Many more people have suffered and died in the twentieth century as a direct result of the actions of atheists than as a direct result of the actions of religious people (Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, Cambodia under Pol Pot, North Korea etc.) If atheism is more enlightened than religion, why did this happen?
2007-04-09 21:44:12 · 20 answers · asked by 2kool4u 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Non believers have more intense of doing bad than those who fear God.
jtm
2007-04-09 21:48:15 · answer #1 · answered by Jesus M 7 · 1⤊ 8⤋
i think that what you're doing here is looking at only certain members of history and concentrating just on a few examples. im religious but ive got a few atheists friends and we get along just fine. it is because now there are more atheists in the world than ever so there is a wider selection of people. if there was a sudden boom in christianity or any other religion, youd find that, that religion was causing both the most enlightenment yet also he most suffering. hope this helps
2007-04-09 21:48:40 · answer #2 · answered by Kman 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
ok this question is a little ignorant and heres why. wether the people are athist or not its more of a judge of charicter than any thing. most of the people are plced into power by freinds who also have power or there born into it. to put it into prospective if youve ever met any one who thinks there better than any one because there parents have lots of money.. then take those people give them an a bomb and controll over a country. there selfish nature will cause the country to fail and the value of life to deplete. although in this centruay many more people have been killed than other its alo due to technoagy many christain kings in the dark ages and crusades would of had a death count prety equivalant to todays rate if they had the current technoalagy. im a christain too but i do not feel a religion has much to do with slaughter counts in countrys sorry.
2007-04-09 21:51:30 · answer #3 · answered by punktillies 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
So, let me get this straight. You are saying that all people in Russia, China, Cambodia, N. Korea, etc. WERE religious until the rulers you mentioned took over, then all the people became atheist? Not sure I understand that, lol
2007-04-09 21:50:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pol Pot attended Catholic School
Stalin attended a seminary and his parents were very religious (although his father use to beat him senseless)
Mao, I can't be too sure.
What these people have more in common than Atheism is Communism. They didn't kill people based on their religion unlike the religious folk.
2007-04-09 23:18:19 · answer #5 · answered by Sarcasma 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wrong. atheism had nothing to do with any of that. Not one person, to the best of my knowledge, was "killed in the name of no God." Quite the opposite. It's interesting that you don't mention Hitler, either, because centuries of Christian antisemitism - both Catholic and Protestant - stoked the fires of the Holocaust, which was after all actually carried out by Europe's most Christian nation.
As for the rest, they were more LIKE religions than atheism, because they encourage(ed) worship of the state and cults of personality, precisely the sorts of things that free thinkers shun. What do freethinkers in oppressive states do? They tend to go along to stay alive, much like the *true* Christians did in Germany and the USSR and still do in China and North Korea.
2007-04-09 21:51:18 · answer #6 · answered by Brendan G 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
athiesm is not a political ideology, nor a security protocol. they all believed 2+2=4 as well but this does not mean mathematicians are murderers or more prone to do such. Religion has plenty of blood on it's hands and none of them did these acts in the name of athiesm, not for athiest causes and not athiest agendas.
2007-04-09 21:53:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A quote by Adolf Hitler for you ....
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)
2007-04-09 22:01:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Materialism.
2007-04-10 01:27:20 · answer #9 · answered by darth_maul_8065 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When atheists kill, it's for their own reasons, not because their gods demand it. These were just evil people who happened to be atheists, like hitler was christian.
Besides: so what? Buddhists are the most peaceful and least violent, certainly better than christians in that respect - does that mean buddhism is the one true religion?
2007-04-09 21:48:55 · answer #10 · answered by eldad9 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Stalin had theological training.
Hitler was a christian (positive christianity was the term he used).
You are very conveniently ignoring all the brutality of religions which are supposed to be just, kind, loving.
2007-04-09 21:50:28 · answer #11 · answered by Iain 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