Atheists destroy churches, attack the faithful

Of course, TBD is committing a very common fallacy called "cum hoc ergo propter hoc", a.k.a. "correlation does not imply causation"

His contention is that, because brutal dictators such as Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin were all atheists, that its their atheism that caused them to commit genocide.

Well, it is also a fact that Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin wore moustaches... so I could make a correlation, that moustachioed dictators were likely to commit genocide, and this correlation has every bit as much validity as TBD's. In fact, my correlation is more valid, since I can point to another brutal dictator who was moustachioed, and committed genocide; Saddam Hussein. He was a Sunni Muslim who believed in God (and invoked his name on many occasions). Therefore, he was NOT an atheist....

Oh Dear..... How sad...... Never mind!

Literally the same insipid argument was previously made in this very thread a tbd literally destroyed in by pointing out that neither mao nor xi have moustaches. What they do have? Official statements and programs designed to destroy religion

Might want to read the thread before you let tbd dunk all over you.
 
Last edited:
One more time: please walk us through the process by which you arrived at these contradictory positions.

Fourth time of asking, while I'm here: have you organised a boycott of Chinese goods with your church? If not, why not? You're being extraordinarily tight-lipped on this subject. Do you work for Huawei, by any chance?

Yawn. The unyielding marxist atheist line was not propaganda.

I aint the subject of the thread, but nevertheless have previously explained what I have done to fight these atheist monsters. Read the thread, folks, trust me y'all arguments aint anywhere near as clever as you think they are.

By the way, accusing me of working for Huawei, and not doing enough to fight the atheist scum in China, by an actual apologist for the Chinese Government is the type of next level hypocrisy that we can all enjoy.
 
Last edited:
Yawn. The unyielding marxist atheist line was not propaganda.

Because? You missed the part where you explain why it's more than 'because I say so', or 'because it's convenient for my arguments.

I aint the subject of the thread, but nevertheless have previously explained what I have done to fight these atheist monsters. Read the thread, folks, trust me y'all arguments aint anywhere near as clever as you think they are.

No, you haven't. We've gone over this before. You have done literally nothing.

By the way, accusing me of working for Huawei, and not doing enough to fight the atheist scum in China, by an actual apologist for the Chinese Government is the type of next level hypocrisy that we can all enjoy.


Liar.
Quote me defending the Chinese government if you disagree with that epithet. Do you want me to link to the numerous times where I have unequivocally condemned the Chinese government, to emphasise your blatant and shameless dishonesty?
 
Because? You missed the part where you explain why it's more than 'because I say so', or 'because it's convenient for my arguments.

Because the claim that it was was made up out of whole cloth by you, not me, and the proponents of that claim have fully failed to support it let alone prove it, while i have directly quoted the entire statement and shown it to be a warning and a threat.

Just think the progress we could make if one were to apply the same standards to one's fellow travelers or one's own positions. It is your claim yet it is entirely based on 'because Cosmic yak says so', or 'because it's convenient for cosmic yak's arguments.

Gotta tell you, when you were typing that out, did you feel the creeping unease of full scale irony and hypocrisy?
 
The reality is that Atheists turned the 20th century into genocidal nightmare of unprecedented proportions. (...) Atheists are the new monsters.

Is it because of the genocide of the Jewish people? Because of the extermination of the kulaks? Because of the mass murder of communists in Indonesia? Or because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Tokyo and Dresden?

I don't think it's because of atheism.
 
Last edited:
Is it because of the genocide of the Jewish people? Because of the extermination of the kulaks? Because of the mass murder of communists in Indonesia? Or because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

I don't think it's because of atheism.

No, it was because of Stalin and Mao and Pol pot and atheism.

And it is continuing with Xi and atheism.
 
The reality is that Atheists turned the 20th century into genocidal nightmare of unprecedented proportions. The fact that you had to go back 400 years for pathetic whataboutism is very, very telling.

You are looking into the abyss and it is staring back. Atheists are the new monsters. Take a look at what is happening in China, today.


