Would you vote for an Atheist?

The humble christians and the good ones are the ones who usually dont shout LORD LORD yet let their actions speak volumes. Atheists are also mentioned in the bible folks and jesus once placed one atheist above a rabbi. Ever hear of the good samaritan?
Jesus even talked about the separation of religion and state.

 

KalvinB,

Your problem is that you're not only generalizing but you're blowing facts out of proportion. I'm an atheist yet I've never killed anybody

Plus, although you're skewing the numbers relentlessly here, the fact remains that more deaths have to be accredited to religion than to the rejection of it. Or am I missing something here? Does atheism, to you, mean rejection of religion or rejection of YOUR religion. In the latter case, I can see what you mean. From what I know, however, Christians have been killing Muslims and vice versa, Muslims have been killing Hindus and vice versa, Buddhists have been killing and are being killed etc. In all these cases, one religion has sought to triumph over another. Ultimately, religion has hemmed logic and judgment in, subverting rational thought and promoting discord. Getting into the dialectics of your opinions, KalvinB, I can't help but feel that you're linking irrational behavior and the rejection of theism, which is asinine, if you'll pardon me saying it.

Religions have always tried to lord it over atheists; not the other way round. Of course, I'm generalizing here, but maybe that'll put me in your shoes for a moment and I can see the bigger picture.

 

REALLY?!

Lenin + Mao == 100+ Million dead trying to get rid of religion

So find me 90 million people that were killed because someone was trying to force a religion. Heck, make it 80 million. 80 million recorded deaths with the leaders behind them, the years and the death counts.

I'm giving you two atheists. You can find as many religious leaders as you need. If you want to talk about facts then lets see them.

Not nationally, no. In Louisiana it was a huge racial divide.

What law would that be?

And what does expressing your religion have to do with that?

 

Keep watching fox news for your stats, care to provide some sources to these so called 90% black votes?

I don't know, this thing called the US consitution?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Maybe the part where it "prohibits the federal legislature from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" (the "Establishment Clause") or that prohibit free exercise of religion (the "Free Exercise Clause"), laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to assemble peaceably, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_toll

Where do you get your numbers for this 90 million dead? Considering the largest death toll in war is considering WW2.

 

http://www.kansascity.com/445/story/483208.html

That doesn't say a politician can't vote against abortion rights because of religious reasons. It means a religion cannot be established. Voting against abortion does not establish a religion.

Which is exactly what you want to do. You want to prohibit politicians from exercising their beliefs.

 

You cannot make laws based on religious beliefs, if a politican is against abortion BECAUSE of religion your setting the plane for religion being involved in law making... period. You just prove my point, not contest it.

 

You need to research the right things

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide

In November 2005, he estimated the democide in Mao's China (1949–1975) at 73,000,000.[10]

Happens all the time. They're called "morals"

So unless atheists don't have them, they base decisions on religious convictions.

 

Hence the article label at the very top.

This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality.

The whole point of wikipedia is to provide a netural point of view, this entry does not.

You should read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong

 

Recorded deaths? Oh, pardon my incapability but I don't think I'm going to be able to produce links to websites just to prove a point. The problem with you is exactly that you're giving me TWO atheists. While I can't say if they genuinely wanted to get rid of religion or were merely using atheism to excuse their genocide, what I can say is that two people cannot represent a faith. Mao or Lenin could very well have been a deranged Christian or Muslim trying to eradicate people of every other faith.... regardless of where they come from, they're still deranged.

The reason I'm so against religion is because the very concept of a vengeful God is anathema to me. The reason I have never killed a man is because I have no right to infringe on his life; not because a God will punish me if I do. This "confess to God or burn in hell" mentality is only creating more criminals in the world. The human mind is an adaptive thing. If you feed a certain set of beliefs upon it and bound it in, it will look for a way around the boundaries. This is exactly why people murder and then justify it in the name of God. This way, "I don't go to hell because I'm not committing a sin."

A moral should be based in love of humanity, not fear of God.

 

Techman, you have definately seen god in an incomplete light. The god i know is the most loving, caring , compassionate being in the universe. the laws he has placed are because he loves us so much. Think of a being who can see and think of all possibilities. He is the god of life, not the god of death

 

The moment "God" begins to place laws, He becomes a wisp of a concept to me. The God I see is the entire universe, all made up of the same energy. I'll spare you the hippy talk and leave you with my belief that you should be the one to determine your own philosophy and faith based on empirical knowledge rather than on dated scripture.

 

Go back and read my previous posts. Either you didn't see my postulate that comparing Mao/Lenin to the Crusades is comparing apples to oranges, or you're willfully ignorant of it.

 

Of course it's apples to oranges. Otherwise you'd have to accept that TWO atheists murdered 10 times more people than hundreds of religious people in a fraction of the time.

Of course I'm ignoring your "postulate."

It's absurd. So let's see those 80 million recorded deaths carried out in the name of religion to establish a religion. I'm even low balling it for you.

Otherwise you have nothing to show that religion is more dangerous than atheism except specultion and bigotry.

I've got factual numbers of deaths on the religious side and the atheist side.

 

You don't have actual numbers for sure becuase there isn't way to count all deaths caused by religions during past few thousand years.

Considering that religion has been keeping people in dark age for centuries, burning books other than Bible and killing people who came with different ideas, crusades, inquisision, burning witches and all this stuff...

Also consider that in the past there weren't so many people in the world (like 20 times fewer) so comparing numbers from 20th century and from medieval times is silly (but I think that if you could count all deaths caused by religion during last let's say two thousand years... you would come to astronomic numbers).

And by the way... tell me which war wasn't fought because of religion? You could count those on one hand. 95% of conflicts and wars ever fought were because of christianity/islam etc.

Mao and Stalin were real monsters that's true. But then again, you certainly know that genocides they caused weren't inspired by atheism. They were inspired by their rotten psychopatic minds.

Relying on faith, believing in an invisible guy that created the universe... noone can see him, talk to him but he is certainly there... Replacing reason and logic with faith and "feelings" isn't very smart.

And back to topic: I would vote for an atheist but then again I usually don't vote at all.

 

I would not vote for an atheist.

 

I wouldn't vote for anyone who wears blue shoes.

.



.




.

There, now you can see how ignorant you look.

 

I believe God is in charge of the world, and I would not want someone to lead my country who is ignorant to that.


Dumbass

 

It's ironic you call me a dumbass when there's 0 factual evidence supporting your fairy tale.

 

I have evidence, but if I told you, you wouldn't understand. Even Christians will not understand each others' testimonies in full, but if they are receptive and have faith, it will strengthen theirs. You're obviously on a mission to discredit Christianity. So there is no point discussing this.

And sorry for calling you a dumbass, but your post made NO sense!