Peril for Western Democratic Institutions

If you're going to blame religious people for wars fought by religious people than you have to take responsibility for atheist regimes. If you don't you're hypocrite.

Atheism is not a religion nor a political system and is purely a personall choice.

Yes non religious regimes have committed heinous crimes against humanity but that is not a DOGMA accepted by most people like Religious Dogma is.

OK how can I put this to you. The bible is full of stories on how not all races are equal. God and the tower of Babel is a lesson in racism.
Baptists hate Mormons, Catholics and JWs and vice versa. Muslims hate Christians and vice versa. Catholics hate protestants. Sunis hate Shias. Hindus hate muslims and muslims hate hindus.

Only the saved (must belong to the pertinent church) will go to heaven; the rest can sod off.

The Southern Baptist church condoned slavery and justified it through the Bible (they did apologise for this hundreds of years later).

People have blown themselves up in the name of God.

People have committed suicide in the name of god (kool aid)

God tells the Israelites to massacre whole tribes.

Christians and Jews believe Muslims are Cain's offspring and thus are not deserving of human status.

Really now must I go on?

Religion is not a political system and is purely a personal choice. Unless it is forced on you


This to me and atheist writer/philosopher Daniel Dennet isn't an unacceptable viewpoint and is a blatant double-standard. You're asking religious people to be held accountable for crimes committed by religious leaders, but when it comes to crimes committed by atheist leaders or regimes you say they were a different kind of atheists, they don't believe what I believe. How would Christians fair if they said "The Europeans who conducted the Crusades weren't like us, they weren't following Jesus' message of love and peace. Therefore you can't hold me accountable."

OK, what is the issue here? Is it to compare crimes committed by atheists and the religious? NO! My point is that religions advocate separation and intolerance.

I am not talking about crimes I am talking about dogma. For example: Baptists believe that only they will go to heaven; and many other creeds also advocate that their way is the only way to heaven thus inherently seeing other creeds as not worthy. Perhaps a good indication is the many different churches within Christianity. Although all Christian faiths are based on the same Bible; they do not meet eye to eye.

My opinion is that; Religion is inherently flawed due to the total absence of the very being in whose name the faiths are based on.

If God is an existing being then let him once and for all clarify to the human race his intentions and stop this great misunderstanding that has caused such social unrest and injustice.
You do make some points that I totally agree upon in principle. It matters not how many one murders! Murder is murder and body counts are just a numerical indication and do nothing to increase or lessen the evil of murder.

German cities were fire-bombed and razed to the ground with total disregard for the civilians.Surely they were not all accountable for Hitler's crimes?

If you lived in Taliban held territory; you would be hard pressed to disregard their dictum! Fear is the key here; and religions play this card very well.

I personally am acquainted with good people of all faiths and will not condemn them on their beliefs nor will accept that they shall be damned for eternity simply because they are not born again or whatever.

You brought it up -- "People have been killing each other for religious reasons for millennia."

Let me repeat what is very strong point. In The Origin of Species Darwin wrote that blacks were less advanced than whites, and their birth rates should be controlled so they will eventually go extinct. I -- as someone who believes in the theory -- definitely doesn't agree with that and assume you don't either. It's completely analogous to how many Atheists think that a few verses in a religious doctrine about separation and intolerance means that all people who follow that religion subscribe to them.

I'll grant you that most Theocratic countries subscribe to sexist and racist beliefs that are in their doctrine. I can't defend that, I am against theocracies.

When it comes to "salvation" Baptists feel they will go to the same place as Anglicans, Lutherans, etc. and vice versa. You might have a point about Catholicism, I think they believe that they are going to heaven and the other sects aren't. I don't know for sure, but with regards to most of the other sects, all -- although some differ on certain nuances -- believe that "accepting Jesus as your personal saviour" is enough to get into heaven, even if you don't believe in 6-Day creationism.


Is Socrates' teaching disregarded due to the Socratic Problem? No, people still see the teachings as valuable even if Socrates didn't write them. The same is true for God.


Correct me if I am wrong, but I gather that your point is that murder is evil no matter how many people you do or don't kill? I agree in principle, but under the law how "evil" a murderer is and their punishment is determined by body count -- of course there are other determining factors, but body count matters.


Of course not, but I don't understand your point.


The "fear card" is played everywhere in society. Teachers threaten students to help them do better for themselves and parole officers do the same thing for the same reasons -- religion is no different.


If they're "good people" why challenge their fundamental beliefs and risk losing that side of them?