Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history

originally posted by: sheepslayer247
a reply to: Annee

What I am saying is that Hitler was trying to make National Socialism, the ideals of and belief in the party, the "religion" of Nazi Germany.

OK. Control/power/greed - - - in whatever form. Organized religion certainly fits those as well. You can't have 2 powers. (kinda actually fits whats going on in US government today IMO)

I know Hitler is not a favorable subject of discussion on ATS. So, don't want to say too much. But, certainly fascinating.

I'd say he was a believer in Ancient Astronauts.

a reply to: ArnoldNonymous

Atheism isn't currently killing anyone, religion is. Seems like you are just blaming atheist for being more successful than the religious. Religious people fail more, not our fault atheist people are more successful at genocide than religious.

a reply to: ArnoldNonymous

Though the doctrine wasn't religious, the motivation, the actions, the irrationality, the group-think, the propaganda, the destruction of material things for ideal aims, was. The "State", "Germany above all", the "cultural revolution", were no different than "God".

Think about it: the burning of witches, heretics and pagans at the stake and the gassing of Jews, gypsies, homosexuals in gas chambers. What's the difference? The belief is arbitrary and makes no difference when it comes to human irrationality, bigotry and superstition.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: sheepslayer247
Hitler hated Christianity because he believed it was to blame for many of the worlds problems. Hitler's goal was to replace all religion with National Socialism.

Atheism has no belief. No dogma to use as power control.

Really? How about "there is no God. God is a myth". That is hopelessly dogmatic.

Again - lack of belief is not a belief.

All Atheists (and religious) are actually Agnostic - - "God can not be proven or dis-proven" (actual meaning of agnostic).

Atheism is not anti-god - - - it is lack of belief.

However - - - an individuals philosophy is just that - - their own philosophy. Atheists are connected by one thing - and one thing only "lack of belief in a god". Beyond that, they are not a "group think" as religious belief is.

What an individual atheists philosophy is - - is his own. Atheism has no belief.

i don't believe you.

and no, only agnostics are agnostic.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Jobeycool
What is called being born again of love,and peace and the Fruits of the Spirit, something no atheist ever teach.

And who cares.

I don't need a "belief" to tell me how to behave toward my fellow men.

but at the same time, you believe you are a good person, no?

where do you get the behavior from? friends? social circles? community?

The difference is that atheists aren't killing in the name of atheism but many supposedly religious people ARE killing in the name of their chosen religion.

Its not atheists or religion that get people killed, its man vs god that gets people killed. The first murderers in old testament scripture were rebels of god. They werent atheists because they didnt even exists in the beginning. But they definitely werent with god, and they seeked after their own glory. The natural man is and always has been an enemy to god, and in his natural state, man would kill regardless.
I would not give athiesm credit for murder because in atheism there is no such thing as murder. there isnt greater consequence to their actions, and there is no responsibility. For them, the only laws they have to answer to are those of man, and even then those laws are questionable. But to those who believe in a greater power, we have a responsibility, we have a purpose. We answer to an eternal law and we have eternal consequences. And just because something is labeled religious, DOES NOT mean it comes from god, even if it claims to do so. What comes from god every man must find out for himself through constant prayer, meditation and study. Just my two cents.

originally posted by: johnb
The difference is that atheists aren't killing in the name of atheism but many supposedly religious people ARE killing in the name of their chosen religion.

i think the argument is better phrased as: what is worth dying for? is it for god and country, for the advancement of science, for family, friends, drugs, money, power? and the answer to all that is nothing is worth dying for, but if you must die, might as well be because of your love for others, not because of your lack of love for others.

and therein lies the rub: if you think people are nothing more than animals that will resolve to genocide. this is how it is perpetrated in both religious and non-religious settings. they pick targets, demean the targets, thus giving a psychological reason to genocide the targets. the reasons are varied, but the overall driving force is the belief that the opposing side is less deserving than they are, of love, compassion and forgiveness.

this is why i don't believe in the death penalty.

You apparently do not understand the difference between religion and philosophy.....idiot.

a reply to: ArnoldNonymous

The best example of religious persecution in America is the Salem witch trials. How many people were killed in those trials? Thousands? Hundreds? Actually, fewer than 25. Yet the event still haunts the liberal imagination.

Point of information: D'Souza is ignorant, or perhaps being disingenuous:

Mountain Meadows massacre.

being killed by someone that happens to be atheist, isn't the same as killing in the name of atheism

If the standard is being killed by someone with an affiliation, then by that logic the number of religious people who have killed is still far greater.

a reply to: ArnoldNonymous

interesting....

inquisition, done by atheists
crusade, done by atheists
witch hunts, done by atheists
aborigins, massacred by atheists.
native americans, massacred by atheists
all murders in middle east done by atheists
even gaza people bombed by atheists

interesting theory...

peace

a reply to: tsingtao

No one "believes" they are a good person. They try to be a good person, based on their deeds and actions (or they don't, also based on their deeds and actions). Those deeds and actions can come from a number of sources, some of them religious, others irreligious, and some do come from common human experience.

Some might need a book written by iron-age migrants to tell them what constitutes a good person (although I would argue that much in said book does not exemplify reason, compassion, or kindness in the slightest). To these people, their actions are entirely dictated by the whims of a God whom they consider to be good.

Others might need only their personal experiences, that is: to see and experience that which causes suffering and grief in the world, and to know that partaking of those actions don't make one a good person. To these individuals, the ramifications of their actions on this world are what constitutes decency.

