Atheists why do you all hate Christians?

[F1-Insanity]

I've given this a lot of thought, and compiled a list of things that religion is either completely or mostly responsible for, put in wonderful capitals.

And here's a list of why. Mind you, this doesn't extend all the way back to Mayan times, it's just what I can find off the top of my head. It's very incomplete.

An Incomplete List of Atrocities

Wars

The Crusades.
The Dark Ages.
Every Jihad Ever.
The Troubles.

Persecutions

The Persecution of the Protestants.
The Persecution of the Catholics.
The Persecution of Atheists.
The Persecution of the Jews.
The Persecution of the Muslims.
The Persecution of the Homosexuals.
The Persecution of the Blacks.
Slavery.
The Pogroms.

Needless Death

The Numerous Martyrdoms.
9-11.

Abuse of the Vulnerable

The Indoctrination of the Child.
The Harmful Repression of Sexuality.
The Various Abuses of Children by Clergy, ranging from rape to beating to a thousand others.

Horrifying Organizations

The Lord's Resistance Army.
Al Qaeda.
The Interahamwe.
Aleph.
The Ku Klux Klan.
Abu Sayyaf.
Egyptian Islamic Jihad.
Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The Sons of Freedom.
The National Liberation Front of Tripura.
The Army of God.

Genocides

The Rwandan Genocide.
The Holocaust.

Terrible Practices

Circumcision of Infants (w/o anaesthetic)
Human Sacrifice

Half-related to:

The Exploitation of Mesoamerica.
The Murder of the Natives.
The British Empire.
The Iraq War.

Alot of that is people using religion as an excuse, or to rationalize what they've done

Because the words in the 'religious' books allow for such action, methinks. Certain verses approve of murder, or enslaving folks, or subjugating them etc...

[Dyakovo]

<SNIP Incomplete and inaccurate list

Alot of that is people using religion as an excuse, or to rationalize what they've done

The accurate ones would still be the fault of religion (or more specifically the particular religion that was the justification).

[The Alma Mater]

So... are we still at war, or did we make peace when God gave us his son to kill ?
Almost all humanity vs 1 son, now we are even sort-of-thing ?

No.
I didn't get my Jesus to kill.

Ask God to make another then. I am sure he would not want us to send in the iron chariots.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

Wrong.
There is nothing good out of those that does not come from nonreligious sources as well.
I do not know that the murder rate in Czech republic being mostly atheist is any bigger than in USA (hint hint it is the opposite)
Besides charites are bad - government should take care of everyone, that actually works

I fail to see how you have dis-proven my point.

Religious charities have hooks. You have to listen to their screed as a condition of receiving the charity. Those charitable Catholic monks actually forcibly converted thousands of non-Christians as a condition of their being allowed to live in abject poverty and servitude. A lot of Christian charities only serve other Christians.

Secular charities may have hooks, but I don't think so - if you have a need, they'll help you with it. Actually, the only hook I've seen in many secular charities is that they require that you learn how to help yourself as a condition of getting help from them.

Religious charities don't generally promote self help, they promote dependence because if you're dependent, you have to keep coming back, it keeps you vulnerable and susceptible to their preaching.

You know, I've watched this on numerous occasions. A person or a group undergoes a traumatic experience, say the death of loved ones. The ministry of a particular sect goes into action. In the guise of giving comfort, they approach the bereaved. After a period of hand-holding, head-patting and prescribed platitudes, which doesn't let up, they go in for the kill. Before you know it, in the face of all that prescribed,unrelenting, phony kindness, the bereaved succumbs and converts. It's a false conversion, usually, done in a moment of vulnerability and suggestibility, but it's another notch on the pulpit.

Wow you managed to write all those words and you STILL haven't dis-proven my point.
Organized religion has done good as well as a lot of bad.

[Central Slavia]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

[Risottia]

Debate question 1. Can Gods action that killed off all humanity save Noah c.s. be interpreted as an act of war ?
Debate question 2. Was Noahs a collaborator ?

Currently question 1 is being "debated" by comparing humans exterminating smallpox to God exterminating humanity, and asking if the word war is justified in this context.

Clear ?

Mh.
1.Killing off all humanity is genocide. So, definitely an act of war.
2.Well... yes. He didn't try to save other people than his own closer relatives.

