• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Who has committed greater attrocities people of faith or atheists?

Which have committed greater attrocities?

  • A) People of faith

    Votes: 20 80.0%

  • B) Atheists

    Votes: 5 20.0%
  • Total voters
    25

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I here that catch phrase "religion is responsible for some of the worst attrocities in history," bantered about quite a bit, but is true? Is it not more true that atheists have been responsible for far greater attrocities than people of faith?
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
I here that catch phrase "religion is responsible for some of the worst attrocities in history," bantered about quite a bit, but is true?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Is it not more true that atheists have been responsible for far greater attrocities than people of faith?
Click to expand...

No. The only atheists who have ever committed atrocities on a grand scale were the communists...and the fact that they were atheists had nothing to do with their atrocities. This is in mark contrast to Christian and Islamic leaders who actually justified their atrocities based on their religion.

And it's also ignoring the atrocities that were committed OFF the battlefield...such as the Catholic Church preventing scientific progress for nearly a thousand years, making countless lives more miserable.

With that said, religion has also brought us some of the greatest moral leaders that the world has seen. So I find this thread slightly stupid.
 

Since you say that Communists are not representative of atheism, then by that standard I could say that Christians and Muslims aren't representative of people of faith. The bottom line is that the people of faith have committed far less attrocities and killed far less people than atheists whether they did it in the name of Atheism is inconsequential to the question at hand, the Communists were atheists thus the atheists have committed worse attrocities than people of faith.
 
Well, consider the Crusades, the mass pogroms in Russia and Eastern Europe committed under the flag of Christianity, consider the Spanish Inquisition, the slaughtering of Jews and Christians by Muslim extremists. Think about the clashes in India and Pakistan over Hinduism and Islam. How about the repeated intifadas in Israel and the multiple wars between Israel and the Arab Middle East, all centred on gaining control of 'holy land.' Catholics fought Protestants in the Hundred Years' War, Muslims along with Muhammed fought pagans in the battle of Yathrib (Mecca).

However, I guess you have to also consider the Holocaust and Mao's Leap Forward for the atheist side. Also, one might add in the USSR's banishment of religion on the list of atheist-led or -inspired killings. All in all, I don't know. I think that terrible things can be done when someone thinks they're doing the right thing for God or their religion (I.e. the peversion of the Qur'an by present-day Islamofascists to kill Jews, Christians, and to bring down the US).
 
Atheists also have a faith. It's called Atheism. It doesn't matter what you believe in. The things which matter are things that you do and since the deeds are the results of a faith (any faith) then bad deeds are the result of bad faith/religions.

Indeed religions cause attrocities. Religion cause wars (one's religion against other's one). In the future there will be no religions. God doesn't like religions. Religions twist the laws that God gave to humans.

Religions are heresy.
 
Last edited:
Atheism is not a faith. The very deffinition of faith
1 a
Click to expand...
Strike 1 out aeithists hole no allegiance to duty or person
2. No god - scratch that out. Aethists do not believe in which there is no proof hence scratch out 2b as well.
3. maybe but too lightly to signify as a faith and no ability to generalize all aethists as such
 


In religious studies religion is defined by any pivotal value to which all other values are subordinate by that definition atheism is very much a religion.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
In religious studies religion is defined by any pivotal value to which all other values are subordinate by that definition atheism is very much a religion.
Click to expand...
What pivotal value transcends from a non belief in god?
None.
Hence aethism is not a religion.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
The pivotal value in atheism is that there is no god, all other values are subordinate to that maxim.
Click to expand...
Can you give an example?
Thall shalt not kill because there is no god?
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
The pivotal value in atheism is that there is no god, all other values are subordinate to that maxim.
Click to expand...

Umm
I don't know of any atheists who base their values off of the fact that their is no god. That doesn't even make sense.

What values are implied by the nonexistence of god? How about the nonexistence of leprechauns? The nonexistence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
 
Exactly what I'm trying to ask.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
I here that catch phrase "religion is responsible for some of the worst attrocities in history," bantered about quite a bit, but is true? Is it not more true that atheists have been responsible for far greater attrocities than people of faith?
Click to expand...


Religion can be used to try and justify war, but it isn't the cause. Wars are fought over territory and economics.

All the same wars would have been fought without religion (including the crusades, I dare someone to disagree with me on that).

The Salem With trials, the Spanish Inquisition, and some nations in the middle east making women 2nd class citizens are examples of social injustices yes, but not wars.

My name "FreeThinker" implies that I am and atheist, which I am, but don't confuse atheism with a hatred for religion.
 
Aethism has never been used to justify war.

