|
Navigation
The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us. Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help improve critical thinking. Buy a Laptop -- Apple
|
Atheist killers VS. Theists.
Posted on: April 30, 2009 - 12:52am
 Offline
Atheist killers VS. Theists.
Evangelists point to Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and Chairman Mao, and the multitude of the tens of millions more persons killed by such Atheists, than by Theists. Aside from the obviuos, how would you respond to the charge?
|
|
Copyright Rational Response Squad 2006-2024.
|
No matter how many people atheist might have killed (and every one I would question wether or not they were actually atheist) doesn't prove anything one way or another.
What is the obvious?
Who says there's no atheists in foxholes?
http://foxholeatheist.wordpress.com/
I don't know about all of those, but wasn't Hitler Roman Catholic?
In Mein Kampf Hitler wrote “by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord”.
Theism is why we can't have nice things.
The fallacy is that I was not born or raised in those cultures at that time.
They fail to consider that if they were, for example, insted of being born in the west, if they were born Muslim in Iran, most likely they would be Muslim and support that totalitarian theocracy.
The other thing they fail to realize is that I, as an atheist, DO NOT support the blind worship of anything, something both Hitler and today's Iran have in common.
The Abrahamic god is not one of "advise and consent" with "checks and ballances", something that Hitler didn't have either. If anything, the god of Abraham, as a claim and a character, has more in common with fascism and theocracy.
God only values those who live for him without quesition and threatens to punish dissent, just like the state of theocratic fascism of Iran today, just like Hitler of WW2.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
You forget that the believer has the fallacious "trump card" in that of the fallacy of the "True Scottsman".
What they confuse are two separate issues.
1. How they wish others would behaive.
Which is a separate issue than.
2. What others believe in their brains.
There is no doubt Hitler was a sick and evil man. But HE DID have a belief(no matter how twisted) in an all powefull being, whom Hitler believed chose the German people to rule the world.
This is the same fallacy that Muslims pull when others point out Bin Ladin, "He is not a true Muslim", does not change the belief Bin Ladin has in his head that Allah is the one true god.
It would be just as fallacious if FOR EXAMPLE ONLY, a person calling themselves an "atheist" went into a shopping center and shot 50 people and I said, "That is not a "true" atheist".
How I wish others would behave is still a separate issue than what they believe in their brains.
All Christians, be they in prison or in the pulpit, hold the belief that the God of Jesus is the one true god. Both Shiite and Sunni Muslims hold the belief that Allah is the one true god.
Many atheists didn't and still dont like Madolyn O'hair. Some don't like Christopher Hitchens because of their blunt and brash "in your face" tactics. But they are atheists just like I am, just like Harris and Dawkins.
Claiming a label does not automatically make anyone good or bad, actions do. There is no magic lawgiver in the sky vs a man in a red leotard re-arranging the neurons in our brains making us do good or bad.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
How is that a fallacy? Seems more like an observational opinion to me.
Even if it were true that atheists kill everything and everyone in the world daily it would not prove the existance or non-existance of God one way or another.
And in any case I would also state that none of those killed in the name of atheism per say. It could be fairly argued one way or another.
And on a personal level in my experience that tactic is usually just to get you off your topic. I can kind of see the "morailty is God" thing springing up out of that fallacious reasoning but otherwise it's a pointless arguemnt and proves nothing.
Who says there's no atheists in foxholes?
http://foxholeatheist.wordpress.com/
Atheism answers only one question. It isn't a worldview and doesn't dictate morality, it therefore cannot be responsible even if those people were atheists.
Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.
Your examples still pursued the action of worship of a god. They just used the state as the god to worship.
And Hitler was a christian, by his own words.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
In reponse to a post above... Apparently, Hitler was raised as a Roman Catholic, but abandoned it at some point.
(I should have hit "quote".)
I've no clue as to what it has to do with anything. But what the hell.
OK. But what the Evangelist did (whom I paraphrased), was to say that what I stated in my thread post is proof that Atheists have more blood on their hands than Theists... that Atheists hold to a lesser code of mores, ethics and morals, effectively because they have no "code" or "creed"
or teachings (for example dogma of the bible) with which to guide them.
Did I REALLY need to spell this out to you guys???
I asked for comments on it, and assumed you could extrapolate what the obvious crap that an Evangelist was saying about Atheists. Guess I can't take anything for granted in the future.
WITH THAT IN MIND... please re-read the thread post and respond to what I asked, rather than spew shit about blah, blah, blah that we've ALL heard a million times before!
Thank you.