Actually, you don't know that, all that is clear from the story is that the only people he succeeded in saving were his family.

Genesis VI doesn't report anything that could suggest that Noah tried to warn other people. So if we take the Bible as truthful testimony, well, he didn't.

It also does not report anything to suggest that he didn't.

Then you must assume that the Bible wouldn't be taken as a truthful testimony in a trial. "The truth, ALL the truth, and nothing but the truth".
Attorney Jesus of Nazareth, is the defendant, mr.God, trying to hide facts from the scrutiny of the court?

[Tokos]

Who's the berk blaming the dark ages on religion?

[Dyakovo]

Debate question 1. Can Gods action that killed off all humanity save Noah c.s. be interpreted as an act of war ?
Debate question 2. Was Noahs a collaborator ?

Currently question 1 is being "debated" by comparing humans exterminating smallpox to God exterminating humanity, and asking if the word war is justified in this context.

Clear ?

Mh.
1.Killing off all humanity is genocide. So, definitely an act of war.
2.Well... yes. He didn't try to save other people than his own closer relatives.

Actually, you don't know that, all that is clear from the story is that the only people he succeeded in saving were his family.

Genesis VI doesn't report anything that could suggest that Noah tried to warn other people. So if we take the Bible as truthful testimony, well, he didn't.

It also does not report anything to suggest that he didn't.

Then you must assume that the Bible wouldn't be taken as a truthful testimony in a trial. "The truth, ALL the truth, and nothing but the truth".
Attorney Jesus of Nazareth, is the defendant, mr.God, trying to hide facts from the scrutiny of the court?

Considering it is a work of fiction, yes, I would assume that the bible wouldn't be taken as truthful testimony in a trial.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

[Risottia]

Debate question 1. Can Gods action that killed off all humanity save Noah c.s. be interpreted as an act of war ?
Debate question 2. Was Noahs a collaborator ?

Currently question 1 is being "debated" by comparing humans exterminating smallpox to God exterminating humanity, and asking if the word war is justified in this context.

Clear ?

Mh.
1.Killing off all humanity is genocide. So, definitely an act of war.
2.Well... yes. He didn't try to save other people than his own closer relatives.

Actually, you don't know that, all that is clear from the story is that the only people he succeeded in saving were his family.

Genesis VI doesn't report anything that could suggest that Noah tried to warn other people. So if we take the Bible as truthful testimony, well, he didn't.

It also does not report anything to suggest that he didn't.

Then you must assume that the Bible wouldn't be taken as a truthful testimony in a trial. "The truth, ALL the truth, and nothing but the truth".
Attorney Jesus of Nazareth, is the defendant, mr.God, trying to hide facts from the scrutiny of the court?

Considering it is a work of fiction, yes, I would assume that the bible wouldn't be taken as truthful testimony in a trial.

Hence:
case 1) Bible cannot be trusted to be a truthful testimony
case 2) Bible is to be trusted to be a truthful testimony, hence God is a genocide.
That is, either way, I win. YAY!

[Central Slavia]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker[/quote
You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

It is the same as saying there are plenty jewish physicists, but denying that Torah is responsible for their physics skill

[Omnicracy]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

It is the same as saying there are plenty jewish physicists, but denying that Torah is responsible for their physics skill

... no...

Its like saying they can't be a jewish physicist without the existance of Judeism or physics respectively.

Also, the Torah is not responsible for physics skill, so I don't get your point at all...

[Central Slavia]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

It is the same as saying there are plenty jewish physicists, but denying that Torah is responsible for their physics skill

... no...

Its like saying they can't be a jewish physicist without the existance of Judeism or physics respectively.

Also, the Torah is not responsible for physics skill, so I don't get your point at all...

But that is just my point! In the same way the religion is not responsible for the goodness religious folk do as there are nonreligious folk doing it as well

[EvilDarkMagicians]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

It is the same as saying there are plenty jewish physicists, but denying that Torah is responsible for their physics skill

[Omnicracy]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

It is the same as saying there are plenty jewish physicists, but denying that Torah is responsible for their physics skill

... no...

Its like saying they can't be a jewish physicist without the existance of Judeism or physics respectively.

