Atheism, Religion, and Crime

[Leela]

Leela

Oh my, you are very mistaken here.

Communists hunted down and murdered as many priests, bishops, and nuns as they could during the 20th century. This has nothing whatsoever to do with how Catholics would like to have everyone believe in God.

Do you have the smallest idea of what the communists in China, Russia, and Spain said about religion? Or what they did???

Communism didn’t ‘oppose’ or try to talk people into conversion. They crucified. They burned alive. They shot. They starved to death. Hundreds. Of. Thousands. Of. Christians.

May God please shower you with light, ANnem

What have communist regimes ever done to religious groups that religious groups have not done to one another?

 

[j1akey]

annem:

Oh my, you are very mistaken here.

Communists hunted down and murdered as many priests, bishops, and nuns as they could during the 20th century. This has nothing whatsoever to do with how Catholics would like to have everyone believe in God.

Do you have the smallest idea of what the communists in China, Russia, and Spain said about religion? Or what they did???

Communism didn’t ‘oppose’ or try to talk people into conversion. They crucified. They burned alive. They shot. They starved to death. Hundreds. Of. Thousands. Of. Christians.

Well, if you want to play that game then I could rattle off plenty of examples of attrocities commited by catholics/christians in the name of their God. What communists did is just one of the more recent historical events but it is by no means unique and christians certainly have had plenty of blood on their hands as well in human history. It doesn’t make it any less wrong but you can’t point fingers at other groups without pointing one at yours either.

 

[anEvilAtheist]

Communism includes opposition to religion in a way but only in the way that every religion opposes every other religion. Communists want Communism to be the supreme ideology just as Catholicism opposes any other competing worldview. There is nothing about atheism itself that supports any particular ideology.

I agree that there is nothing about atheism itself that supports any particular ideology. But there is also nothing about theism itself that supports any particular ideology. If atheists say that religion in general is evil because of seemingly evil acts committed by believers, they should be prepared to consider Stalin as evidence that atheism is evil. Some religions may be evil, and some atheistic systems of morality may be evil, but this does not show that there is anything inherently evil about theism or atheism.

In fact, the atheists I know are generally opposed to ideologies whether religious or political in favor of pragmatism. Saying that the problem with Communism is that it is atheistic completely misses the point as Sam Harris explains:

“People of faith often claim that the crimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the inevitable product of unbelief. The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core and generally give rise to personality cults that are indistinguishable from cults of religious hero worship. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject religious dogma; they are examples of political, racial and nationalistic dogma run amok. There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.”

Best,
Leela

I agree that false dogmas are the real problem. But we all have beliefs. People take positions on more than just whether they are a theist or an atheist. Atheists have moral beliefs that they act on, and theists have moral beliefs that they act on. If atheists have dangerous beliefs, they should be criticized as harshly as theists with dangerous beliefs. I just think it’s wrong to label other people’s beliefs as dogma (with the negative connotation that entails) and assume that our own beliefs are always correct and “reasonable” (with the positive connotation that entails).

 

[annem]

j1akey

What communists did is just one of the more recent historical events but it is by no means unique and christians certainly have had plenty of blood on their hands as well in human history.

Leela

What have communist regimes ever done to religious groups that religious groups have not done to one another?

Sorry, but I find a great deal wrong with your replies. First, there is the absolute refusal to accept blame on atheism for what was done in the name of atheism.

It strikes me that this is an immoral attitude. Do you think it is an atheist attitude?

anEvilAtheist

But we all have beliefs

Some of us have truths; some do not. But as a theist I believe in truths.

Why do you think all atheism has done is evil so far?

Christianity changed to the world forever and for the better. We invented free hospitals, the university, science. Most of all, morality changed due to Christianity. We now have an idea of rights that can only be true if there is truth.\

Atheism cannot create people like Mother Teresa or St Francis. It cannot create people like Pope John Paul.

And pretty much all it has done in the last 100 years is destroy and kill.

You might want to think about it,

May God grant you all a million miracles! Annem

 

[Leela]

I agree that there is nothing about atheism itself that supports any particular ideology. But there is also nothing about theism itself that supports any particular ideology. If atheists say that religion in general is evil because of seemingly evil acts committed by believers, they should be prepared to consider Stalin as evidence that atheism is evil. Some religions may be evil, and some atheistic systems of morality may be evil, but this does not show that there is anything inherently evil about theism or atheism.

