Those peace loving White Supremacists are at it again

[unixman]

USSR - officially atheist - killed more humans than any other regime in history. It was born in a pogrom of 40 million people, and was one of the most aggressive nations ever known, oppressing its people, building walls to keep its own "citizens" from escaping, and creating vast Ghulags to imprison dissenters without trial, forever, while the leaders - what a surprise - lived in luxury.

[Gibbon]

True. But espousing discrimination against people holding religious beliefs is not ridicule - and may well be rooted in irrational hatred. Some individuals on this site (MicrosoftBob is one example) seem to have an irrational kneejerk antipathetical response toward anything religious. I.e. just because it's anti-religious doesn't mean that it's not irrational.

Politically atheistic regimes in the 20th Century totted up millions of deaths. Extreme ideologies of any kind result in mass murder. Religion is just one particular flavour. I'd contend that the idea that religion naturally leads to murderous ideology is not proven. Rather I think an ideology becomes murderous either when the ideology is considered to be more important than individual people, or when the ideology labels non-subscribers to be less than human. The latter might indicate that while ridicule and lampooning should generally be tolerated, there is a point where it can become dehumanising, so even ridicule isn't unrestrictedly a good thing.

Ridicule might well be born out of irrational hatred.

Some good points. I agree that to ridicule individuals to the point of dehumanising them is morally reprehensible.

I personally have no real problem with people following whatever beliefs they want, I have a problem when it becomes political or they try telling us how to behave or what is acceptable, then their ideas are open to examination and ridicule if applicable.

[Paddy]

USSR - officially atheist - killed more humans than any other regime in history. It was born in a pogrom of 40 million people, and was one of the most aggressive nations ever known, oppressing its people, building walls to keep its own "citizens" from escaping, and creating vast Ghulags to imprison dissenters without trial, forever, while the leaders - what a surprise - lived in luxury.

You mean Stalin. He was from Georgia and former priest.

[WordIsBond]

Has it happened yet? We have thousands of years of killing in the name of God, have we any concrete examples of an atheist version of a crusade or jihad?

Jeffrey Dahmer was an atheist who said he killed because he didn't believe there was a God to hold him accountable, but there is no evidence he actually targeted religious people for their religion.

Mao Zedong certainly applies, he considered religion an enemy of the state and brutally targeted religious people simply because of their religion, intellectuals, etc, to try to impose his philosophies.

Joseph Stalin destroyed thousands of churches and had more than 100,000 priests and nuns shot. He also was an atheist who went on a "jihad" to impose his views on hundreds of millions.

Kim Jong Il. Pol Pot.

It's ludicrous to suggest atheists have their hands clean or haven't used force and violence in the name of their beliefs.

[WordIsBond]

You mean Stalin. He was from Georgia and former priest.

Actually not true. He was in seminary but was an atheist and never became a priest.

Would be irrelevant if it were true. If an atheist becomes a Muslim and kills people because of his beliefs, you don't blame atheists because he was a "former atheist." If a former priest becomes an atheist and kills people because of his beliefs, you don't blame priests because he was a "former priest."

[original PM]

Yes, someone shoots a congregation in a Christian church and it is the fault of Christians.

In other news London was to blame for the blitz, the Jews were to blame for the holocaust and Africans were to blame for slavery.

Is it to much to ask to say 'that is sad news' rather than having a go at the victims?

Strange you should say that because slavery has been rife in Africa for thousands of years - the white slave traders bought the slaves that came to the US from black slave traders - they did not go and 'steal' people.

So in essence yes blacks were to blame for slavery.

[EternalOptimist]

I reckon they weren't praying. probably doing some cartoons or something and got what was coming to them.
If they were cartoons of mohammed (peas be upon him), he'll probably get off with a caution

[NotAllThere]

Some good points. I agree that to ridicule individuals to the point of dehumanising them is morally reprehensible.

I personally have no real problem with people following whatever beliefs they want, I have a problem when it becomes political or they try telling us how to behave or what is acceptable, then their ideas are open to examination and ridicule if applicable.

I entirely agree.

[Unix]

This is about racism and the availability of guns in the U.S. These shootings happen almost monthly whereas other countries with gun controls very rarely. Only the American right idiots can begin to justify this.

[d000hg]

Given the kind of vitriol you see "religion should be banned" etc, it does seem likely there are people out there who might go on a spree in the name of demonstrating how bad religion is.

I thought China had come closest to trying to stamp out religion as a kind of "atheist crusade", it was certainly strongly suppressed for a time. Maybe N. Korea also? But they tend to do that wanting to replace religion with some sort of "emperor/state worship" rather than for the sake of atheism.