Quote (Menace)
Marxist states killed in the name of the working class or more common in the name of the collective power of the people so let's blame the working class or the masses for the Marxist genocides no ?
So lets blame people for killing people and not the idea/ideal that united them?
Quote (Menace)
people have a bullshit misconception about atheism and atheisms related ideas
Surely a failure by atheists to construct pallatable informative discourse over a broad spectrum of intellectual capacity.
Perhaps because the lack of locus, other than the idea of unlikely possibility of a God, to draw people to.
Quote (Menace)
the absence of progressive ideas from doctrinal , dogmatic societies led to atrocities and genocides
Attacking peoples beliefs on the basis of absolutism is both dogmatic and absolute; in that attack is not reconcilliatory, does not take into consideration individual and social differences and comes from what is asserted in an authoritive and unchallengeable fashion.
Religion=Absolute=culpable for atrocity.
Perhaps some Atheists would do better to appeal to the less extreme practioners of religion, by being less confrontational, to rein in or isolate extremists (if that is the worry of concerned atheists) rather than lambast thier chosen religion/s and followers by association.
On a more basic note how can you reason with the unreasonable?
I've only witnessed here extreme and negative examples of religious persuasion presented to argue against it.....rather unbalanced in my opinion.
Most successful if not all religions started as movements of social reform, which were relatively progressive in comparison to the status quo and enviromental conditions they stood against.
Why are atheists failing in this respect?
They also amassed a vast array of creative artistic and cultural practices associated to and inspired by them or there respective God/s/esses providing purpose oppertunity and even health benefits to countless individuals.
Paradoxically perhaps Atheists need a messiah of sorts....LMAO!!!, even if Atheism does not.
What's the difference between misquoting intelligence reports and misquoting religious text to propagate atrocity?
To say that society needs to move away from the political constructs that allow this is fair enough, how is that going to be reasonably achieved on a global scale without bloodshed in form or another?
Pie in the sky utopian conceptions offering nothing except false hope to gullible people beguiled by the spell of superior intellect.
Nagasaki and Hiroshima were not planned by nor carried out by religious men on a religious crusade.
The construction and deployment of such technology came about through the actions of scientific and rationally minded men.
The technologies that have led to the ever increasing global climate change and increasingly unsustainable population growth have came about through the advancements of the rational with no underlying religious tenents driving them.
The invention of nuclear weapons and the ever increasing demand on finite resources pose a far greater threat to humanity than religious fundmentalism, even if fundamentalists were to acquire them the actualization of the science made it possible.
Thermobaric weponary also designed and deployed with no irrational absolute moral code behind them.
Atheism is a non entity so as such cannot be blamed for anything, true, but what comfort will it bring as the security of nation states find themselves threatened more by the lack of resources on a Global scale than by idealists of any creed?
No doubt it will be rationally and relatively moral to murder for survival when, as looks likely in the not too distant future, humanity may well be driven to do so for food and clean water.
Not a position that God or lack of therin puts us in, in which case what does the arguement achieve?
