you call your self grown up and believe in fairy tale??
are you even a honest theist??

i see that you've been here quite a while now and got lost and you just came back from the dead..
just like your zombie jesus..

i think myk will take care of you...
chow...!!

@AJ777
Love to..do you know any adults?

Looking at your posts so far you are just making ill researched, ill thought out fanciful statements designed to irritate.

As YOU are making the claims about Atheism being a religion YOU have to prove that claim.

Simple stuff, dictionary definition followed by the widest used atheist dogma.

YOU are making claims about atheist killings

Names of the murderers, numbers killed and evidence that they were 'card carrying' atheists would do as a start.

That's how "grown ups' start a discussion. With reason logic and facts.

If it is too hard for you, please, carry on screaming in an inarticulate manner and being a big fat dick, Nyar nyar.

which mass killing are we talking about?

why would you generalize atheism as to mass murderers??

"the question i get asked by religious people all the time is, without god what's to stop me from murder all i want?
and my answer is: i do murder all i want, and the amount i want is zero. the fact that you people (theist) think
that if they didn't have this person watching over them that they would go on killing and raping rampages is the most self-damning thing i can imagine"

~penn jillette

do you cherry-pick your bible AJ??
do you feel honest with that attitude?
come on!!

@ AJ777
Prove your claim first then we can discuss.

"Western societies laws and rights are built upon Judeo Christian ethics. "

Like Nazis Germany you mean?

" Millions of people were murdered in Russia alone under a leader who was a professed atheist."

So what, he was also trained in a seminary as a priest? Did you know Stalin boasted he had modelled is secret police on the christian Jesuit order because he was so impressed with their ruthless adherence to dogma and doctrine? It was a totalitarian regime, do they generally respect the rights of the individual do you think? The tsars murdered as many, and they claimed to rule by divine right, and were the head of the christian church in Russia. Is this your argument for a deity, the absurd lie that theistic regimes kill slightly less than totalitarian regimes like Stalinism?

Then of course there was Nazism and Hitler, a christian regime, Hitler was a catholic, claimed it all his life, even right at the end when all political mileage was long lost from the claim. The RCC was quick to form a concordat with Nazism, and they celebrated Hitlers birthday at a special mass every year in churches all over Germany until he died. The SS only recruited theists, and in Germany only recruited christians, you had to be a christian to be considered.

Are these tried old mendacious cliches all you have?

My morality shoots for a little more, and in the democratic west the countries with the lowest instances of violent crimes like murder and rape are atheistic or secular governments like Sweden, Norway, Japan etc. Explain that if you can?

@AJ777: Millions of people were murdered in Russia alone under a leader who was a professed atheist.

I think the real philosophy of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and others wasn't atheism but totalitarianism, strongly spiced with paranoia. All power was absorbed into these leaders, who set themselves up as personifications of the state. Totalitarianism cannot abide rivalry of any kind. Religion challenges totalitarianism by offering a god or a savior as a leader above everything in this world. Indeed, religion also has its own history of totalitarian theocracies and collusion with tyrannies. It's no wonder Christianity was seen as a threat.

@AJ777 "Western societies laws and rights are built upon Judeo Christian ethics."

I disagree. The US Constitution was set up to keep religion out of politics. Read the facts. Also, the fact that the first laws enacted were not the ten commandments is relevant.

I also suggest you read some good books, such as Winston Churchill's "A History of the English-Speaking Peoples". In it he describes the evolution on law and it's application. One that stands out is the drive for a person under trial to be judged by his peers. That basic concept is in direct opposition to the religious doctrine of authoritarian control by one or a very few.

The Medieval times were uber-religious, everything was dictated by religion. In those days one who stood charged stood before the lord of the domain and it was that person who rendered a judgement. That is how religion applied laws.

AJ777, is this how you conduct yourself, perpetually throwing monkey poo at a wall hoping that eventually something would stick? Your bold assertions have been shredded each time you advance something.

@AJ777
The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" The two parts, known as the "establishment clause" and the "free exercise clause" respectively, form the textual basis for the Supreme Court's interpretations of the "separation of church and state" doctrine.[37] Three central concepts were derived from the 1st Amendment which became America's doctrine for church-state separation: no coercion in religious matters, no expectation to support a religion against one's will, and religious liberty encompasses all religions. In sum, citizens are free to embrace or reject a faith, any support for religion - financial or physical - must be voluntary, and all religions are equal in the eyes of the law with no special preference or favoritism

There is also: Article 6
Article Six of the United States Constitution provides that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States".