Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the

[DiogenesDog]

Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the
mass murders of history

By Dinesh D'Souza
RANCHO SANTA FE, CALIF. – In recent months, a spate of atheist books have argued that religion represents, as "End of Faith" author Sam Harris puts it, "the most potent source of human conflict, past and present."

Source: Christian Science Monitor

This my reddit comment to the article cited above.

Well, there go the bona fides for the CSM. This paper must change its name if it can not live up to the principles that Christian Science implies, i.e, that submission to a literal and condemning form of social control in the name of a religion is not what the first teacher had in mind. Science is a process that results in reproducible outcomes. Christian Science originated in ideas that the practice of an inner positive morality, reflected in ones worldly activities and is capable of being shared with others of like mind. This was in fact, the whole basis for a new social interaction in the years between the death of the original teacher and the ascendancy of the Roman state church to monotheism in the name and nature of a nonentity, Christ. Christ is a condition, not a person. Jesus was a teacher not a god. In that capacity and legacy, He is far superior to the qualities and superstitious constructs that have been created in the name of religion or hierarchical statist social control.

Theism is a superstition wrapped in a method of social control. Atheism is not without a concept of a greater power. It is that the power in question is not an elderly, robed and bearded fellow sitting on high and calling shots. The Greater Power is the accumulation of all the bits of power that are manifest in a mysteriously intelligent and seemingly intentional cosmos. Secondarily, that which is human is an artifact or perhaps even a precondition of something even more mysterious and wonderful. It is all up to the intentions, actions and outcomes of the former, the current and the future manifestations of man or something better. Man is a speck of possibility or more generously a component of that which will come.

Dinesh is a priest of superstition. CSM has either generously allowed his comments as a Zen like lesson or they have abandoned the prime directive of Christian Science. The result of which is that they may no longer be publishing in truth but rather in superstition.

Morality is a peculiar human trait and condition. Everyone is moral in either a negative, life taking or positive, life affirming way.

Dinesh may mean well, but his method is couched in certitude and arrogance not worthy of his intention.

I must vote this up so as to expose it to the rigors of truth that will prevail.

Otherwise, I would not be a good . . .

Lantern Bearer

I AM

 

[mattskramer]

This is just more of the absolutist divisive “we versus them mentality”. Define your terms and definitions to support your agenda. Count your beans. For the sake of argument, lets assume that more violence has been done in the “name of atheism”. SO what?

 

[Shogun]

what a goddamn joke.

 

[midcan5]

DiogenesDog, I'm missing the point? Whatever it is you are trying to say it is over my head. Please bring it down a notch so I can figure out if all is lost or there is a glimpse of hope.

 

[Avatar4321]

This is just more of the absolutist divisive “we versus them mentality”. Define your terms and definitions to support your agenda. Count your beans. For the sake of argument, lets assume that more violence has been done in the “name of atheism”. SO what?

So what? it counter's the claims of militant athiests who are falsely claiming that religion is responsible for more violence and thats why religion should be done away with.

Isnt it amazing how it no longer matters when it doesnt support your position?

 

[Diuretic]

d'Souza's premise is stupid. Atheism doesn't motivate mass murders or wars. In fact atheism is probably totally irrelevant to the motivations. But I can also make the same claim when it comes to allegations that religion is the reason for mass murders or wars.

I suspect that religion has been an excuse for mass murders or wars. If I want to take over a neighbouring country to grab their natural resources and I have a mediaevalist population, are they going to give up their lives to make me, their ruler, rich? Nope. But if I tell me our god demands it, watch them saddle up.

Joe Stalin, Mao, atheists both, slaughtered millions. Not in the name of atheism but in the name of power.

This demands a more subtle analysis, d'Souza is filling space.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

d'Souza's premise is stupid. Atheism doesn't motivate mass murders or wars. In fact atheism is probably totally irrelevant to the motivations. But I can also make the same claim when it comes to allegations that religion is the reason for mass murders or wars.

I suspect that religion has been an excuse for mass murders or wars. If I want to take over a neighbouring country to grab their natural resources and I have a mediaevalist population, are they going to give up their lives to make me, their ruler, rich? Nope. But if I tell me our god demands it, watch them saddle up.

Joe Stalin, Mao, atheists both, slaughtered millions. Not in the name of atheism but in the name of power.

