Question mostly to Atheists (not a mocking)

[LuisDantas]

That is not the teachigs fault, that is a human error where the religious person has not understood that killing of harming Gay people are of course wrong and a huge sin

We will have to agree to disagree here.

Faulty teachings exist, and are in fact everywhere.

 

[QuestioningMind]

the FACT that they were against many other groups does not mean that they were NOT against religion. There have been, as I have pointed out, many dictators who were not anti-religion. That is not required to be a dictator, y'know.

I mean, really....suppose someone is anti-Trump. Does that mean he cannot, then, be against Mitch McConnell? If he is against stamp collecting, does that mean that he can't then be against turning bottles in for cash?

How about...if a dictator is against religion, does that mean he can't be against free speech?

Your objection is illogical.

No one said that they weren't against religion. I already pointed out that they wanted to get rid of religion because it competed against worship of the state. What they were NOT doing is killing people in the NAME OF a lack of belief in gods. They were killing people in the name of the all powerful state and religion just happened to be one of the institutions that competed with that goal.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

The Christian God spoke to the christians, not to those who do not believe. IF you do not have a religious belief no God or Buddha stop you from doing what you want.

Citation needed: They claim that their god "spoke" to them. They have yet to demonstrate that is true.

And since I know you do not live in the USA? You have no idea how much their god-claims have been put into the Force Of Law-- to the detriment of human rights, and human freedoms each time they do that.

But religious people have guidelines to follow.

Ironically, they say they do-- but in practical terms? They only want to force other people -- at gunpoint-- to follow these immoral rules. They, themselves? 100% act as if they are personally exempt...

 

[dianaiad]

The obvious sarcasm of my post went right over your head.

No it didn't. It fell flat.

They are killing people who are opposed to their regime. It doesn't matter why they are opposed.

Yes it does. There is always a reason for opposition. In the case of theism, it was the opinion of the totalitarian leaders that it was theism itself that was the problem. Therefore, get rid of theism. And theists.

Communist leaders killed prominent communists because the leader was paranoid about their possible opposition, not because they were communists. Does that make the communist leaders anti-commnist?

Makes him paranoid and anti-whatever his target was doing that made him go round the bend.

Hitler killed prominent Nazis because he was paranoid about their possible opposition, not because they were Nazis. Does that make Hitler anti-Nazi?

Makes him paranoid and anti-whatever it is that made him go round the bend.
A great many of the original Russian revolutionaries were religious. Devoutly communist, too. Did their communism make them any less anti-theist? You'll need to go look at WWII Italy and ask that question for yourself.

You seem to be claiming that if someone believes one thing, he cannot be, or believe, anything else. I could accept that attitude in a kindergartner, but anybody old enough to vote should know better.

I know of one totalitarian leader (I believe you may have been referring to him, actually) who killed theists because they were theists, intellectuals because they were intellectuals, put anybody who actually owned anything to work in rice paddies and worked them to death, who killed teachers and was deeply suspicious of anybody who could read. Shoot, he killed people who wore glasses...because they wore glasses. It betokened an 'elitism' that this leader didn't like.

Well, I have news for you; if he killed people who wore glasses because they wore glasses, that does NOT mean he didn't kill anybody else for any other reason.

...and if a Communist leader killed fellow communists because he became suspicious, that does NOT mean he didn't kill theists because they were theists and he was suspicious of theism.

If you still don't get it, then I really have nothing more to say on the subject.

I'm not the one who isn't getting it.

If a totalitarian dictator murders theists because he thinks that they might oppose him, then there is a reason why he thinks they will...a reason tied specifically to their theism. He doesn't like that. So he kills them. That makes him anti-theist. Not because they might oppose him, but because of the reason he thinks they might.

He might target other groups that could oppose him...for reasons that differ from those he thinks that theists might, and that would make him anti-whatever they are. Nothing about hating theism makes it impossible for him to hate anybody else, y'know.

You are committing one fallacy after the other, mostly keyed to 'fallacies of composition,' that is, claiming that if all groups have one thing in common, then that's the only thing they have in common...also known as "no true scott."

Don't do that.

Yes, these people targeted theists because they thought theists would oppose them. However, many totalitarian governments have had theists who supported them. If someone thinks that there is something about theism that would be a problem, then it is the theism they are against. Anti-theist.

They could ALSO be anti-intellectual, anti-rich, anti-stamp collector as well. Doesn't make them any less anti-theist.

 

[dianaiad]

No one said that they weren't against religion. I already pointed out that they wanted to get rid of religion because it competed against worship of the state. What they were NOT doing is killing people in the NAME OF a lack of belief in gods. They were killing people in the name of the all powerful state and religion just happened to be one of the institutions that competed with that goal.

Same thing. Except that religion doesn't usually compete against totalitarian regimes. The only reason a totalitarian leader might think it does is because he doesn't like theism. Or theists. So...he kills them 'in the name of atheism,' or 'because getting rid of theism is a good thing." those are simply two ways of saying precisely the same thing.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Most atheists were raised Christian, so I can understand why they would talk about the problems with the religion. Some atheists rag on supernaturalist religions but I don't know many who rage on sensible religions like Buddhism or Taoism.

