When will the world get it? Enough already!

55 posts / 0 new
Last post
AJ777's picture
So, the response is to name

So, the response is to name call, and insult? How does that refute my statements? Is there an honest atheist on this forum that would like to have a grown up conversation?

Tin-Man's picture
@AJ777 Re: "Is there an

@AJ777 Re: "Is there an honest atheist on this forum that would like to have a grown up conversation?"

Honest atheists?.... Uh, sure. There are PLENTY on here. Thought that was rather obvious. *scratching head*.... OH! I see now! Must have been a typo. You actually meant to ask, "Are there any honest THEISTS on here who would like to have a grown up conversation?" *chuckle* That's okay, buddy. We understand. Honest mistake. Had me confused there for a moment, though, I admit. *chuckle* But - uh - no, I can't really say I have seen much of any honest theists on here lately. Sorry. Wish I could be of more help. Feel free to look around, though. Maybe you can find one somewhere. Hey, stranger things have happened. *shoulder shrug*

mickron88's picture
you call your self grown up

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...

Sheldon's picture
Your statements don't need

Your statements don't need refuting, you have offered no evidence to support them, Hitchens's razor applies. Nothing you have posted suggest you want any conversation, grown up or otherwise, and you started with insults, so it's hilarious to turn crybaby now.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture

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.

AJ777's picture
So, all of you fellows are in

So, all of you fellows are in agreement that atheism has never been a worldview that has contributed to any mass killing?

mickron88's picture
which mass killing are we

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!!

Sheldon's picture
"So, all of you fellows are

"So, all of you fellows are in agreement that atheism has never been a worldview that has contributed to any mass killing?"

Atheism is not a worldview, and since you have provided no evidence that not believing in a fictional deity motivates mass murder there's nothing to refute. Unlike your deity of course, which the bible claims committed genocide, and ethnic cleansing on an almost casual basis, it's almost a banality in most of the old testament.

Is murder objectively wrong then, or do you only get hysterical when an atheist commits murder?

So much for objective morality.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ AJ777

@ AJ777
Prove your claim first then we can discuss.

AJ777's picture
Western societies laws and

Western societies laws and rights are built upon Judeo Christian ethics. You also don’t murder because if you did, the police would probably eventually arrest you and lock you up for life. We do have someone other than God watching over us. Police, and I’m thankful for them. Millions of people were murdered in Russia alone under a leader who was a professed atheist.

Sheldon's picture
"Western societies laws and

"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?

Old man shouts at clouds's picture


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

And millions more by the Christian monarchs....your point?

algebe's picture
@AJ777: Millions of people

@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.

TheBlindWatchmaker's picture
And even if that is the case

And even if that is the case and one person in the form of Stalin was an atheist,
what was the religion of the million of those who carried out the acts?

The same argument is placed upon Hitler, Despite his actually being catholic.

Regardless of that, The vast majority of German Nazi soldiers were religious,
With the ultimate goal was to create a unified protestant reich church.

Let us not forget also, with whom both Communist Russia and Nazi Germany's first concord was with, The Vatican.

mykcob4's picture
Again and this has been

Again and this has been proven over and over to you on this forum. The laws that govern this nation are explicitly NOt Judeo-christian. They are specifically and intentionally SECULAR. The Treaty of Tripoli plainly explains that very fact.
At issue is not the treaty itself — it exists and is well-documented. What is at issue is Article 11 of that treaty, which says that the United States and Tripoli should never enter into hostilities because of religious differences. Sounds innocent enough, but the phrasing used in the preamble to the Article has made it controversial.

"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion," the Article begins. And so, for those who advocate for the complete separation of church and state, the article is seen as an early vindication of the position, especially since the treaty was approved by a Senate that recently approved the Bill of Rights.
The letter by Jefferson to the Bapatist preacher also proves that fact.
U.S. Constitution › Article VI
Article VI
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Again AJ777 you are dead wrong!

mykcob4's picture

Actually, Putin is a Russian Orthodox Catholic.

David Killens's picture
@AJ777 "Western societies

@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.

mickron88's picture
who's leader is this? can you

who's leader is this? can you prove it to us that this happened? or is this more likely hear-say-cherry-picking-blame-atheist thing?

seems like i understand what you're trying to do here..

"eventually arrest you and lock you up for life"
about this though..
i think before i act, i consider my self as likewise with the others...
i'm not like you. you just follow orders. if your god commanded you to murder your child. would you do it?
of course you'd do it..you follow your god don't you? don't be hypocrite AJ..

and thats moral??......AJ? moral really??

LogicFTW's picture
The original US laws were

The original US laws were built on separation of church and state, and I am aware of many other western societies that did the same.

So you are saying you rely on police and not your god? That is actually a reasonable logical assumption. Good job!

If you want to play the "leader" was a professed atheist game. Shall I start a list of people murdered by professed theist leader?
I can, copy and paste in a list. I warn you though, the list is long and depressing. You are going to wish real quick that you never brought up such a stupid argument.

AJ777's picture
TW, your claim is that us

TW, your claim is that us laws are based on separation of church and state? Explain. Qu@si, I don’t understand your post.

LogicFTW's picture

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".

Sky Pilot's picture


"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"."

No one paid any attention to that.

Article 1 Section 18 of the 1789 Georgia State Constitution = "Section 18. No clergyman of any denomination shall be a member of the General Assembly."


algebe's picture
@AJ777: Atheism is the opiate

@AJ777: Atheism is the opiate of the people.

Your paraphrase of Marx is illogical. Marx described religion as the opium of the people because he saw it as an empty, deceptive, addictive substitute for the improvement of life in the real world.

Religion helped to sustain tyrannies by offering the masses a dream of paradise to keep them from rising up against their oppressors. George Orwell uses the character of Moses the raven in "Animal Farm" to symbolize this idea. Napoleon also recognized this aspect of religion, which he thought was "great stuff for keeping the common people quiet."

You're trying to blame atheism for the crimes of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.. Are you not aware that the professed atheism of communist regimes was a reaction to the criminal collusion of religions in the despotic regimes that were overthrown by communists? Communism was itself the diseased product of the toxic environment created by god's anointed and the priesthood that supported them. The theocratic Czarist regime made life so foul for the masses that communism seemed like a good idea.

Whatever else atheism is, it can't be accused of being other-worldly. Atheism doesn't offer sweet illusions to cover up a harsh reality. That's the role of religion.

Cognostic's picture
Gods, in the form of shared

Gods, in the form of shared beliefs, are some of the things that kept clans, tribes and later communities together. Yes, they were myths but they served a purpose in the human psyche. The real question is this: What will replace the God myth? What perception of the human condition is useful enough and powerful enough to overcome the God myth and still serve the social function of forming a society. We have moved from clans, tribes, colonies, countries, but what is next? 1/3 of the world's population is Muslim and another 1/3 is Christian. These are identifying characteristics that act as barriers to outsiders and cohesion to believers. And, these extend beyond mere countries.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.