Soldier beheaded in Woolwich, UK. Sickening.

[dipper]

How much of the inspiration for the atrocities those people committed was drawn from atheist texts or ideas?

Pretty much 100%.

Marxist utopianism and historical inevitability is remarkably similar in it's justification of atrocities to religious nuttery. For religious nutters it's because deaths on earth are less important than future existences in a mythical eternal heavenly utopia. For utopian nutters it's because the deaths now are less important than the perfect lives of countless generations that will be lived in the mythical future utopian society.

Pol Pot's project, for example, was specifically to wipe away corrupting cultural and humanist influences such as religion and start again with a clean, rational slate leading to a utopian society.

[arrowsmith]

Atheism is quite simply just a lack of supernatural belief. There is no pillars of atheism, no dogma, no tenets, no commandments, nothing.

Naturally it's quite difficult for something like that to compel people to do anything.

You either don't understand what atheism really means or you don't really know anything about the other ideologies that drove those people. Or you were just trying to be smart.

[INXS]

Pretty much 100%.

Marxist utopianism and historical inevitability is remarkably similar in it's justification of atrocities to religious nuttery. For religious nutters it's because deaths on earth are less important than future existences in a mythical eternal heavenly utopia. For utopian nutters it's because the deaths now are less important than the perfect lives of countless generations that will be lived in the mythical future utopian society.

Pol Pot's project, for example, was specifically to wipe away corrupting cultural and humanist influences such as religion and start again with a clean, rational slate leading to a utopian society.

Wow! They sound scary! Are any of them still alive? Should I be worried about them now?

[arrowsmith]

Pretty much 100%.

Marxist utopianism and historical inevitability is remarkably similar in it's justification of atrocities to religious nuttery. For religious nutters it's because deaths on earth are less important than future existences in a mythical eternal heavenly utopia. For utopian nutters it's because the deaths now are less important than the perfect lives of countless generations that will be lived in the mythical future utopian society.

Pol Pot's project, for example, was specifically to wipe away corrupting cultural and humanist influences such as religion and start again with a clean, rational slate leading to a utopian society.

We are talking about atheism which is a lack of supernatural belief of any kind, why are you conflating it with Marxism which is something completely different and of all things proposes revolution.

[arrowsmith]

Those people were driven by their political ideologies not by a lack of belief in any kind of god.

Pol Pot murdered the entire intellectual class of Cambodia of which many would have been atheist themselves.

[closedcasket]

How many of those people were killed in the name of atheism?

How much of the inspiration for the atrocities those people committed was drawn from atheist texts or ideas?

Correlation doesn't imply causation.

OK, than how many were "really" killed in the name of religion? Most wars are fought over material gain, territorial disputes and political ideology. Even on a small scale between people like you and me, people get killed for ripping people off, getting involved in drugs, screwing around in others marriages but not going to their mosque, synagogues or cathedrals.

If you look at 9/11 even...that wasn't a result of religion .... it was Oil and the US having military bases in Saudi...

If you are looking for the real killer...try nationalism?

[INXS]

If you look at 9/11 even...that wasn't a result of religion ....

Oh really?

[iliketurtles]

I'm happy to oppose ignorant atheist zealots, but not because I think they are in any way "worse" than equally ignorant religious zealots. I'm not even sure on what basis you could make such a claim. Worse for whom?

Religious zealotry essentially operates to provide a license for perpetrating what would otherwise be considered heinous acts against fellow human beings. Atheist zealotry seems to consist mainly of removing cricifixes from classrooms, nativity scenes from public property and banning the wearing of certain types of headwear in certain places. Bothersome and silly, perhaps, but worse than, well, you-know-what?

I'm talking more in the context of a discussion, rather than your two options of:

1. perpetuating heinous acts against humanity (in the case of religious zealotry); or
2. removing crucifixes from classrooms (in the case of atheist zealotry).

Be careful. You're falling into the trap Bryant fell arse first into. Your points have been interesting to read and credible, but this is an example of picking the worst of one, and the moderate of another.

[arrowsmith]

I'm not looking for the real killer.

I'm responding specifically to the absurd assertion that atheistic zealotry is worse than religious zealotry.

Let's take the inquisition. Perfect example of where the atrocities committed were because of a doctrine held by the church and other peoples actions thought to be heretical. This was about religion, not politics or economics or anything else.

Can anybody give any kind of similar example where simply not believing in a god has led anything similar? It's impossible.

[closedcasket]

Oh really?

Oil and Money.

Throughout history a lot of wars were waged in the name of some religion...but there was usually an underlying reason.