Why have the religious killed more people than the atheists?

Answer 1

I don’t think religion kills people but belief does.
Most religions have a basic be tolerant and good to each other message.
A friend and I had this discussion the other day and came to this conclusion.
Belief is a funny thing people would kill, die and fight for belief but not for facts or logic.
A good example of this is early Christians who froze to death on lakes when put there by the Romans (all they had to do to walk was denounce their faith), However I would very much doubt you would have got the same response if they had said 2 + 2 = 3 and you can walk.
I think without fail all would have said yes 3.
Faith it seems is one of those counter intuitive things that can make humans override even the survival instinct and ultimately do terrible things in the name of.

Answer 2

Um, you have heard of the Cultural Revolution and the Killing Fields, right? And the Gulag? And The Terror?

I guess if religious killing is numerically larger - and I'd like to see the numbers before I believe this - it's because religion has had more time. Stop criticizing the atheists for falling down on the job - eventually, they'll catch up.

And, of course, you're discounting the possibility that we won't all find a new reason to kill each other off. I wouldn't go that far.

Answer 3

A common criticism which atheists raise against religion is how violent religion and religious believers have been in the past. People have slaughtered each other in large numbers either because of differences in religious beliefs or because of other differences which are further justified and intensified through religious rhetoric. Either way, religion has a lot of blood on its hands. Can the same be said for atheists and atheism? Haven't atheists killed more people in the name of atheism than religious theists have killed in the name of their religion? No, because atheism isn't a philosophy or ideology.

Answer 4

Because people take the word of God and misunderstand it. Tally up how many generals killed. Tally up how many people kill for money, pride, land, ideas. Then count how many people out of those numbers said they were "religious" . Then look into how their "religion" instructs them to behave. Now ask your self if you really think they were "religious"? Christianity did not kill, people did. If I tell you I'm a tree, does that mean I am a tree? You know what to look for to know if I'm a tree or not, and if you learn what it means to be "religious" then you would see that not everyone who says they are religious really are of faith. Jesus said that religion holds man back from God and faith brings them closer. Also if you really want to get technical, if you count how many people died from bombs and guns, and things like that you will actually find that the "atheists numbers are way higher then you "believed".. Who makes these things? Scientist. Do they count as "atheists"? I thought atheist meant that one has no religion or faith.?

Answer 5

The people defending religion against mass murder always quote the same old names,eg.Hitler, Mao, Stalin and so on.
Yes, it's undeniable that those people were mass murderers but they only lived a lifetime. Most religions as institutions have had a couple of centuries to practise and perfect their trade. I think it's a reasonable conclusion that 2000 years unremitting slaughter will far surpass that of a handful of tyrants.
For me the true question is; If these gods are so all powerful, peace loving, benevolent, paternal etc., etc., why do they allow it to go on?.

Answer 6

Because the corrupt use "religion" to justify their actions and convince people that "god wants this war". Most of the atrocities committed in the name of religion were committed by people with a very warped understanding of the religion. Jesus never sanctioned, torture or burning people alive, yet Christianity is tainted by those who did evil in it's name.

Also, considering until relatively recently, atheists were a tiny minority of the population. Racism, hatred and intolerance are the main causes of violence and murder, all of which are prohibited by Jesus's command to "love your neighbour as yourself". Can a religion that bans such things be held accountable for those who defy the ban?

Most wars are started because of greed (natural resources, like Iraq's oil, profitable pilgrimage routes (the Crusades)) or national pride (Nazism, the Cold War, etc).

Answer 7

Relatively speaking, I believe that religious people kill no more than atheists. However, since religious people are always saying how they need their belief in almighty beings to keep them moral it makes you wonder how many more people they would kill if they did not have their God.

Answer 8

Do you realize how many times this question gets asked? probably 2 - 3 times a day. I would say that most of your answers are copy and paste from previous times that people have given.

You are new to Y!A

Your question also shows your bias. your mind is made up before the question is asked.

I haven't seen the "Pick your Nose" club for a few months now. When they see a question that is a repeat, somewhere in the answer the use "pick your nose" and the number of times they have seen it in the last week. Hey guys I got this one first

Answer 9

Can you back that up with some statistics?
The former Soviet Union was "officially" atheist, and killled alot of people, China is also "officially" athiest, and they as well have committed thier share of atrocities.
It isn't about religion, or athiesm, it is about black or white with the people who do these things, a mentality that says "If you ain't fer me, you must be agin me". That alone is sufficient reason to people like that to massacre anyone they see standing in thier way, regardless of thier professed spiritual orientation. The phrasing of your question displays such a bias.

Answer 10

Religious people know the truth more clearly than others. When they see bad things happening in front of them, they try to prevent it, in that process few people get killed. Whether it is right or wrong has to be studied in depth on a case to case basis.