I agree that false dogmas are the real problem. But we all have beliefs. People take positions on more than just whether they are a theist or an atheist. Atheists have moral beliefs that they act on, and theists have moral beliefs that they act on. If atheists have dangerous beliefs, they should be criticized as harshly as theists with dangerous beliefs. I just think it’s wrong to label other people’s beliefs as dogma (with the negative connotation that entails) and assume that our own beliefs are always correct and “reasonable” (with the positive connotation that entails).

The issue is not holding beliefs in general. There is nothing wrong with believing things so long as beliefs are held provisionally. The important difference between general beliefs and dogmas or ideologies is that dogmatic beliefs are not subject to new experience. We all hold beliefs, but I’d like to think that all my beliefs can be updated as new arguments and evidence become available. Religious beliefs are not like this.

As an atheist it would still be incredibly easy to convince me that God exists and is something like the Christians say he is if in fact he actually does exist and is anything like they say he is. On the other hand, beliefs that are not based on evidence (dogmatic beliefs) cannot be changed regardless of the evidence. One jet landing safely in the Hudson is viewed as confirmation that God exists, while every other airline crash where everyone dies is viewed to have no bearing on the question. It is impossible for believers to imagine any evidence that could convince them that God does not exist. In other worlds, if the world were completely different than it is, it would still be viewed as entirely consistent with the belief in God. It seems to me that if it has any meaning to say that God exists, then the world should be much different than a world where God did not exist. A difference must make a difference, so pragmatically, the question of whether or not God exists has no value.

Best,
Leela

 

[liquidpele]

Sorry to jump in here…

Sorry, but I find a great deal wrong with your replies. First, there is the absolute refusal to accept blame on atheism for what was done in the name of atheism.

It strikes me that this is an immoral attitude. Do you think it is an atheist attitude?

I believe you’re missing the major factor here. Such events are hardly caused by “atheism” or “religion” or whatever other excuse you might like to bring up, they are fueled by dogma, societal issues, what we call out primitive urges, etc. The only difference between thousands of years ago and today is the scale we are capable of. Typically, these events relate to social or government breakdown. Not only is “atheism” not to blame, religion is not to blame. People are to blame.

anEvilAtheist

Some of us have truths; some do not. But as a theist I believe in truths.

Why do you think all atheism has done is evil so far?

Are you claiming atheism has only done evil so far? Surely you don’t believe such nonsense?

Christianity changed to the world forever and for the better. We invented free hospitals, the university, science. Most of all, morality changed due to Christianity. We now have an idea of rights that can only be true if there is truth.

True, and I typically give credit where it is due. Christianity and other religions have done a lot of good. A whole lot. But it’s a mixed bag, like most things, so just keep that in mind. It also brings up the question of whether Christian faith accomplished those things, or if it was simply the organization of people and necessity for such things. It’s an interesting debate, and likely a bit of both just as it is with modern governments.

Atheism cannot create people like Mother Teresa or St Francis. It cannot create people like Pope John Paul.

And pretty much all it has done in the last 100 years is destroy and kill.

Knights of Columbus… you really do believe that don’t you? Well, I imagine there is no changing your perspective over the internet, so I’ll just say I believe you are woefully misguided about the ambitions, beliefs, and reasoning behind people’s actions.

May God grant you all a million miracles! Annem

I’d like some toast with the virgin mary on it please.

 

[Leela]

j1akey

Leela

Sorry, but I find a great deal wrong with your replies. First, there is the absolute refusal to accept blame on atheism for what was done in the name of atheism.

It strikes me that this is an immoral attitude. Do you think it is an atheist attitude?

Since Hitler liked dogs should dog owners share responsibility for the holocaust?

Atheism is not a belief system or a philosophy. Atheism is simply the lack of one particular belief. It is the state we are all born into. it is impossible to do anything “in the name of atheism.”

Also, my issue is not simply that I oppose religion but all dogmatic beliefs including Communism. For me they are part of the same problem. I try to oppose bad ideas wherever I find them. Religions may have more than their fair share of bad ideas, but bad ideas are not limited to religion.