While we all like to point fingers at our favorite boogie man, things are decidedly more complex.

Religion and State Failure: An Examination of the Extent and Magnitude of Religious Conflict from 1950 to 1996
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0192512104038167

Genocide is an ethnic conflict, and......

From Results (p66)
"Another important aspect of the results is that it is ethnic conflicts that are most likely to be religious. Overall, 47.6 percent of ethnic conflict years in the State Failure data set are religious conflicts as opposed to 25.5 percent and 19.5 percent, respectively, for mass killings and revolutions. This implies that the primary violent challenge that religion has posed to states has been in the form of conflicts between groups of different religions."

From Conclusions (p70)
"In all, the evidence clearly shows that many conflicts continue to be religious. Since 1950 the number of both religious and nonreligious conflicts have increased, though religious conflicts have increased slightly less. Thus, while religion remains an important factor in conflict, it is clear that other factors, or at least a combination of other factors, are also important. One factor that seems to have influenced the rise of nonreligious conflict is the Cold War. During the ColdWar, nonreligious conflicts became more common than religious conflicts for all conflict types, but after the Cold War all conflict dropped, with nonreligious conflicts dropping more than religious conflicts. If this trend continues, religious conflict will be about as common as other types of conflicts. In any case, it is clear that religious conflicts are still a significant percentage of all conflicts"

" ...religious conflicts tend to be more intense than nonreligious ones."

"Religious conflicts are a minority of conflicts, both during and after the Cold War, while Huntington’s theory would have them the majority. Lastly, Huntington predicts that conflicts involving Islamic groups will be the most common, whereas conflicts involving Christian groups are far more common.

As noted above there are many reasons humans will kill each other in addition to religion; real estate, money, and regime change notable among them.
Your attempt to paint atheists as genocidal maniacs is contrary to the facts.

http://www.onlyemes.org/wproot/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/zuckerman_on_atheism.pdf

I understand facts are not of much interest here but some readers may find them enlightening.
 
While we all like to point fingers at our favorite boogie man, things are decidedly more complex.

Religion and State Failure: An Examination of the Extent and Magnitude of Religious Conflict from 1950 to 1996
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0192512104038167 TOTALLY IRRELEVANT NONSENSE SNIPPED

Whoa, seems "official."
Ctrl F "stalin" no results.
Control F "Mao" no results
Control F "pol Pot" no results
Control F for "falun gong?"
CONTROL F FOR CHINA????

No results.

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

Just blown away at this point the lengths people will go to defend the human rights abuses in China.
 
Whoa, seems "official."
Ctrl F "stalin" no results.
Control F "Mao" no results
Control F "pol Pot" no results
Control F for "falun gong?"
CONTROL F FOR CHINA????

No results.

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

Just blown away at this point the lengths people will go to defend the human rights abuses in China.

Just more baiting nonsense because no one on the Forum has been defending the human rights abuses that are occurring in China.
 
Last edited:
Literally the same insipid argument was previously made in this very thread a tbd literally destroyed in by pointing out that neither mao nor xi have moustaches. What they do have? Official statements and programs designed to destroy religion

Might want to read the thread before you let tbd dunk all over you.

You either missed or handwaved away the point.

Saddam Hussein was a genocidal dictator, and he believed in God... notably., the exact same Abrahamic God that YOU believe in.

This alone blows your insipid claim away... you're done; stick a fork in yourself

Just more baiting nonsense because no one on the Forum has been defending human rights abuses in that are occurring in China.

IOW, a big fat strawman.
 
Last edited:
You either missed or handwaved away the point.

Saddam Hussein was a genocidal dictator, and he believed in God... notably., the exact same Abrahamic God that YOU believe in.

This alone blows your insipid claim away... you're done; stick a fork in yourself
.

Oh man, that is some rich fallacy.

say folks does whataboutism about Saddam Hussein falsify what I have said about china?

Of course not, but the fact that you think your insipid whataboutism blows anything away is hilarious.

