the penalties one may face for immoral acts are often levied in the material world, during the life of the perpetrator. Indeed to the founder of communist doctrines, Karl Marx (1818-1883), atheism, was just a stage on the path to communism, and it was ultimately "unreal" and "no longer needed" by socialism and communism. This is what Karl Marx himself said about atheism: Atheism as a denial of this unreality; has no longer any meaning, for atheism is a denial of God and tries to assert through this negation the existence of man; but socialism as such no longer needs this mediation...
It is important to pause for a moment and consider this statement carefully. If Karl Marx, the intellectual founder of Marxism and communism, repudiated atheism as meaningless and no longer needed, how then could atheism be considered the cause of the atrocities committed under communism?

Edumucation

Are atheists communists? Of course not. Some atheists are communists, and communists have been taught to be atheists, but becoming an atheist doesn't affect your politics.
Many people who have been classified as atheists have simply been raised under a communist regime. These are atheists by default or convenience, not atheists by conviction, personal experience or logical deduction. They are wide open for conversion, partly because they haven't been exposed to any religions, they have very little natural immunity like children raised in over-clean houses. In contrast atheists in Europe and America tend to be atheists by personal choice. Very few people are forced to be atheists against their will, while they are impressionable. Religious indoctrination of children will, one day, be accepted as the crime against humanity that it is.


- Albert Einstein, Out Of My Later Years:
"One strength of the Communist system ...is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion."

ROFLMAO..... talk about holy indeed!

Edumucation? Could you be more insulting with your sarcastic digs? Education wasn't a good enough word for you so you had to use the urban term

Carry on, i'll just ignore you and your rude remarks in the future.

[pepper24]

Absolutely sickening and what a lame excuse. I hope this guy rots in jail or that VA has the death penalty. Then when he dies he burns in hell.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Cheese

ROFLMAO...talk about holy! Here for you and my friend CC

Real Edumucation

While it is true that Joseph Stalin (1879-1953), Mao Zedong (1893-1976) and Pol Pot (1925-1998) were all atheists, this is not the only thing they have in common. They were also men, political leaders and communists. Merely citing common denominators does not establish the cause of their actions. It is important to consider what was the main driving force in their committing atrocities against their own people.

...in no case is atheism central to the building of these dogmatic positions. Atheism embodies no particular ideology, world view or dogma and cannot be justified as any significant factor in the activities of these people. If anything, the lack of belief in a supernatural overlord leaves one to respect the importance of all of mankind peacefully coexisting, because unlike in religious doctrine, the penalties one may face for immoral acts are often levied in the material world, during the life of the perpetrator. Indeed to the founder of communist doctrines, Karl Marx (1818-1883), atheism, was just a stage on the path to communism, and it was ultimately "unreal" and "no longer needed" by socialism and communism. This is what Karl Marx himself said about atheism: Atheism as a denial of this unreality; has no longer any meaning, for atheism is a denial of God and tries to assert through this negation the existence of man; but socialism as such no longer needs this mediation...
It is important to pause for a moment and consider this statement carefully. If Karl Marx, the intellectual founder of Marxism and communism, repudiated atheism as meaningless and no longer needed, how then could atheism be considered the cause of the atrocities committed under communism?

Edumucation

Are atheists communists? Of course not. Some atheists are communists, and communists have been taught to be atheists, but becoming an atheist doesn't affect your politics.
Many people who have been classified as atheists have simply been raised under a communist regime. These are atheists by default or convenience, not atheists by conviction, personal experience or logical deduction. They are wide open for conversion, partly because they haven't been exposed to any religions, they have very little natural immunity like children raised in over-clean houses. In contrast atheists in Europe and America tend to be atheists by personal choice. Very few people are forced to be atheists against their will, while they are impressionable. Religious indoctrination of children will, one day, be accepted as the crime against humanity that it is.


- Albert Einstein, Out Of My Later Years:
"One strength of the Communist system ...is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion."

What a load of errr stuff.

Its an elegant argument that totally ignores reality. And I love the smary tone.

If I so desired, I could go on the web, look for arguments that support the opposite and you'd write it off as religious propaganda.

I'm not talking about Karl Marx, I'm not talking about communism as a religion, Karl Marx designed communism as a Utopian economic and political system. It were men like Stalin, Mao and the other genocidal maniacs who believed that they were the gods in their own universe, and that there was no price to pay for reshaping the universe to their needs and goals.

At the best, they believed in god and he was a threat to their own plans, at worse, they believed that there was no true judgement for their actions besides history and results during their lifetime.



I understand that your passionate about your side of the argument, but your coming across as a bit of an ass with your tone.

You want to debate, debate, you want to throw out insults and act like an inferior superior, then I have no need for you.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally Posted by C_Rush

If he said the yogurt in his fridge told him to do it, would we be slamming yogurt and the people who eat it???? The guy is mentally unbalanced, that has nothing to do with God or religion.

But why is it always god? Why don't they say the yogurt made me do it? I'm not taking one side or the other, I just find it odd that it almost always god telling them to kill. (or at least thats what they choose to say)

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Frank the Tank

But why is it always god? Why don't they say the yogurt made me do it? I'm not taking one side or the other, I just find it odd that it almost always god telling them to kill. (or at least thats what they choose to say)

I think thats an exageration, I've heard more "It was the voices in my head" Or the son of sam dog thing.

Bottom line is even if someone isn't religious the terminology and mythology from religion is a huge influence on our reality.

But its easy to say "Demons told me to do it" and then its connected to religion as opposed to a T.V. show.

Or god told me to do it, does he really know it was god, or was it just a convenient thought from a sick mind.

Did this sick believe he was religious? Absolutely. Was he, not at all, he made it up as he went. It has nothing to do with god or the bible beyond his own sick mentally ill reality.

Let me ask you this, if he was taking his treatments, and still a god fearing bible thumping man, would have he killed his son? Probably not.