Also, the Torah is not responsible for physics skill, so I don't get your point at all...

But that is just my point! In the same way the religion is not responsible for the goodness religious folk do as there are nonreligious folk doing it as well

Well, if the religous person is inherantly a bad person at this point, then the religousness would probably be why they do good, but I get your point.

[Pinnopia]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

It is the same as saying there are plenty jewish physicists, but denying that Torah is responsible for their physics skill

... no...

Its like saying they can't be a jewish physicist without the existance of Judeism or physics respectively.

Also, the Torah is not responsible for physics skill, so I don't get your point at all...

But that is just my point! In the same way the religion is not responsible for the goodness religious folk do as there are nonreligious folk doing it as well

Well, if the religous person is inherantly a bad person at this point, then the religousness would probably be why they do good, but I get your point.

What? Just because "bad" people have chosen to follow, doesn't mean they corrupt the word to meet their devious needs. I mean, let's say a person likes killing people, well because the Bible says such-and-such people are "evil" it gives him an excuse to be able to kill them. Sure, not by society's laws, but for him it can give him an outlet to do so. Maybe that is too extreme but let's substitute abusing for killing.

[Omnicracy]

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

It is the same as saying there are plenty jewish physicists, but denying that Torah is responsible for their physics skill

... no...

Its like saying they can't be a jewish physicist without the existance of Judeism or physics respectively.

Also, the Torah is not responsible for physics skill, so I don't get your point at all...

But that is just my point! In the same way the religion is not responsible for the goodness religious folk do as there are nonreligious folk doing it as well

Well, if the religous person is inherantly a bad person at this point, then the religousness would probably be why they do good, but I get your point.

What? Just because "bad" people have chosen to follow, doesn't mean they corrupt the word to meet their devious needs. I mean, let's say a person likes killing people, well because the Bible says such-and-such people are "evil" it gives him an excuse to be able to kill them. Sure, not by society's laws, but for him it can give him an outlet to do so. Maybe that is too extreme but let's substitute abusing for killing.

I think you misunderstood something in my post... I was refering to a group of people that only does good because their religion tells them too.

[Nordicus]

Anyway, differences between God exterminating humans and humans exterminating smallpox.

And, a similarity between them: In each case, a being/species exterminated nearly, but not quite, the entirety of a "lesser" species.

I'm not arguing in favor of the Christian viewpoint (I'm an atheist, myself), but I just thought it was worth pointing out. Humans exterminating pests isn't considered war, and what would be the big difference between God's view of a bunch of sinners and our view of a bunch of pests? Food for thought.

Alot of that is people using religion as an excuse, or to rationalize what they've done

and half of your list doesn't have anything to do with religion at all

This, but, at the same time...

I've given this a lot of thought, and compiled a list of things that religion is either completely or mostly responsible for, put in wonderful capitals.

And here's a list of why. Mind you, this doesn't extend all the way back to Mayan times, it's just what I can find off the top of my head. It's very incomplete.

An Incomplete List of Atrocities

Wars

The Crusades.
The Dark Ages.
Every Jihad Ever.
The Troubles.

Persecutions

The Persecution of the Protestants.
The Persecution of the Catholics.
The Persecution of Atheists.
The Persecution of the Jews.
The Persecution of the Muslims.
The Persecution of the Homosexuals.
The Persecution of the Blacks.
Slavery.
The Pogroms.

Needless Death

The Numerous Martyrdoms.
9-11.

Abuse of the Vulnerable

The Indoctrination of the Child.
The Harmful Repression of Sexuality.
The Various Abuses of Children by Clergy, ranging from rape to beating to a thousand others.

Horrifying Organizations

The Lord's Resistance Army.
Al Qaeda.
The Interahamwe.
Aleph.
The Ku Klux Klan.
Abu Sayyaf.
Egyptian Islamic Jihad.
Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The Sons of Freedom.
The National Liberation Front of Tripura.
The Army of God.

Genocides

The Rwandan Genocide.
The Holocaust.

Terrible Practices

Circumcision of Infants (w/o anaesthetic)
Human Sacrifice

Half-related to:

The Exploitation of Mesoamerica.
The Murder of the Natives.
The British Empire.
The Iraq War.