Best,
Leela

 

[StrawberryJam]

Let’s talk about children that have died because of religious beliefs with the christian scientists and the Jw’s and who knows how many others along the way. I am just starting to find out between medical neglect and physical punishment how religion can be so damaging to children who don’t even know what is going on, one child was killed for not saying amen after mealtime. A toddler. It makes me sick.

 

[eggsbenedict]

annem*Sorry, but I find a great deal wrong with your replies. First, there is the absolute refusal to accept blame on atheism for what was done in the name of atheism.

It strikes me that this is an immoral attitude. Do you think it is an atheist attitude?*

Why should we accept blame for things other people do who happen to have the same disbelief that we do. There are many people who have done atrocious things who have the same disbeliefs that you do, annem. For example, Stalin didn’t believe in Zeus and I assume neither do you.

annemIt strikes me that this is an immoral attitude.

Is it an immoral attitude to not accept the blame for the Crusades?

annemWhy do you think all atheism has done is evil so far?**
Your question implies something that isn’t true.

annemChristianity changed to the world forever and for the better. We invented free hospitals, the university, science. Most of all, morality changed due to Christianity. We now have an idea of rights that can only be true if there is truth.

1. Canada’s health care system is composed of free hospitals, many of them do not have a religious affiliation.
2. Centers of learning pre-date Christianity.
3. The principles of Science are not based on religious beliefs.

annemAnd pretty much all it has done in the last 100 years is destroy and kill.

This is an inflammatory statement. There are many atheists who have contributed positively to society.**

 

[anEvilAtheist]

Some of us have truths; some do not. But as a theist I believe in truths.

I think we all believe our beliefs are true. There are both atheists and theists who hold false beliefs. My point is that we should not demonize one side for those on their side that have false beliefs since both atheists and theists have diverse views on morality.

Why do you think all atheism has done is evil so far?

This is absolutely ridiculous. Do you really see the charitable work of people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett as evil?

Christianity changed to the world forever and for the better. We invented free hospitals, the university, science.

I believe the first free hospital was actually in Baghdad, and China had a free university before Jesus was even born. And I think that the ancient Greeks would have been surprised to find out that science wasn’t even invented until much later. Do you have evidence to support any of those three claims or are you just making stuff up?

Most of all, morality changed due to Christianity. We now have an idea of rights that can only be true if there is truth.

I agree that things can only be true if there is such a thing as truth.

Atheism cannot create people like Mother Teresa or St Francis. It cannot create people like Pope John Paul.

Well obviously atheism doesn’t “create” people who adhere to religious dogma. But I think if you look at generous individuals who contributed to the betterment of mankind, there are atheists who easily surpass your examples. Andrew Carnegie limited himself to only $50,000 a year and gave away approximately $300 billion in 2009 dollars to those less fortunate. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have both given away many billions to good causes.

And pretty much all it has done in the last 100 years is destroy and kill.

I guess all of us atheists must be lying to you when we say that we donate our time and money to charity. I must really just enjoy spending all my free time killing people.

You might want to think about it,

So might you.

 

[reggieM]

Thanks for your thoughts.

I don’t think people should commit suicide because there is so much left to be experienced. Life has its rough times, but there are also many happy moments. I think that most people who commit suicide have the false belief that they will never be happy again. It can be hard to look optimistically at the future when one is miserable, but I think that the future is typically brighter than people realize.

These are nice thoughts, but in trying to talk someone out of suicide - they are weak conjectures. The suicidal person more often is afraid that things will get worse. The fact is, things do get worse very often. But regardless, what good are these “happy moments”? They’re going to end anyway, so why not now with suicide? The only hope that atheism can give is that there might be something a little better than what you have now – but no guarantee. This is not a reason for living at all though. It’s going to be more pain and suffering – that is certain. There might be some happiness mixed in, but the suicidal person cannot deal with the pain that will certainly come in the future. Why should he or she deal with that? There is no ultimate purpose for the atheist – so suicide goes along with it.

I see them as misguided people who thought suicide was the answer, and in doing so gave up the only shot at happiness that they would ever have.

