An Atheist that claims his science is better than another science. And will use violence to prove it. Science willing.

I couldn't get very far with that article. The subject matter completely aside, his writing style made my skin crawl. I'm going to see if I can find some of these debates on video. Is he as whiny and myopic in person? I'll find out...

fantastic post, Winston.



If not for the Theological & Pedagogical tradition that organized religions fostered for the, shall we say, "Well to do" or Literate sub groups through the ages ... the advances of Science, Medicine, Visual and Philosophical Arts would not exist.

The Cultivation of Gnosis has always been a carefully guarded aspect of the human psyche. Which IMHO, is similar to, and directly linked to survival of the species. Think, group dynamics, politics, property ownership and immortality all rolled into one.

Those who wish to remain in power or survive, control the Knowledge... It has only been usurped during times of revolution (enlightenment) where the "new" interpreter (or theory) of Knowledge arrives... resulting in conflicts (spiritual or political)... and the eventual shifts of systems to fit the needs of the culture of society at large.

Is it Intellectual Laziness?
No, not totally... Politics most definitely.

I'd guess that the death toll of official atheism -- in the form of 20th and 21st century communism -- is larger. Depending which figures are used, just one century of communism has a death toll approaching 100 million.

I'd also recommend being careful about what to include as religious conflicts. For example, the bloodshed in Ireland is frequently described as sectarian, but its origins have to do with economics, class and ethnicity, rather than an argument over an interpretation of religious doctrine. It's just that the religious labels are the easiest way to tell one side from the other. (As I've posted elsewhere, it could just as easily be labeled a linguistic conflict, since people on one side tend to pronounce the eighth letter of the alphabet as "aitch" while folks on the other tend to say "haitch." Yet no one ever blames the alphabet for the conflict!)

But you're quick to dump communists and their killing on the shoulder of athiets. How convinient. I could make an argument that communists of the 20th century had an economic agenda and not an athiest agenda.


I always tend to make the point that power-grabbers and other low-class slimeballs have used religions of all stripes in the past to get their way and have killed millions.


As an example, you could say the Islamic invasions of India were more about economics, since Arabs wanted India's loot, and not so much about spreading their faith. For me, it hardly matters that they looted India of its wealth...they also killed and converted millions at the point of their swords and desecrated thousands of Hindu and Buddhist temples, monastaries, and libraries of ancient knowledge.

India's history of Islamic invasions reads very similar to what happened to Native Americans in North and specially South America. Spanish conquistadors wielded a sword in one hand and Bible in the other. They proclaimed that God was on their side in all their savageries. They talked themselves into murders thinking that they are doing "God's work" and are assured a place in "Heaven."

__________________


Is it ghey that I love this song so much?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl_Wc6Nm8lc

I guess you could say I'm not as jaded about "stuff" such as enduring love yet...

You'd do well to follow your own advice. Many of those killed under communist regimes were the targets of ethnic cleansing. Atheism had little to do with it. Too often religion, or the lack thereof, is used as cover for another agenda. Even the Crusades, which had the imprimatur of the church were more about wealth and land than religion.

__________________
“Stupidity has a certain charm - ignorance does not”

we're on same page on this one!

__________________


Is it ghey that I love this song so much?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl_Wc6Nm8lc

I guess you could say I'm not as jaded about "stuff" such as enduring love yet...

Well, of course. Communism had an economic and social agenda. But implementing it required the destruction of belief in any other authority. Hence the specific targeting of independent religious institutions and teachings throughout the Soviet empire, communist China, Cuba and Cambodia.

As it turns out, the Communists were right about the need to dominate the belief systems of their subjects. It was, after all, primarily faithful members of the Catholic Church who finally drove the Soviets back home to Russia without firing a shot.

There seems little basis to dispute the centrality of atheism to the communists in both philosophical and practical terms.

Ethnic cleansing is primarily a post-communist phenomenon. The most famous case, that of Yugoslavia, arose after the evaporation of the communist police state that had kept a lid on the country's various ethnic tensions.

It's a far leap from that to mass murder. Castro managed to contain the influence of the church without resorting to Stalinist tactics. Is there true religious freedom in Cuba? No. Is there a big pile of dead catholics? Again, no. It's not atheism or religion that kills. Nor is it communism. It's tyranny.

__________________
“Stupidity has a certain charm - ignorance does not”