Alot of that is people using religion as an excuse, or to rationalize what they've done

Because the words in the 'religious' books allow for such action, methinks. Certain verses approve of murder, or enslaving folks, or subjugating them etc...

...this, too.

And you have not even addressed mine.
It is fair to say good comes from religious people, but not from religion itself, as it does not increase any good substantially.
Any of supposed good you can think of happens outside of religion as well - as we say in my country, a goodman is not going to be broken by the alehouse, while even a church will not improve a badmaker

You cannot have religious people without religion itself......

Note what I underlined in the post you quoted.

I think you misunderstood something in my post... I was refering to a group of people that only does good because their religion tells them too.

Do you have any proof that such a group exists? I certainly have not seen any.

[Blouman Empire]

You forgot the death of millions in the wars religion has triggered.

Fixed for accuracy.

Might even be over a billion, if you total it all up and include all the genocidal wars described in the Old Testament.

Wouldn't surprise me. And that's not even counting the supposed episode of 'I am throwing a hissy fit and am gonna drown everybody except Noahs family'.

You can hardly use those death in the count since they didn't happen...

The religious people do though.

Except it wasn't because of religion.

[Blouman Empire]

It was because of God.

To smite the infidels.

Where have we heard this before btw?

I don't know where you have heard it nor do I know why you are mentioning it now.

As I say that example wasn't because of religion.

[Mollux]

As a former atheist, I attest that I did not hate Christians when I was an atheist. I'm sure, though, after a thousand posts, someone has pointed out the OP's flamebaiting.

[Blouman Empire]

It was because of God.

To smite the infidels.

Where have we heard this before btw?

I don't know where you have heard it nor do I know why you are mentioning it now.

As I say that example wasn't because of religion.

Noah's Imaginary Flood wasn't because of religion? I have every reason to believe that you fail hard. It was because no one except for Noah believed anymore, so God murdered everybody. What's so hard about that?

You are failing hard because you don't even know why it happened. Though now you are saying it didn't happen but still want to blame it on religion.

Also if what we take is true than the flood is an example of what would happen in the world without religion, everyone would be killed. Now you have a reason to have religion in the world it keeps everyone from being killed. I win.

[Blouman Empire]

Then why did it happen? "Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. " is in the fucking bible. You know what the most 'wicked' thing was, right? Worshiping gods other than the Lord God. (and later, Jeeeeeezus.)

It didn't happen, but I'm saying that even if it did happen, it was the fault of religion. It doesn't matter whether it's christianity or anything else, you fail so hard that [insert witty analogy here].

Genesis 6: 11-13 but everyone else was evil in God's sight and violence had spread everywhere. God looked at the world and saw that that it was evil, for the people were all living evil lives. God said to Noah, "I have decided to put an end to all people. I will destroy them completely, because the world is full of the violent deeds.

Now listen carefully this had nothing to do with religion it was God, see the difference? It was not the fault of religion you have not shown that, and stooping to petty catch words will not win you an argument. And if you belive it didn't happen why did you bring it up as an example?

[Tokos]

I'm very interested in learning how you turned faith. Was it because of Pascal's Wager? Blind fear? A hallucination that happened to come along at the right time? Failing to use reasoned logic?

Let me guess… anything you don't like is a "hallucination"?

[The Tofu Islands]

The Dark Ages.

Not a war, also not really religion’s fault.

Slavery.

Not religion’s fault (more to do with economic benefits).

The Rwandan Genocide.

Ethnically motivated, not religiously motivated.

The Holocaust.

Based on race and perceived genetic inferiority, mostly.

The Iraq War.

Oil =/= religion...


Plus, for all of these and other similar arguments:
These do not give a reason to hate religious people in general.
Things like this may give reasons to dislike specific groups or individuals, but not the religion as a whole.

I'm very interested in learning how you turned faith. Was it because of Pascal's Wager? Blind fear? A hallucination that happened to come along at the right time? Failing to use reasoned logic?

No srsly I want to know.

This is basically the reason I really dislike some atheists.

Look, if you want to appear nice and better then religious folks, this is about the worst possible thing you can do. There’s no need to accuse anyone who disagrees with you as being irrational or hallucinating.