FANTASTIC!!!
 
Oh man, that is some rich fallacy.

say folks does whataboutism about Saddam Hussein falsify what I have said about china?

Of course not, but the fact that you think your insipid whataboutism blows anything away is hilarious.

FANTASTIC!!!

A clear and obvious moving of the goalposts. I wasn't addressing your claim about China. In fact, I agree with you to a point, that China oppresses groups that they disagree with.. They oppress and attack religious groups, pro-democracy groups, anti-communist groups, civil rights groups and others. None of their oppressing of any of these groups has anything to do with atheism.

No, I was debunking your claim that atheists are solely responsible for acts of genocide during the "Industrial Age". That claim can be debunked through simply finding an example of one religious, genocidal maniac in that period; and I found one... Saddam Hussein.

Your claim in Para 2 above has been nuked from orbit!
 
A clear and obvious moving of the goalposts. I wasn't addressing your claim about China. In fact, I agree with you to a point, that China oppresses groups that they disagree with.. They oppress and attack religious groups, pro-democracy groups, anti-communist groups, civil rights groups and others. None of their oppressing of any of these groups has anything to do with atheism.

No, I was debunking your claim that atheists are solely responsible for acts of genocide during the "Industrial Age". That claim can be debunked through simply finding an example of one religious, genocidal maniac in that period; and I found one... Saddam Hussein.

Your claim in Para 2 above has been nuked from orbit!

You were debunking my claim which nuked your original attempt to whataboutism the crap out of the thread? That tickles my twines my man. :D

TBD: militant marxist atheists are committing human rights atrocities today
SC: But what about inquisition and other things that happened over 400 years ago!
TBD: stalin, mao, and Xi today.
SC: whatabout saddam!
TBD: a rounding error compared to industrial scale atheist monsters.
 
You were debunking my claim which nuked your original attempt to whataboutism the crap out of the thread? That tickles my twines my man. :D

TBD: militant marxist atheists are committing human rights atrocities today
SC: But what about inquisition and other things that happened over 400 years ago!
TBD: stalin, mao, and Xi today.
SC: whatabout saddam!
TBD: a rounding error compared to industrial scale atheist monsters.


What a load of horsecock!

You made this claim...

...it is Atheists and their storm trooper thugs, the anti-religionists who are the real fanatics, and who have brought genocide to the industrial age.

I have comprehensively nuked this claim by pointing out that Saddam Hussein (emphatically NOT an atheist) committed genocide (established fact) during your "industrial age"

You claim is nuked, you are done like a dog's dinner.... use the fork TBD!
 
What a load of horsecock!

You made this claim...



I have comprehensively nuked this claim by pointing out that Saddam Hussein (emphatically NOT an atheist) committed genocide (established fact) during your "industrial age"

You claim is nuked, you are done like a dog's dinner.... use the fork TBD!

Saddam Hussein was about as religious as the other apologists around here

Were there pipsqueaks like this mutt who committed bad acts? Sure. Were they next level monsters like your pals Stalin, mao, Pot and Xi? hell no. i already explained this the first time some apologist tried to derail the thread with this whataboutism.

And as i explained before, it was the atheist monsters who brought industrial tactics and scale to genocide.

Because there ain't no mass murderer like an atheist genocidal maniac like the Chinese monsters in place today.
 
You were debunking my claim which nuked your original attempt to whataboutism the crap out of the thread? That tickles my twines my man. :D

TBD: militant marxist atheists are committing human rights atrocities today
SC: But what about inquisition and other things that happened over 400 years ago!
TBD: stalin, mao, and Xi today.
SC: whatabout saddam!
TBD: a rounding error compared to industrial scale atheist monsters.

Well this is of course part of your attempt to demonize Atheists. You seem to be asserting, over and over again, in this thread that Atheistic beliefs, inevitably lead to mass murder, genocide and other atrocities. Thus of course demonizing Atheists in general, which is disgusting. This makes about has much sense has saying Christian beliefs inevitably lead to the inquisition, book burning etc. Which is also a load of crap.