At least someone actually understood the issue amd topic.
I will let Eddie Izzard explain it all for you. (He makes a very good point about a minute in.)
Nobody I know was brainwashed into being an atheist.
Why Believe?
Well stated.
And treat2, I mentioned the morailty arguement. Simmer down.
Who says there's no atheists in foxholes?
http://foxholeatheist.wordpress.com/
I think we forgot what the thread post said, so let's go off-topic.
I'm gonna have a nightcap. How's about you?
Existence??? Where did that come up?
Well done!
Now can you guys fucking comment the fucking thread post?
Bull! He may have mixed it with his own twisted ideas, but he did not give up on it. There are plenty of pictures of him during the War shaking hands with priests and standing in front of Churches. THAT, and his SS belt buckles had embossed on them, "God is with us".
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Atheism views the world in a given way. How a person views the world influences behavior so obviously it can have an affect for human behavior.
Atheist is the OFF position....Theist is the ON position. Neither address tactic.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
I have no 1st hand knowledge as to Hitler's beliefs, which is why I said "Apparently". I heard a discussion of the subject comparing Theist and Atheist killers on utube, and the topic of Hitler being religious did come up, and there was disagreement as to his beliefs.
You can try a search on utube to attempt to find the Evangelist guy that brought up the argument that Atheists killed tens of millions more than Theists ever did, etc. , etc. ... I can't recall how I found the video.
Try somethings like:
Atheist murderer
Evangelist VS Atheist
Atheist killer
It should probably produce someting. Look for a pic of a guy behind a podium. And use the "related" search if your player has the ability.
You'll get the numbers in millions from that video, as well as, the video that one of the posters was kind enough to put up in the thread.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating my personal beliefs on this subject... I'm simply bringing up the Topic for comments from the peanut gallery.
What "given way" can you concluse based on me being an atheist?
Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.
I don't think those things comprise enough evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Hitler was a Catholic.
Edit: I think he was a theist, but I don't know if he was Christian.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
I'm not sure either. And I remember reading a letter he wrote- I think to Goering, so that may explain the tone- making fun of how Himmler wanted to raise the power of the Catholic church (well, the remnant racist/anti-semitic elements, anyway).
Personally, I don't give a shit if he was or wasn't.
The question I posted remains
an argument of some well-known fundamentalist Theists.
Debating tangential B.S. is B.S., the numbers killed bt Atheists are still enormous.
What would be your argument against the obvious charges?
That it's a bullshit argumentum ad popularum. Full stop. Then you ask if they'd like to get doughnuts. Or coffee. Or both.
Both influence our view of payoffs for our actions.
Your belief there is no omniscient judge.
I don't believe that there is a omniscient judge so I am more likely to kill people or do other immoral things.... please connect the dots. Must suck to have that world view where everyone is immoral to start off with. I don't follow the law because of fear of punishment, I follow it because it is the right thing to do. this hole thing is stupid anyway, people from every faith kill, atheist christian muslim really it doesn't matter, Christian don't kill because they are christian, atheist don't kill because they are atheist, they kill because they are assholes. Really there isn't much more to it than that.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
I have no idea why you do what you do; behavior is complicated. The species would certainly be affected negatively by a lack of enforceable laws, though. To deny our violent inclinations would be naive. To determine our possible behaviors based on our current circumstances is shortsighted. Given the right situation people do bad things for no good reason.
I agree. The question is does our view of the world affect our behavior. The answer is of course it does.
Exactly.
Checkout the asshole Evangelist on utube making this argument to fellow assholes at a convention of assholes.
Try a search on "Atheist" and look for a pic of an asshole behind a podium. It shouldn't take long to find it.
The question is how would you personally respond to that asshole's lecture?
I gave you the answer already. I'd tell them it's a bullshit argument ad popularum and be done with it. Because there's no way to 'win' and it's one of the most moronic numbers game arguments on the face of the planet.
And Tapey gave you an answer as well. Which I agreed with; it was, in essence, my point. Why are you pressing this issue, anyway? The correct answer is that it's a bullshit argument and therefore invalid. It appeals to a logical fallacy; hence, it is irrelevant in a logical argument.
So: That said; what's the best way for someone to move on and get to actually important issues? Food and drink, of course. There are few things that ease the temper like a good meal, and if nothing else, going to get food can give you a new backdrop and allow you to re-set and put you into a slightly different state of mind. This can all help to move the argument(s) into more productive areas.
Would you like to talk about vagina juice?
Nah, not really. I've had a horrendous dry spell lately. No pun intended; seriously.