Cyberguy's Blog

Encouraging religion to "beget" off!

Repeating the lie

In the NZ Herald column “Sideswipe” today they claim that “20th century was the bloodiest in human history and its violence was largely instigated by atheists”.

My response to columnist Ana Samways is as follows:

Ana

The comment in Sideswipe today that “the 20th century was the bloodiest in human history and its violence was largely instigated by atheists” is totally false. A quick google search would have disabused you of this outrageous slander against atheists that is spread by religious ideologues despite repeated rebuttals.

Hitler was never an atheist. He was born into a Catholic family, and he never renounced his Catholicism.

Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were all Marxist-Leninists. All three dictators attempted to control religion to suppress any alternative viewpoint that might threaten their own political personality cults. Their brand of communism was essentially a secular religion that required subservience to “the state” instead of a god.

Shame on you for repeating this piece of bigotry against the non-religious.

Regards,

20 responses to “Repeating the lie

  1. tobeforgiven May 15, 2012 at 12:27 pm

    I agree that the attrocities commited were not commited because of Atheism. This is a silly arguement, but that they were commited because of bad people doing bad things.

    The problem is that Atheists will not say the same. It is common that bad folk will use atheism, Marxism, and even Darwinism to validate their bad world view.
    The same can be said for Christianity. That folks like Hitler, or the midevil popes used religion as an excuse for their actions.

    Perhaps we should stop blaming ideology and start blaming the actions of bad people.

  2. sminhinnick May 15, 2012 at 12:33 pm

    @tobeforgiven
    You say “It is common that bad folk will use atheism, Marxism, and even Darwinism to validate their bad world view.” Who uses atheism and Darwinism to validate their bad world view? Examples please.

  3. onefuriousllama May 15, 2012 at 12:53 pm

    The only ‘bad folk’ that I know of that ever tried to use ‘darwinism’ as an excuse for anything was a nice devout Catholic man called Adolf Hitler.

    Religion: equipping people to deny reality since 8000BC.

  4. tobeforgiven May 15, 2012 at 12:55 pm

    A good example of the use of Darwinism to validate a bad world view could be taken from Darwin’s own son (Leonard) and his work in the eugenics movement. The eugenics movement was a creative was of executing genocide on inferior races. All of this was based on a social application of Darwin’s “Descent of Man.”

    As far as Atheism is concerned, I have recently skimmed “Socialism and Religion” by Lenin. while calling for religious tolerance he sets the stage for religious persecution by claiming that religion is antithetical towards human progress, as was the arguement for Marx (Religion as the oppiate of the masses). This thinking influenced the religious persecution in most communist societies.

    President Calles in Mexico and the constitution of 1917 resulted in a great amount of religious persecution. Calles being an atheist, calling for an atheist country.

    There was a good deal of persecution during the French revolution, while not in the name of atheism, it was in the name of “reason”. As during this time the revolutionaries took over the Cathedral at Notre Dame drove out the priests and renamed it the Temple of Reason.
    This persecution involved deportation, violence, death, and forced marriage for Christians and Clergy.

    The thing is, I don’t blame atheism for any of it. Power, control, money, and often insanity would be better things to blame.

  5. synapticcohesion May 15, 2012 at 1:12 pm

    “Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were all Marxist-Leninists. All three dictators attempted to control religion to suppress any alternative viewpoint that might threaten their own political personality cults. Their brand of communism was essentially a secular religion that required subservience to “the state” instead of a god.”

    Which means being an atheist is irrelevant because they may have reject God/gods, but are making gods out of ideals and concepts. Proof positive that there is nothing that makes being an atheist better than not being an atheist.

    “Hitler was never an atheist. He was born into a Catholic family, and he never renounced his Catholicism.”

    He doesn’t need to. Catholicism is not inherited; you practice it.

  6. tobeforgiven May 15, 2012 at 1:37 pm

    Your right!
    That is why I didn’t use Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, or Hitler as examples.

    By your arguement, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot having not renounced their Atheism would then be considered Atheists.

    As Hitler, having never renounced his Catholicism (though if you read “Table Talks” or study the persecution of the Catholic Church in Poland or that of the Neo-Orthodox Movement you might begin to think twice about how he renounced it by his actions).

    Your saying that the first three could not be considered Atheists because they were not pure atheists (as they believed in personality cults).
    Then you are also saying that I cannot use the same arguement to say Hitler was not a Christian (I actually have yet to make that arguement, but for the sake of discussion I will make it now).

    While Hitler called himself a Christian, his actions and the way he ran the reich church could not be considered Christian by any widely held Christian theology.

    • synapticcohesion May 15, 2012 at 3:51 pm

      “By your arguement, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot having not renounced their Atheism would then be considered Atheists.”

      No–they’re atheists because they were openly radical fundamentalist atheists who murdered and persecuted Christians and other religious people en masse and established oppressive, atheistic regimes where people lived in fear of practicing their religion.

      “The main point to be made about totalitarianism is it cannot stand competition.”

      sminhinnick, admit it–they were fundamental atheists. Like Hitler, they could have used the church to gain support and gain power and control, but as radical atheists, what they wanted was to eradicate religion. Oh, and you also unwittingly lend credence to conspiracy theorists who say that the purpose of the atheist movement is to make worldwide totalitarianism easier and all the more possible by eradicating religion (i.e., competition).

      • sminhinnick May 15, 2012 at 9:45 pm

        @synapticadhesion – You are also repeating the lie. Here are the facts.

