[Wachearex]

What is the ugly side of athiesm, besides the fact that a minority of them are well, douche bags, compared to say, slavery, the crusades and millenia of opression of various minorities?

[daasayse]

Uummm, exactly how is destroying churches an "atheist attack"??? Hey, consider this MrFun, if people don't kill for God, there's still plenty of reasons to kill that are not "atheist reasons". Get over yourself. Churches and priests etc are often under attack because they have power. Just like the elite in general, or do you think some military dudes just hate teachers and people like that because, uhm, they're teacherists?

YOu can't start a discussiona bout the positive sides of religion by starting "ATHEIST MURDERERS OF RELIGUN HATERZ32 plenty examplkems" VALIDITY COMES HERE! ??? PROFIT!

Maybe we should also remember that Hitler built roads and lifted the economy and was an artist before we only look at the bad things in him, right ?

And no, I'm not comparing religions to Hitler, I was just pointing out the ridiculous nature of your argument.

[sestomosi]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Please. Stalin didn't give a **** about religion other then that it might be a possible challenger to his dictatorship thus it had to be destroyed. The rhetoric was just propaganda. And you think the rhetoric of the crusades was anything more than propaganda?

[boxcigsnick]

Originally posted by Vesayen
What is the ugly side of athiesm, besides the fact that a minority of them are well, douche bags, compared to say, slavery, the crusades and millenia of opression of various minorities? ... while a minority of religious types are the same. Most religious atrocities and whatnot are just as blameable on politics/etc. as the atheist ones are (to oerdin's point)...

[mypharmalife]

Atheism is just as much a religion as Catholocism. It's Athe-ISM for a reason...

Agnostic is not a religion, on the other hand. Atheists believe there is no god; agnostics don't give a !@%$.

Those anti-religious actions listed in the OP were Atheist religious actions; I don't think Mao/Stalin believed in Atheism any more than half of the top religious types believe truly in any religion. In both cases they are using rhetoric to accomplish a political goal...

[replicaypu]

Originally posted by SlowwHand


Evidently not.
Atheists haven't had nearly as long to do their dirty work

[AngegepeM]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Atheism is just as much a religion as Catholocism. It's Athe-ISM for a reason... Do you know what the "a" part means?

Agnostic is not a religion, on the other hand. Atheists believe there is no god; agnostics don't give a !@%$. And what about agnosticISM?

[malishka1025]

Originally posted by Lorizael


Do you know what the "a" part means?



And what about agnosticISM? Atheism = the belief there is no god. It is not "the lack of belief in a god", which would qualify as agnostic.

I would not use the term "agnosticism" in the present meaning of the word "agnostic". The meaning has changed from its original meaning quite substantially; and as I would consider a modern day agnostic someone who does not concern themselves with the existence or lack thereof of a god, I would not think an 'ism' would be an apropriate way to classify them ("ism" implies a coherent movement or philosophy, wheras modern day agnostic is the lack thereof).

[meridiasas]

Wow, I agree with Mr. Fun.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

[Fksxneng]

Motivation is everything and actions are only understandable and judgable based on it. It's called context.

Its the difference between true believers and the megalomania of one man.

[ExpodoDop]

But to be fair, religions are not a war generating machine. It is also a question of power and politics. There has to be a leader of some sort who tells people to do war in the name of something. If it's religion, then it's religion, but the command doesn't come from God. Leaders might say it's exactly the case but it isn't, so religion in itself is not a problem, it's a people problem. Then again, everything is a people problem really.

So religion has been used as propaganda. But it's nto the only fuel. If you have bunch of idiots who can do your dirty work for you, just pick the issue that will excite them. For some it is religion, for some it is something else, you go with what works.

[diundasmink]

Basically one belief is genuine and the other is just one guy cynically trying to get rid of the opposition. You honestly can't understand the difference? Religion is the reason for one while atheism is not the reason for the other. Thus the OP blaming atheism is total rubbish.

[w3QHxwNb]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Wow, I agree with Mr. Fun.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Wow. I have to say this was the biggest surprise in my day.

[allaboutauto.us]

The entire thread is absurd. I think theists deep down know it is silly to believe in imaginary beings.

[Niiinioa]

And, yes, I do believe the Pope really believes in Christianity. All deeply religious people believe their religion is right.

[paralelogram]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I would argue that religion is exactly as much the cause as atheism is - either it acted as an enabler for the propoganda, or it was the root cause in both cases. Then you'd be wrong. Stalin was motivated by power and didn't care about religion once it was no longer in a position to challenge his dictatorship. Ergo Atheism was not his dominating or even motivating issue.

[Jxlacvio]

Never underestimate the power of self delusion.

[Viyzarei]

Originally posted by Oerdin


Then you'd be wrong. Stalin was motivated by power and didn't care about religion once it was no longer in a position to challenge his dictatorship. Ergo Atheism was not his dominating or even motivating issue. I would agree with your statement there except for the 'wrong' part. However, I do not feel it contradicts my statement

[teentodiefows]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I would argue that religion is exactly as much the cause as atheism is - either it acted as an enabler for the propoganda, or it was the root cause in both cases. Although the individual believers may have believed, there is little question that the crusades themselves - and many other religious wars/etc. - had at their true root a geopolitical cause (or simply a religion attempting to reinforce their power, aka Stalin). I agree with this; Oerdin pointed out that Stalin's motivation to kill all Orthodox and Catholic clergy was not based purely on atheism, but because of his desire to eliminate opposing power to his own desire for power.

But, when it comes down to it, Stalin's atheism permitted him to carry out this bloody purge without any qualms even if his motivation was not purely for the sake of atheism itself.

[sterofthemasteool]

Originally posted by Asher

Religious people, communists; the point is you guys believe in fiction and kill people for it.

That's all there is to it. Yeah, since I'm a faithful Christian, would you like to know how many people I have killed because of my belief?