I'm biased as I see religion as a veil pulled down to cover the eyes from asking questions.
Philosophy on the other hand opens the mind. Too often I hear religion as justification over this this and that. But you are correct with your rational as far as my ignorance goes. I can not think of any war started strictly because of religion, it was always used as the justifiable excuse.
 
jfuh said:
Aethism has never been used to justify war.
Click to expand...

In grade school I punched a kid in the face and took his lunchmoney. He asked me why I did it and I said "because there is no God". I then proceeded to declare the Green power ranger cooler that the Red power ranger, and also made the statement that my dad was absolutely capable of beating up his dad. This ends my paragraph having nothing to do with the debate. Thank you.
 
I think that depends on your definition of "people of faith".

In my mind, atheists are also people of faith, in that they have faith that there is no god.

I would say that this poll has little to no point.

Most if not all atrocities have been committed by people or groups of people who want power.

I will say that I think religion has been used to justify more atrocities than any other justification.
 

The point is that many athiests who are actually opponents of religion; such as, Bill Maher claim that religion is responsible for the worst attrocities in history when the fact of the matter is that THE worst attrocities in history have been perpetrated by atheists.

I'm not an atheist or relgious, I'm agnostic and with good reason I challenge anyone to prove or disprove the existence of a supreme being.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Umm
I don't know of any atheists who base their values off of the fact that their is no god.
Click to expand...

Sure you do, think of it this way evangelical Christains believe there is a god and he wrote the bible that is their pivotal value, all other values are subordinate to that maxim, IE since their is a god and he wrote the bible the heavens and the earth were created in 7 days, the world is 10,000 years old, and god created man in his own image from Eves rib, now flip that the Atheist believes there is no god that is their pivotal value, all other values are subordinate to that maxim IE, since there is no god then the big bang created the heavens and the earth over a time span of trillions of years, the world is billions of years old, and man evolved from apes.
 

Bill Maher is like John Stewart without the funny.

I'm not an atheist or relgious, I'm agnostic and with good reason I challenge anyone to prove or disprove the existence of a supreme being.
Click to expand...

I think, therefor I am.

I just proved the existence of God.

I win.
 

Well to be honest everyone living in modern society has morals that originated from religion. Whether anti-religious wackos admit it or not the ethical codes we live by in America came from the Bible (some of them).
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
How did that prove the existence of god? I know I'm a little slow but you're going to have to extrapolate that for me.
Click to expand...

If you were a liberal I would use this opportunity to attack you.

However,

You are a like minded conservative.

So,

I quoted "I think therefor I am" as the proof of God because I was calling myself a God: a joke of amazing wit and subtlety.
 
FreeThinker said:
If you were a liberal I would use this opportunity to attack you.

However,

You are a like minded conservative.

So,

I quoted "I think therefor I am" as the proof of God because I was calling myself a God: a joke of amazing wit and subtlety.
Click to expand...

Oh I thought it was a reference to Descartes 3rd meditation IE his proof for gods existence, I must confess that I don't understand it one bit and from what I can understand it seems extremely flawed:

[edit] Meditation III

Argument 1
  1. I have an idea of God (an infinitely perfect substance).
  2. That idea must have a cause.
  3. Nothing comes from nothing.
  4. The cause must have at least as much formal reality as the idea.
  5. I am not infinitely perfect.
  6. I could not be the cause of the idea.
  7. There must be a cause that is infinitely perfect.
  8. God exists.
Argument 2
  1. I exist.
  2. My existence must have a cause.
  3. The cause must be either:
a) myself b) my always having existed c) my parents d) something less perfect than God e) God
  1. Not a. If I had created myself, I would have made myself perfect.
  2. Not b. Continued existence does not follow from present existence.
  3. Not c. This leads to an infinite regress.
  4. Not d. This idea cannot account for the fact that the idea is of something supreme.
  5. e. God exists.
 
OK for the people who voted for "people of faith" can we please see some statistics, because I'm going to show you the statistics for just one group of atheists the Red Chinese which I think would pale by comparison every attrocity committed by all peoples of faith put together:
 
Last edited:
FreeThinker said:
Well to be honest everyone living in modern society has morals that originated from religion. Whether anti-religious wackos admit it or not the ethical codes we live by in America came from the Bible (some of them).
Click to expand...

But, the way I think of it......

Who is to say that those who wrote the scriptures didn't take thier own moral views and scribble them down, then use the false belief in a supreme being to back them up?

If man created religion, then he could have created the moral views as well, with the religion having nothing more to do with it than to scare people into acting how he wanted to act.

Who knows, maybe all of our moral views come from man who was high on peyote and hearing voices that told him to convince everyone to live a certain way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…