As for your list of murderous Marxist Dictators. You might want to read some of the works of Edgar Snow. Late in Mao's life Edgar Snow interviewed Mao and Mao talked about after dying going to see God. I further suggest a read Mao Tse Tung Unrehearsed, by Stuart Schram.

Oh and does in have to be pointed out that Hitler was most definitely not an Atheist.

And to add to the list of Genocidal Dictatorships headed by people who were definitely not Atheists. The Young Turks. They did a little thing called the Armenian Genocide among other gruesome atrocities.

The Japanese Regime from 1937 on. Little things like the Nanking Massacre and even worst the Three All Campaigns in China, i.e., Loot All, Burn All, Kill All. To say nothing of assorted mass murder in the areas they conquered. But not an Atheist Regime.

The Suharto regime in Indonesia. The massive anti-Communist massacres of 1965-66, in which c. 1 million were killed and we will add the later genocide in East Timor. Again not an Atheist Regime. Not an Atheist regime.

Idi Amin's Regime in Uganda, at least 300,000 dead. Not an Atheist regime.

The Nationalist Regime in China under Chiang Kai Shek. The so-called Bandit suppression campaigns which frequently turned into mass murder expeditions. Not an Atheist regime.

Oh and you could look up King Ludwig of Belgium and the Congo.

I could go on and on. But I think my point is made.
 
Last edited:
As for your list of murderous Marxist Dictators. You might want to read some of the works of Edgar Snow. Late in Mao's life Edgar Snow interviewed Mao and Mao talked about after dying going to see God. I further suggest a read Mao Tse Tung Unrehearsed, by Stuart Schram.

Oh and does in have to be pointed out that Hitler was most definitely not an Atheist.

And to add to the list of Genocidal Dictatorships headed by people who were definitely not Atheists. The Young Turks. They did a little thing called the Armenian Genocide among other gruesome atrocities.

The Japanese Regime from 1937 on. Little things like the Nanking Massacre and even worst the Three All Campaigns in China, i.e., Loot All, Burn All, Kill All. To say nothing of assorted mass murder in the areas they conquered. But not an Atheist Regime.

The Suharto regime in Indonesia. The massive anti-Communist massacres of 1965-66, in which c. 1 million were killed and we will add the later genocide in East Timor. Again not an Atheist Regime. Not an Atheist regime.

Idi Amin's Regime in Uganda, at least 300,000 dead. Not an Atheist regime.

The Nationalist Regime in China under Chiang Kai Shek. The so-called Bandit suppression campaigns which frequently turned into mass murder expeditions. Not an Atheist regime.

I could go on and on. But I think my point is made.

Yeah, but this is evidence. We all know he don't need no stinkin' evidence
 
Well this is of course part of your attempt to demonize Atheists. You seem to be asserting, over and over again, in this thread that Atheistic beliefs, inevitably lead to mass murder, genocide and other atrocities. Thus of course demonizing Atheists in general, which is disgusting. This makes about has much sense has saying Christian beliefs inevitably lead to the inquisition, book burning etc. Which is also a load of crap.

Not really, you see I have explained the math in detail previously:

totalitarian + atheism = anti-religious human rights violations. by the way, do not think that the true believer anti-religionists don't routinely bring up the inquisition, regularly as part of their pogroms.

Again, while I find the whataboutism as fascinating as y'all probably do, right here in this thread we are talking about Xi, unyielding marxist atheists and real ongoing human rights violations.

Anything about that, TBD asked expectantly knowing the answer already
 
Last edited:
Remember folks: One can use the same 'evidence' TBD uses against atheists to claim that Christians are Child Molesters.

remember folks fake whataboutism is the worst argument after regular whataboutism.

The above is fake whataboutism. One finds it difficult to comprehend the sneering contempt someone must have for one's readers to try to grift such an argument.
 

Back
Top Bottom