But I think the problem is that suicide is the answer for atheism. There is no guesswork involved (if atheism is true). Whatever happiness you gain in life, no matter how much you have – it’s all going to disappear quickly with death. Why not just have it disappear now?

I would say though that in extreme cases, suicide may be a reasonable course. If someone was absolutely certain that they were about to die a slow and excruciatingly painful death, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for them to consider suicide.

It is absolutely certain that every person is going to face some pain and eventually die. I see this idea supporting suicide as an answer for just about everyone.

Atheism itself doesn’t have any stance on suicide, just like theism doesn’t. However, some theists, as well as some atheists, have moral beliefs in which suicide is wrong.

Catholicism does have a stance on suicide, of course. But Catholicism also proposes a definite meaning and purpose to life here on earth as well as after death. This gives meaning to suffering and to the lack of happiness (or transient nature of happiness) that life affords to many people.

Atheism can only hold out some hope that there might be happy moments (but there might not be also). These happy moments are passing and might actually make the suffering even more painful.

It’s like a person who regrets winning the lottery because after losing all the money he is more unhappy than he was when he didn’t have it. Or a man who marries a beautiful wife and has some brief happiness – but then she leaves him for another guy and he has profound sorrow. He may say that it would have been better if he didn’t have that little happiness.

So a little, fleeting happiness, can be much more painful for a person to consider.

People want the happiness to last. But with atheism, it does not last and cannot last very long. Suicide puts and end to the ups and the downs. It’s not just the downs that the person wants to avoid. But the rising of hopes and then crushing of hopes – that is worse.

 

[annem]

liquidpele

I believe you’re missing the major factor here. Such events are hardly caused by “atheism” or “religion” or whatever other excuse you might like to bring up, they are fueled by dogma, societal issues, what we call out primitive urges, etc. The only difference between thousands of years ago and today is the scale we are capable of. Typically, these events relate to social or government breakdown. Not only is “atheism” not to blame, religion is not to blame. People are to blame.

eggsbenedict

Is it an immoral attitude to not accept the blame for the Crusades?

Wow, total denial of any responsibility. Are you people trying to prove that atheists cannot be moral?? It sure seems like it.

When do I hear the apologies? Why are you busy tossing blame on everybody else? It seems to be the first, the only, the knee jerk response. It’s not my fault! It’s not the fault of the group I belong to! Besides, you;re either a) just as bad or b) worse.

This is VERY DISTURBING BEHAVIOR and you really, really need to think about it.

A lot.

But may God grant you all miracles anyway, Annem

 

[anEvilAtheist]

The issue is not holding beliefs in general. There is nothing wrong with believing things so long as beliefs are held provisionally. The important difference between general beliefs and dogmas or ideologies is that dogmatic beliefs are not subject to new experience. We all hold beliefs, but I’d like to think that all my beliefs can be updated as new arguments and evidence become available. Religious beliefs are not like this.

Some are. People change religions or become atheists all the time as they find new evidence. I think you should be careful about generalizing.

As an atheist it would still be incredibly easy to convince me that God exists and is something like the Christians say he is if in fact he actually does exist and is anything like they say he is. On the other hand, beliefs that are not based on evidence (dogmatic beliefs) cannot be changed regardless of the evidence.

But did you empirically test everything before you came to believe it, or did you merely accept certain things as true when you were a child and only later abandon those that did not match the evidence? Some people who were taught that Christianity is true do not come across evidence that contradicts their beliefs and continue to believe. I don’t see how this is irrational.

One jet landing safely in the Hudson is viewed as confirmation that God exists, while every other airline crash where everyone dies is viewed to have no bearing on the question.

I agree that believing that would be irrational.

It is impossible for believers to imagine any evidence that could convince them that God does not exist. In other worlds, if the world were completely different than it is, it would still be viewed as entirely consistent with the belief in God.

I agree that this is true of many believers, and the opposite is also true of some atheists.

It seems to me that if it has any meaning to say that God exists, then the world should be much different than a world where God did not exist. A difference must make a difference, so pragmatically, the question of whether or not God exists has no value.

Best,
Leela

I agree that if God exists, we would expect the world to be different than we would expect it if God did not exist.