This demands a more subtle analysis, d'Souza is filling space.

Bullshit. It is plain and simple. There is no nuiance you can spin on it. The attempt to vilify religion fails over and over and your response is, "gee, those guys didn't do it cause of athiesm they just did it for power."

 

[Shogun]

d'Souza's premise is stupid. Atheism doesn't motivate mass murders or wars. In fact atheism is probably totally irrelevant to the motivations. But I can also make the same claim when it comes to allegations that religion is the reason for mass murders or wars.

I suspect that religion has been an excuse for mass murders or wars. If I want to take over a neighbouring country to grab their natural resources and I have a mediaevalist population, are they going to give up their lives to make me, their ruler, rich? Nope. But if I tell me our god demands it, watch them saddle up.

Joe Stalin, Mao, atheists both, slaughtered millions. Not in the name of atheism but in the name of power.

This demands a more subtle analysis, d'Souza is filling space.

exactly, filling the space between th ears of militant christians who don't like the fact of their bloody history. Hell, I can see the re-writing of hisotry now: English puritans fleeing England for fear of religious persicution, NOT BY OTHER CHRISTIANS, but by godless athiests...

 

[AllieBaba]

Atheists use the name of God to put a face on their most vile actions, it's a fact. They do it to discredit Christians, God and to give themselves credibility.

More specifically, I believe true monsters of history were in fact non-Christian, regardless of what they called themselves. Hitler toyed with the concept of God, but I believe he didn't believe in God. He simply used the beliefs of others to suit himself.

THe Inquisition was also the result of politics meeting religion, with politics winning, and putting a religious face on it. Does this mean religion is at fault? No, it means evil can infiltrate any establishment. Which is actually a call for devoutness.

 

[Shogun]

what you believe and what is reality may very well be two different animals. If you don't like the history of your religious affiliation then too bad. trying to elude the fact of 1500 years of christian domination wont make it any less of a fact.

Hitler spoke out of both sides of his mouth like a politican but, clearly, at some level he self identified with christianity, if not the catholic church.

Now, just to show you that I'm not giving you the lion treatment, I would like to suggest the following if you are a documentary sort of gal. I caught it at our local independant theatre and it's quite a compelling story about a christian who stood up to the nazis.

http://www.bonhoeffer.com/

 

[AllieBaba]

Actually, I'm proud of the history of my religious affiliation. What upsets me is the way others attempt to minimize the accomplishments, while attributing all sorts of evil to God, religion, and Christians.

Evil doesn't come from God or from Christianity. It comes from evil men, influenced by evil forces. But people who don't see the difference between right and wrong and who don't believe in God can't see that.

 

[Shogun]

sure, becuase the extent of "true" christianity only extends to how much benevolence can be paraded around while trying to ignore the horror that christianity has caused for millions in the name of god. Your affiliation is not pick and choose. You can claim that jim jones wasnt a true christian but such also applies to you according to the opinion of your fellows who may choose to prune the tree and exclude you for whatever reason seems viable. European christianity caused some very dark times and it wasn't just because THEY weren't true christians. Modern christianity has had it's dirty hand in it's own modern version of the cookie jar and still the status of personal christianity is not erased just because YOU don't agree with their actions. This really is the punchline behind the range of denominations. You may think you are more of a christian than fred phelps but, I assure you, he thinks the same about your so called faith. Trying to distance your dogma from its witch burning past won't make it any less true. You can't just claim the christianity in the first 100 years of our nation were simply NOT real christians just because they could rationalize lynching slaves without pissing off the bible.


Now, christianity is not inherently evil. The church does benevolent things even if they are wildy misguided. BUT, to try and cast off the history of violence within the couple thousand years of christianity just because you see atheism as a foe is a complete fucking joke.

 

[AllieBaba]

No, Christianity hasn't "caused" anything evil. Evil people have done evil things, sometimes in the name of Christianity. And the purpose of that is to create the sort of havoc we can see here, right on this board...to make people question God and believe that God can be anything but good and righteous, and to attack people for their belief in God.

Nobody is trying to cast off anything. But it isn't Christian tenets which lead to anything evil.