Family, friends, community, and coworkers also contribute largely. By recognizing the inherent power of working together, staying on task, and supporting communal efforts, one can recognize these actions as beneficial for all involved, and by performing them they are acting well, and therefore can consider themselves a good person.


~ Wandering Scribe

I would say it's not really atheism or religion that kills, but rather ignorance that does. History has shown that people will kill because they either bastardize or blindly follow the teachings of a few, I guess you could say "revolutionary figures," regardless of whether it's Jesus, Muhammad, Darwin, or Marx. The worst thing is that they always seem to take the worst features, like following Muhammad literally, yet not take Jesus' do not kill, or love your neighbor as yourself teachings literally, and with Marx, they just took the worst of his ideas(if you read Marx, you'd see that he advocated atheism, no class and no government(anarchy), i.e everyone should be self-ruled and sufficient, so basically, the communists took the first part literally, but the opposite of the 2nd). Finally, people just blindly followed Darwin, even though now you have evidence of the supernatural like String Theory, Simulated Universe, UFOs, etc. and evolution is anything but conclusive.

Anyway, Nazism was based on Darwinism(who could be considered the god of Atheism), so I would qualify Hitler as an atheist. All of the wars and genocide in the 20th century have been motivated by the ideas of two men, and that's Darwin and Karl Max, and unfortunately, a certain country is still clinging to those ideas(it's scary to think that anyone could be so ignorant as to allow the belief of one man, who appears to be the equivalent of a philosopher, to be the basis of your alliances/enemies and WW3. People are fighting or being enemies for no reasons, other than "it's tradition" basically, not unlike why Pakistan and India, for some reasons, still view each other as enemies).

a reply to: johnb

How do you kill in the name of atheism. Atheism has no god, so they can't just proclaim his name when they kill, therefore, you can only look at their belief, or what they've read.

The reality is that most people are atheists at heart, including Christians, because truly religious people would know that religion forbids killing(not sure about Islam though). Basically, they profess to believe in God, but not truly believe that God exists, which makes one wonder why they even go to church or worship, when you continually violate his strongest commandment(unless it's out of self-defense).

originally posted by: np6888

Anyway, Nazism was based on Darwinism(who could be considered the god of Atheism), so I would qualify Hitler as an atheist.

If Hitler believed in a God, which seems he did, he is not atheist. No matter what his actions were.

Creationists are fond of laying the blame for Nazi eugenics on Charles Darwin. They insist that his materialist argument that humans evolved from animals and his conception of natural selection inspired the Nazis to implement a widespread policy of artificial selection within the Fatherland. However, these claims are as baseless as was the so-called “science” that the Nazis employed.

scienceblogs.com...

originally posted by: np6888
a reply to: johnb

How do you kill in the name of atheism. Atheism has no god, so they can't just proclaim his name when they kill, therefore, you can only look at their belief, or what they've read.

The reality is that most people are atheists at heart, including Christians, because truly religious people would know that religion forbids killing

It is wrongly translated. The correct word is murder. There is a difference between kill and murder.

Murder is the unlawful taking of life. Killing is the lawful taking of life. God has said, "You shall not murder" not "You shall not kill." After all, God says killing in self-defense is justifiable.

carm.org...

People like killing each other.

If one guy randomly kills another, with no religious motivation, that doesn't count as "killed in the name of Atheism"

originally posted by: Wandering Scribe
a reply to: tsingtao



Some might need a book written by iron-age migrants to tell them what constitutes a good person (although I would argue that much in said book does not exemplify reason, compassion, or kindness in the slightest). To these people, their actions are entirely dictated by the whims of a God whom they consider to be good.

~ Wandering Scribe

Does "migrants" really have anything to do with it? Reading the Egyptian Book of the Dead is all about finding favor with the gods for a good life. Same with the rest. Its all a quest for a favorable life of some sort to appease the gods. Certainly wasn't any idea promoted only by a bunch of "migrants". What are you looking for anyway? A great religion and life code born out of one of the major civilizations with their great temples, pantheons and priest hierarchy's?

originally posted by: Wandering Scribe
a reply to: tsingtao

No one "believes" they are a good person. They try to be a good person, based on their deeds and actions (or they don't, also based on their deeds and actions). Those deeds and actions can come from a number of sources, some of them religious, others irreligious, and some do come from common human experience.

Some might need a book written by iron-age migrants to tell them what constitutes a good person (although I would argue that much in said book does not exemplify reason, compassion, or kindness in the slightest). To these people, their actions are entirely dictated by the whims of a God whom they consider to be good.

Others might need only their personal experiences, that is: to see and experience that which causes suffering and grief in the world, and to know that partaking of those actions don't make one a good person. To these individuals, the ramifications of their actions on this world are what constitutes decency.

Family, friends, community, and coworkers also contribute largely. By recognizing the inherent power of working together, staying on task, and supporting communal efforts, one can recognize these actions as beneficial for all involved, and by performing them they are acting well, and therefore can consider themselves a good person.


~ Wandering Scribe

of course people believe they are good. why try to do good things?
only because other people do good things and you like what they do?
regardless of what is written about what "God did" no one is God, although some people will have you believe they are better than the rest.
all through history we see that. granted atheists weren't around through the majority of human existence, it takes all it's cues from religion.

atheism replaced God with the self. that's all they have done.

science is no support altho they think it will vindicate their philosophy.
all science is doing is uncovering how things work, which God created.

your last paragraph really smacks of communism, without any extra context.

and i'm sure hitler, mao and stalin believed they were doing the "right" thing for their people.