It seems to me that 99% of the Atheists rage over religion where it is a God who put rules in front of the followers

 

[viole]

I have noticed that many (not all) Atheists mocking or harras the believers of any religion/ spiritual path.
But also some of the Atheists are well versed in the religious text. So my question is.

Why do you "as an Atheist", take your time to read especially the bible, then when you know a little, you go about making sick critique and wrong claims about the religion you do not believe in? Do you find it fun to mock those who believe what you do not believe in? What is your purpose to try to drag down the religions?

Because they tend to tell their fellow people, and try to enforce as public policy, what their brand of divinity think it is right or wrong, based on no more evidence than garden fairies, or Mickey Mouse being the creator of the Universe.

If I tell you that you should not (plug in what you think it is ok to do) because the Blue Fairy said so, wouldn’t you try to knock down my ridiculous belief first?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Spirit of Light]

Because they tend to tell their fellow people, and try to enforce as public policy, what their brand of divinity think it is right or wrong, based on no more evidence than garden fairies, or Mickey Mouse being the creator of the Universe.

If I tell you that you should not (plug in what you think it is ok to do) because the Blue Fairy said so, wouldn’t you try to knock down my ridiculous belief first?

Ciao

- viole

I would answer that since I am a Buddhist, I do not follow a blue fairy, so it does not count for me, the same should atheist tell religious people who want to force them to believe in a religion. forcing does not help

 

[viole]

I would answer that since I am a Buddhist, I do not follow a blue fairy, so it does not count for me, the same should atheist tell religious people who want to force them to believe in a religion. forcing does not help

Nobody is forcing me. But don’t they try to influence discourse concerning gay marriages, euthanasia, abortion, education, etc.?

If people disagreeing the above does not invoke a divinity, that is fine for me. It is like any disagreement. But if they tell me I am wrong because Jesus said so, then they had it coming. Sorry.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Spirit of Light]

Nobody is forcing me. But don’t they try to influence discourse concerning gay marriages, euthanasia, abortion, education, etc.?

If people disagreeing the above does not invoke a divinity, that is fine for me. It is like any disagreement. But if they tell me I am wrong because Jesus said so, then they had it coming. Sorry.

Ciao

- viole

Actually they follow Jesus teaching, but they don't need to be rude of course

 

[Sand Dancer]

It seems to me that 99% of the Atheists rage over religion where it is a God who put rules in front of the followers

Often the followers are sowing division and ignorance, so that is on the followers. At least they are real.

 

[viole]

Actually they follow Jesus teaching, but they don't need to be rude of course

They don’t need to be rude. They just need to disagree with me because their divinity disagrees with me. In that case it is normal that I throw everything I got at that belief.

If on the other hand, they disagree with me because they disagree with me...I cannot deny their existence, so I just have to convince them by other means.

Ciao

- viole

 

[ecco]

Most atheists were raised Christian, so I can understand why they would talk about the problems with the religion. Some atheists rag on supernaturalist religions but I don't know many who rage on sensible religions like Buddhism or Taoism.

If I raged against Taoism, would there be any Taoists on the forum to engage in the conversation?

 

[Spirit of Light]

If I raged against Taoism, would there be any Taoists on the forum to engage in the conversation?

So it is not chrisianity in it self you disagree with. You just want a discussion? So you pick those that are the most of in the forum?

 

[QuestioningMind]

Same thing. Except that religion doesn't usually compete against totalitarian regimes. The only reason a totalitarian leader might think it does is because he doesn't like theism. Or theists. So...he kills them 'in the name of atheism,' or 'because getting rid of theism is a good thing." those are simply two ways of saying precisely the same thing.

ROFL... the worship of God does NOT compete with the worship of the state or Great Leader? Sure, go ahead and keep telling yourself that, but sadly it will never be true.

You can also continue to delude yourself into thinking that killing people in the name of gaining and holding onto power is somehow the same s killing people in the name of lack of belief in gods. But again, it will never be true.

 

[dianaiad]

ROFL... the worship of God does NOT compete with the worship of the state or Great Leader? Sure, go ahead and keep telling yourself that, but sadly it will never be true.

when the "Great Leader" or the state uses religion to bolster his/its authority, it's true. Ask, oh....Hitler or Mussolini or...how about Castro? (to a lesser extent, certainly). Germany STILL has, btw, a list of religions that it 'allows' or doesn't allow within its borders.

You can also continue to delude yourself into thinking that killing people in the name of gaining and holding onto power is somehow the same s killing people in the name of lack of belief in gods. But again, it will never be true.

It is if the killer is targeting theists. It is the SAME thing as killing intellectuals because the government doesn't want thinking..or well educated people who might disagree with it and say so is "killing in the 'name of' anti-intellectualism."

QuestioningMind, I admire your screen name, but honestly...I think that you are only asking questions and not listening to answers. Either that, or you are asking questions to which you figure you already have the answers. Would you kindly look at some actual history? You know, history that is not biased towards opinions you already hold?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well there are many Atheists who do mock religion, that is a fact

There are many more theists who mock (other people's) religion than there are atheists who mock religion.