And I don't know if it was in this thread or another where the article about Baptists refusing water by AB ran, but I'd like to point out that I'm a Baptist, and that was a wrong decision made by somebody. Maybe a group of somebodies. But it was wrong, and that happens because we are, after all, human.

Our pastor was just "fired" by the church because he wasn't loving enough towards the congregation. Though I think the major reason we fired him was because he had odd (to a Baptist, VERY odd) ideas about whether or not eating in the church was appropriate. He didn't like us to have potlucks, dinners, give away food to each other, etc., based out of our church.

Now THAT'S unloving! Forget that he entered into a discussion about what those of other beliefs think constitutes technical homosexuality during a Sunday school session which included, among those attending, kids who had no idea what they were listening to.....don't deprive Baptists of their food!

 

[CharlestonChad]

Atheism doesn't tell a person how to act. Religion does. I don't see how atheism can be a driving force behind violence when it has never been considered as justification for acts of violence. On the other hand Muslims, Jews, and Christians are at war in the middle east because their religions tell them to act and think differently. Terrorists justify their attacks because of Allah. The Crusaders justified attacks because of the Bible. The South justified racist killings because of the Bible. If Atheism had a goal, or even a doctrine, then the author's claim might be reasonable.

 

[Shogun]

bullshit. you may not accept it like the mother of a convict insisting that her kid is innocent but...


the fact remains.


witch burning christians were still christians.

Crusading christians were still christians.

Conquistadors were STILL christians.

Slave owning whites were STILL christians.

the klan are STILL christians.

like I said, distancing yourself by insisting that christiany has never caused evil is a total fucking farce. If you are catholic This is doubly true. We can paruze some popes if you like...

 

[AllieBaba]

But it isn't Christianity that CAUSED them to behave in an evil way. It isn't Christianity which CAUSES bad things to happen. They made those choices themselves. Don't lay it at the door of Christianity or God, because those two aren't the culprits.

 

[Shogun]

uh, then it's not the ATHEISM that CAUSES bad behaviour either, eh? why is this only a one way street?

Face it. If a bastard self identifies with christianity and uses the bible like a club he is still a christian even if you don't agree with their behavour. FRED PHELPS is a christian. By all means, have your opinon about the validity of denominational interpretation but stop trying to deny that christians using christianity to validate crap are not christians and do not reflect on christianity. They are, It does, and that's the historic fact. There is a reason why conquistadors forced catholicism onto south americans. There is a reason why slavery happened in what you would otherwise call a chrstian nation. There is a reason why our current support of Israel looks damn close to the original crusades. Deny it all you want to but the same logic that allows you to write off muslim life as collateral damage in a war on terror despite your supposed pro-life christiany is the exact same process that allowed every other inhumane campein acted upon by CHRISTIANS following the dogma of the day.

and yes, dogma CAUSED this shit by remaining the, uh, rock by which clashing social identity is rationalized. Ask the peagan druids of the british isles about the benevolance of st. patrick.

Hey, not all christians are evil. Some are quite benevolent... But, in this case, history isnot on your side.

 

[AllieBaba]

I think people who are not under the influence of God are open to evil, simply put.

And history does not bear out the premise that Christianity has caused anything. History bears out the premise that there are evil people, that Christianity can be made to look bad by those evil people, and that bad people will take advantage of that to try to convince people to steer clear of Christianity.

 

[Shogun]

Hey, it's clear that you identify with christianity and have a stake in polishing the turd. So be it. Say what you will but CHRISTIANS have historically acted in heinous way BECAUSE of their identification with christianity as well as rationalizing damn near anything via broad interpretations of dogma. I don't really care if you think that there were no valid christians during the crusades. Suffice it to say that THEY thought so and so did the people they were out trying to kill for the sake of claiming jerusalem.

or burning the witch.

or conquering south america.

whatever. there are too many to list individually. despite your insistance otherwise even.

 

[AllieBaba]

They thought that way because they allowed themselves to be swayed by evil people.

I have a stake in Christianity sort of the way you have a stake in promoting atheism. Which is nothing more than promoting ANTI-Christianity, and challenging people's belief in an all-seeing and all-powerful God.

The problem with that, is it encourages people to stray from the path..which in turn leads to big problems. Like the ones you have listed.

The problem isn't with Christianity in and of itself. THe problem occurs when politicians use Christianity to further their own agendas. See list below.