 

[liquidpele]

liquidpele

eggsbenedict

Wow, total denial of any responsibility. Are you people trying to prove that atheists cannot be moral?? It sure seems like it.

When do I hear the apologies? Why are you busy tossing blame on everybody else? It seems to be the first, the only, the knee jerk response. It’s not my fault! It’s not the fault of the group I belong to! Besides, you;re either a) just as bad or b) worse.

This is VERY DISTURBING BEHAVIOR and you really, really need to think about it.

A lot.

But may God grant you all miracles anyway, Annem

Wha… What? …

Judging by your non-existent reading comprehension from my post and what amounts to a child’s logic regarding responsibility, I can only assume I’ve been trolled.

 

[annem]

anEvilAtheist

I guess all of us atheists must be lying to you when we say that we donate our time and money to charity.

I am thrilled to hear you donate money and time. Good for you. Nevertheless, we have research that proves atheists, on the whole, give less, lie more, cheat more, commit adultery more, and generally prove to be less than moral.

However, you are avoiding the issue of what atheism did in the last century. Aren’t you?

May God grant you miracles! Annem

 

[annem]

liquidpele

Wha… What? …

Judging by your non-existent reading comprehension from my post and what amounts to a child’s logic regarding responsibility, I can only assume I’ve been trolled.

---

Wha…What? You think only a troll would accuse atheists of what they did in the last century?

Think again.

Actually, please think again and again. The 20th century began with atheists in the western universities proclaiming we would all see universal happiness arrive on a plate once they had taken over.

Father Stephen Kurti was murdered by communists in 1972 for daring to baptize a baby.
Boitel, a Catholic who lived in Cuba, was murdered in 1972 after severe torture and having his back broken.

These were real people who were killed by atheists within living memory. You don’t think we should ponder this or consider it when we talk to atheists??? Are you kidding??

But may God grant you miracles, ANnem

 

[StrawberryJam]

anEvilAtheist

I am thrilled to hear you donate money and time. Good for you. Nevertheless, we have research that proves atheists, on the whole, give less, lie more, cheat more, commit adultery more, and generally prove to be less than moral.

However, you are avoiding the issue of what atheism did in the last century. Aren’t you?

May God grant you miracles! Annem

Tell Misericordia to kick me off the volunteer list. Tell the mentoring to read for the spanish and polish public school children in first grade to stop having me there.
I do other volunteering, but not actively anymore for this time period, but will be back on track soon again. I am involved on a local level with the community and the park district. I have lived in the suburbs, and was a Lioness for years.
Don’t ask me to tell you about lying more than you.
Cheating more than you.
Or, especially commiting adultery more than you.
Or, state that I am more “immoral” than you are.

You don’t want to go down that road. Your bible will condemn you for it.

 

[StrawberryJam]

liquidpele

Wha…What? You think only a troll would accuse atheists of what they did in the last century?

Think again.

Actually, please think again and again. The 20th century began with atheists in the western universities proclaiming we would all see universal happiness arrive on a plate once they had taken over.

Father Stephen Kurti was murdered by communists in 1972 for daring to baptize a baby.
Boitel, a Catholic who lived in Cuba, was murdered in 1972 after severe torture and having his back broken.

These were real people who were killed by atheists within living memory. You don’t think we should ponder this or consider it when we talk to atheists??? Are you kidding??

But may God grant you miracles, ANnem

 

[liquidpele]

liquidpele

Wha…What? You think only a troll would accuse atheists of what they did in the last century?

Think again.

Actually, please think again and again. The 20th century began with atheists in the western universities proclaiming we would all see universal happiness arrive on a plate once they had taken over.

Father Stephen Kurti was murdered by communists in 1972 for daring to baptize a baby.
Boitel, a Catholic who lived in Cuba, was murdered in 1972 after severe torture and having his back broken.

These were real people who were killed by atheists within living memory. You don’t think we should ponder this or consider it when we talk to atheists??? Are you kidding??

But may God grant you miracles, ANnem

Okay, you’re starting to be funny now
So when I have my next urge to eat babies, can I call you to talk me down?

 

[Timbothefiveth]

I would also vote Yes, that society needed to challenge religious claims and it needs for now a secular world.

Why? This will further lead to a lack of values, and probably more crime.