        In 1933, Hitler outlawed all atheistic and freethinking groups in Germany. The German Freethinkers League, with a membership of about 500,000, was disbanded and its national headquarters “converted to a bureau advising the public on church matters.” Their former Charman, Max Sievers, was tracked down and guillotined by the Nazis for “conspiracy to commit high treason.” His offenses including writing against the 1933 Reichskonkordat treaty between the Nazi government and the Catholic Church.
        (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Freethinkers_League)

        Doesn’t sound like Hitler was very atheistic to me.

        Here are more quotes from Hitler about religion. You might want to educate yourself on this subject so you don’t look so foolish again. http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/09/list_of_hitler_quotes_in_honor.php

        The money quote: “I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so” [Adolph Hitler, to Gen. Gerhard Engel, 1941]

        For some fun watch HITLER: THE ATHEIST (Quiz Show): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YP_iNCGH9kY&feature=plcp

      • synapticcohesion May 16, 2012 at 3:54 am

        Read what I wrote more carefully. I did not say that Hitler was an atheist. I said that Stalin et al., were fundamental atheists but that they could have easily gained control and power by using the church just as Hitler did.

        Why am I even arguing with you? To you, atheistic mass murder and oppression means “no one is perfect.” So much for morals and ethics being independent of God.

      • sminhinnick May 16, 2012 at 7:05 am

        synaptic, it doesn’t matter if they said they were atheist or not. Whatever. The whole point is Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot did not commit their crimes because of atheism.

      • synapticcohesion May 16, 2012 at 5:32 pm

        “it doesn’t matter if they said they were atheist or not. Whatever. The whole point is Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot did not commit their crimes because of atheism.”

        Wait…what? Wasn’t your post a complaint about a religious person falsely labeling these vicious killers as being atheists? But now that you have to admit that they are atheists…it suddenly doesn’t matter to you that they are atheists.

  7. sminhinnick May 15, 2012 at 2:31 pm

    The main point to be made about totalitarianism is it cannot stand competition. For some of the dogma’s (mainly Marxist ones) the church was a rival that could support a resistance movement – so had to be suppressed. For Hitler, the church was something to be controlled and then used as a means to control. The control or suppression of religion by these regimes was essentially done for political control, not atheistic reasons.

    In other words there is no logical line that takes you from atheism to totalitarianism. But totalitarianism, not known for its fairness or honesty, will use any means or excuse at its disposal to implement social control.

    Atheism should not be tarred with the same brush, just as you cannot blame moustache-wearers for the crimes of Hitler and Stalin, just because they also had moustaches.

  8. sminhinnick May 15, 2012 at 9:53 pm

    @synapticadhesion
    “…they were openly radical fundamentalist atheists who murdered and persecuted Christians and other religious people en masse and established oppressive, atheistic regimes where people lived in fear of practicing their religion.”

    Well, nobody’s perfect.

    • synapticcohesion May 16, 2012 at 3:45 am

      “…they were openly radical fundamentalist atheists who murdered and persecuted Christians and other religious people en masse and established oppressive, atheistic regimes where people lived in fear of practicing their religion.”

      >>>Well, nobody’s perfect.”<<<

      Need I say more? :o

      • sminhinnick May 16, 2012 at 7:00 am

        Don’t worry synaptic, I’m not laughing with you.

      • synapticcohesion May 16, 2012 at 5:24 pm

        I’m not laughing; I am appalled.

      • sminhinnick May 19, 2012 at 11:45 am

        @Synapticconfusion
        You must be an American, because you completely missed that my statement was meant in deadpan jest. When you read it, you should have spat your coffee across the keyboard. Perhaps the Kiwi humour was too straight-faced for you – think Flight of the Conchords humour. Next time I will put a smiley for people like you whole don’t get deadpan.

        Obviously those communist dictators were fanatical murdering assholes.

        But the Second World War, and the Cold War that followed were not wars about bringing atheism to the masses. They were about what political system was ultimately going to control this planet – fascism, communism or democracy.

        Those wars were not driven by religion, and if you think it was then you are uninformed. But both religion and atheism were used as tools by those leaders. Additionally It is a sad fact that European Catholicism overall was quite receptive to fascist ideology, and the Russia masses had been conditioned to religious servility for centuries which Stalin readily redirected to become servility to the state.

        I am debating the claim that “the 20th century was the bloodiest in human history and its violence was largely instigated by atheists”. This is a slur against atheists in exactly the same way it would be a slur if it said “the 20th century was the bloodiest in human history and its violence was largely instigated by moustache-wearers” because both Stalin and Hitler had moustaches.

        Why is that so hard to understand?

        Summary: There is no path that leads from atheism to genocide – in the same way that there is no path that leads from moustache-wearing to genocide.

      • synapticcohesion May 19, 2012 at 1:51 pm

        “Summary: There is no path that leads from atheism to genocide – in the same way that there is no path that leads from moustache-wearing to genocide.”

        But anyone claiming to be a Christian while committing genocide–well, then that means it must be a result of Christianity! And atheism might not have been the only motivating factor, but it was a major factor/agenda nonetheless.

  9. sminhinnick May 19, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    “But anyone claiming to be a Christian while committing genocide–well, then that means it must be a result of Christianity!”

    Only if the motivating factor is religious – and there have been plenty of sectarian conflicts in recent decades. Northern Ireland, Bosnia, all over the Middle East, India-Pakistan. Are you denying these conflicts are not primarily founded in religious differences? I am not targeting Christianity, but all religion,.

    “And atheism might not have been the only motivating factor, but it was a major factor/agenda nonetheless”.

    That’s an evidence-free assertion on your part.

  10. Naveta Magar June 27, 2012 at 5:15 am

    Thanks so much for the awesome post. This is just what I needed to
    read

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 59 other followers

%d bloggers like this: