Zone1 Why do so many atheists seem to want to attack religion?

[hobelim]

The Trinity is not a mystery to be solved. It’s a relationship to be entered into.

Yes, you described it in great detail, "the soul bursting at the seams" which to me sounds like a mind being broken. Now I am not saying you are not having a profound spiritual experience, its just not a very good one.

Dying every time you defy the Law of God, never finding peace in death. Week after week after week. Whee!

Personally I prefer to keep my soul intact. But you go on and enjoy the experience. Week after week after week.

Just one question. Since you have entered into this "relationship" with a trinity, when in your entire life have you seen or heard a single word or peep from it? Any dreams, visions, or revelations from this almighty edible god?

Being in a long relationship with an edible trinity whose wisdom is beyond compare, by now you must be full of it.


Wanna share?

 

[SweetSue92]

Meaning can be subjective, Sue. It doesn't have to have some objective universal relevance. It just has to be meaningful to you. You don't have to live forever for your existence to have been meaningful. It happened. You lived. You loved, and that's sacred even after we are all gone.

You can make meaning out of whatever you like. Objectively, in the end, you're a sack of stardust on an outbound rock destined for worm food.

 

[SweetSue92]

What, no fire and brimstone? What's "an outbound planet doomed for destruction"? Outbound from where? Or were you just being redundant?

In a far suburb of our galaxy.

 

[Grumblenuts]

In a far suburb of our galaxy.

So are we outbound to a more urban district or one more rural?

 

[Anomalism]

You can make meaning out of whatever you like. Objectively, in the end, you're a sack of stardust on an outbound rock destined for worm food.

Is that a problem? To me, that wouldn't make life any less. It would possibly make it even more miraculous.

I don't see objective meaning as being necessary for your life to have meant something. The subjective is enough.

 

[onefour1]

Why do so many atheists seem to want to attack religion?​

Because it goes against their religion!

 

[ding]

Yes, you described it in great detail, "the soul bursting at the seams" which to me sounds like a mind being broken. Now I am not saying you are not having a profound spiritual experience, its just not a very good one.

Dying every time you defy the Law of God, never finding peace in death. Week after week after week. Whee!

Personally I prefer to keep my soul intact. But you go on and enjoy the experience. Week after week after week.

Just one question. Since you have entered into this "relationship" with a trinity, when in your entire life have you seen or heard a single word or peep from it? Any dreams, visions, or revelations from this almighty edible god?

Being in a long relationship with an edible trinity whose wisdom is beyond compare, by now you must be full of it.


Wanna share?

That’s exactly the response I’d expect from a religious nutjob attacking a rival religion.

 

[ding]

Ding Baloney!

Some atheists may believe that. Some theists may believe in purely physical gods. Some people believe in the Easter Bunny.

Meanwhile, by definition, atheists simply lack belief in gods:

What is Atheism?

Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods. It is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about a person.

www.atheists.org

(And, if you're not a bot, Bot Verification)

Not baloney. Cold hard fact. Atheists believe the only thing that exists is the material.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Atheism is not a monolith, so I'll acknowledge that before it even goes there.

Many though, in my opinion, behave just the way I'm describing. Atheism sometimes feels less like its own worldview and more like a reaction to religion; a counter-brand built against theology rather than something for itself. If faith brings peace and meaning to so many decent people, why disrupt that? Why try to hurt people with what you believe to be a devastating truth? Shouldn't the truth of its devastation trigger your empathy to restrain yourself? Is the pursuit of being right worth more than compassion? Can skepticism coexist with kindness, or does it always have to provoke conflict?

Could we maybe respect belief without surrendering critical thought? What do you think? Is there a middle ground, or is this a cultural war destined to rage forever?

The obsession to prove theists wrong isn’t bravery. It’s insecurity framed as enlightenment, and tribalism framed as skepticism. Why chain others with the burden of your disbelief? If your cause is truth, why inflict suffering in its name? Maybe some people need their faith to survive. Maybe your relentless assault only feeds their fear and resentment.

So what are you really fighting for?

You're asking peole to speak for a lot of other peole.

Okay.

Maybe because of the negative effects of religion we see every single day?

 

[Anomalism]

You're asking peole to speak for a lot of other peole.

Okay.

Maybe because of the negative effects of religion we see every single day?

Speaking for yourself is enough. I don’t believe religion causes evil so much as it often gets used to justify it. People find rationalizations for what they already want to do, whether it’s political, economic, or emotional. Without religion they'd just reach for another excuse. History shows us that even atheistic regimes have committed massive atrocities. The problem isn't belief in God; it's human nature misused through power and fear. Instead of blaming religion wholesale, maybe the better question is "What is it in human beings that keeps repeating this pattern, regardless of the belief system?"

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Speaking for yourself is enough. I don’t believe religion causes evil so much as it often gets used to justify it. People find rationalizations for what they already want to do, whether it’s political, economic, or emotional. Without religion they'd just reach for another excuse. History shows us that even atheistic regimes have committed massive atrocities. The problem isn't belief in God; it's human nature misused through power and fear. Instead of blaming religion wholesale, maybe the better question is "What is it in human beings that keeps repeating this pattern, regardless of the belief system?"

Me, I don't go out of my way to attack religion. If it comes up, I will mock it.

Also, you should draw more of a distinction between atheism and religion.

The pattern arises from human beings being hardwired both to believe utter nonsense and to want a magical daddy figure. All of those "atheist regimes" to which you allude: those were nearly all very much religious regimes, with the head of state holding a godlike status or literally being viewed a god. Look at North Korea. Most religious state on the planet, and their gods are the Kims.

 

[Anomalism]

Me, I don't go out of my way to attack religion. If it comes up, I will mock it.

Also, you should draw more of a distinction between atheism and religion.

The pattern arises from human beings being hardwired both to believe utter nonsense and to want a magical daddy figure. All of those "atheist regimes" to which you allude: those were nearly all very much religious regimes, with the head of state holding a godlike status or literally being viewed a god. Look at North Korea. Most religious state on the planet, and their gods are the Kims.

Even if we take atheism out of the equation, my point still stands.

I don’t disagree that humans have a tendency toward irrational belief, or that some regimes elevate leaders into godlike figures. That’s actually part of my point. Even when traditional religion is absent, the structure of belief and obedience often stays the same. It’s not religion per se. It’s the human impulse to hand over autonomy in exchange for certainty or belonging. That impulse can take religious, political, or even scientific forms.

I’m not equating atheism with religion. I’m saying that authoritarianism doesn’t require a god. It requires fear, conformity, and unchecked power. Those are human patterns that show up across history, across ideologies. So yes, mock religion if you want, but the deeper issue isn’t belief in a magical sky daddy. It’s what humans do when we stop questioning ourselves and start moralizing power. That’s the repeating pattern.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Even if we take atheism out of the equation, my point still stands.

Unless your point was that religion very much had a hand in those massacres you claim were by atheist administrations, i dont think it does stand.

Because it did have a part in likely all of them. And this is the base problem i have with religion:

Nurturing our hardwired flaw that gives us affinity for believing utter nonsense can and usually does creep its way into every facet of the believer's life.

If you truly believe in a zombie king Jesus or a perfect human Mohammed, odds are you believe plenty of other embarrassing nonsense.

That's why we should be training young minds with logic and skepticism, not foisting a childish, magical paradigm on them before they are smart enough to know better.

Do this, and religion dies on the vine. No direct attacks necessary.

 

[Anomalism]

Unless your point was that religion very much had a hand in those massacres you claim were by atheist administrations, i dont think it does stand.

Because it did have a part in likely all of them. And this is the base problem i have with religion:

Nurturing our hardwired flaw that gives us affinity for believing utter nonsense can and usually does creep its way into every facet of the believer's life.

If you truly believe in a zombie king Jesus or a perfect human Mohammed, odds are you believe plenty of other embarrassing nonsense.

That's why we should be training young minds with logic and skepticism, not foisting a childish, magical paradigm on them before they are smart enough to know better.

Do this, and religion dies on the vine. No direct attacks necessary.

You ignored my actual framework, reduced my point to a single clause, then pivoted back to your monologue. This seems like a deflection with contempt layered on top.

You're so locked into refuting a claim I never made that you’re missing the actual point. I'm not saying religious belief can't cause harm. It clearly can, and has. What I am saying is belief in falsehoods, magical thinking, and authoritarian worship are not unique to religion. They’re human vulnerabilities. The core problem isn’t “religion” as a label. It’s the uncritical surrender of thought to ideology, power, or group identity. The danger isn’t belief; it’s blind belief. If you want to train young minds in logic and skepticism, I agree. Just don’t pretend that irrationality only wears a robe and carries a cross.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I don’t believe religion causes evil so much as it often gets used to justify it.

Is this not your framework? I directly addressed this. I think the tendency to nurture religion -- whether it involves sky gods or mangods -- can cause people to do bad things. This speaks to religion, not just to Theism.

The problem isn't belief in God; it's human nature misused through power and fear.

Is this not your framework?

I also spoke to this, or at least tried to do so. I think that, while belief in God alone doesn't cause much at all, I think that it spreads like a virus through some people and just minces the skeptical part of the brain, which is something that is trained, not inherent.

I would agree that Theism alone is generally benign. And you will never catch me trying to convince someone there is no God. if I could make a wish, it would be for all the religious people of the world to be reduced to simply theists.

 

[Anomalism]

Is this not your framework? I directly addressed this. I think the tendency to nurture religion -- whether it involves sky gods or mangods -- can cause people to do bad things. This speaks to religion, not just to Theism.

Is this not your framework?

I also spoke to this, or at least tried to do so. I think that, while belief in God alone doesn't cause much at all, I think that it spreads like a virus through some people and just minces the skeptical part of the brain, which is something that is trained, not inherent.

I would agree that Theism alone is generally benign. And you will never catch me trying to convince someone there is no God. if I could make a wish, it would be for all the religious people of the world to be reduced to simply theists.

I can sense you're being genuine. I apologize for my tone before.

I don't think religion is inherently a catalyst for these things, or for those types of people. I think that's just what some people, a lot of people, do. It looks like religion, but really, it's just people.

Why do you think people are like that?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I can sense you're being genuine. I apologize for my tone before.

I don't think religion is inherently a catalyst for these things, or for those types of people. I think that's just what some people, a lot of people, do. It looks like religion, but really, it's just people.

No worries

Sure, it's people. What else, though?

So we look at the people. Surely we agree that Ahmed -- who did a VERY GOOD thing for Allah by blowing himself and 10 Israelis up at a bus stop -- wasn't genetically predisposed to being a murderous, suicidal, evil maniac. In fact, he was quite sure he was doing a good thing.

How did he come to believe something so immoral was moral? Because he believed his god and prophet said so.

Not simply because he believed in God, right? We agree there.

The religion caused it. And yes, while I think economics is a factor (your god sure looks purty, when I am starving, and you have a samwich), religion still dominates. Look at the 9/11 hijackers. Many were established professionals. They had good day jobs.

The evil is found in the dogma, which itself IS the religion. "Believe (these), and you win yourself a ticket to the forever festival!"

If you accept this proposition as virtuous and true, you're likely to accept a great many beliefs that are neither.

This was the carnival barking in the primitive times of our species.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In atheism, you can pretend your life has meaning, but in the end, you're a bag of stardust on an outbound planet doomed for destruction and then, worm food.

I am not pretending. My life has exactly as much meaning as I give to it. that's one of the liberating parts of not answering to an imaginary sky dictator.

Giving your entire life meaning to a sky dictator fantasy, and then ending up stardust anyway?... no thanks.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Not exactly.

From my Atheist Alliance link above:

Spot on.

 

[Anomalism]

No worries

Sure, it's people. What else, though?

So we look at the people. Surely we agree that Ahmed -- who did a VERY GOOD thing for Allah by blowing himself and 10 Israelis up at a bus stop -- wasn't genetically predisposed to being a murderous, suicidal, evil maniac. In fact, he was quite sure he was doing a good thing.

How did he come to believe something so immoral was moral? Because he believed his god and prophet said so.

Not simply because he believed in God, right? We agree there.

The religion caused it. And yes, while I think economics is a factor (your god sure looks purty, when I am starving, and you have a samwich), religion still dominates. Look at the 9/11 hijackers. Many were established professionals. They had good day jobs.

The evil is found in the dogma, which itself IS the religion. "Believe (these), and you win yourself a ticket to the forever festival!"

If you accept this proposition as virtuous and true, you're likely to accept a great many beliefs that are neither.

This was the carnival barking in the primitive times of our species.

I hesitate to reduce something as complex and tragic as suicide bombings to “religion did it.” That kind of reduction flattens a deeply layered reality into a convenient scapegoat, and risks misunderstanding the actual drivers of violence, which makes it more likely to repeat. Suicide bombings, especially in the contexts you mentioned, are not purely religious acts. They're political, social, psychological, and existential. Religion may shape the justification, but it's not the root cause.

Many suicide bombings are strategically deployed in asymmetrical conflicts, when a weaker group fights a stronger one. Hamas, Hezbollah, and other militant groups have used suicide attacks not because their religion tells them to, but because it is one of the few tactics available to them. It’s a method of resistance or warfare, not a religious ritual.

Recruitment into suicide missions often occurs in highly traumatized, impoverished, and hopeless communities. People don’t join out of abstract theology. They join because their families were killed, their dignity was crushed, and someone gave them a story that reframes their pain as heroism. Religion becomes the wrapper, but the emotional content is loss, rage, and despair.

The same psychological patterns that lead to cults, nationalist extremism, and even gang loyalty also show up in religious radicalization. It’s not faith; it’s belonging. It’s having someone offer you certainty, purpose, glory, revenge, or redemption when you feel powerless or ashamed.