Atheists most hated group in the US...

[adimare]

Yeah..atheism worked wonders for the Soviet Union.

And I think atheists are the most hated because they can at times be the most annoying. Ok you don't believe in god, nobody cares about that, I think people tend to care when you take every opportunity to point the fact out like it makes you special or unique.

The point of the cartoon is not that there's a direct relationship between a nation's religion (or lack of) and it's well being, it's the exact opposite.

Let's say you tell me "tall kids have bad teeth" and I show you an example of a tall kid with great teeth. You don't give any credibility to your argument by saying something like "yeah well Billy's tall, and his teeth are terrible". In the end all we did was prove that it's very likely that there's no direct correlation between being tall and having bad teeth.

[jackamo2887]

Where is the statistic that 70% of Norway are atheists anyway? I realize it is a rediculous cartoon by an atheist with too much time on their hands, but since so many people put faith into it I wouldnt mind seeing the stat.

[slimbimjim]

Organised religion is funny.

[HoosierBoy]

I think at this point, the majority of non-atheists who are not either stupid or over-zealous believers (or both) realize that perhaps what their religion preaches as truth isn't so.

I think most feel that there is a "higher being", but aren't so quick to say (or agree with the idea)that the earth really was made in 7 days, that the earth has only been in existence for 10,000 years, that there were no dinosaurs, that woman came from a man's rib, and other such ridiculous claims.

At this point, many religious folks are what are called "moderates". They don't necessarily believe in the scripture, but they like the idea of morals, and feel that despite the many lies and problems with religion, they feel that it provides a "good" to the world in instilling morality.

I for one think what's right and wrong is a matter of reason, that our laws revolve around reason and logic, and not religion. In fact I'd argue we don't need religion anymore, at all. Our decisions make our destiny, not some "god's plan". And a good education coupled with good parenting can do MUCH more for ensuring we have a good and just society than religion can.

my 25 cents

Who's "we"? Speak for yourself.

[AKR]

Yeah, doesn't surprise me. My last girlfriends parents hated the fact I was atheist, but I guess I can kinda understand that in a way because they were hardcore religious. They even had pictures of Jesus on their walls. So I was like the anti-Christ railing their angel daughter. However, I always got stupid speeches like "We are praying for you" "God has a plan for you", it got old quickly. And frankly, it offended me to no end.

That's when you open your mouth and eyes really wide and hiss at them. That usually puts an end to it.

Can you say "Stalin", can you say "Mao Tse Tung", can you say "Pol
Pot", can say "Kim Il Jung", or "Fidel Castro", etc..?

Atheists hate themselves and other atheists. Atheists have twice the suicide rate of non-atheists, they are twice as likely to not marry and twice as likely to be childless. Check out their mental health statistics too.

lol, This just in: you're f*cking brain dead. I would discuss this with you, but again, you're f*cking brain dead. Carry on.

But, you have to understand that we Christians are taught to believe that ""The person who isn't with me is against me, and the person who isn't gathering with me is scattering." Matthew 12:30

So, yeah, we basically see you atheists as siding with the Satan. No belief in God, belief only in man, worshipping science, all those things don't make sense to us.

What I understand is that Christians have orders to MURDER anyone (even a family member) who tries to turn them from their religion, and that Atheists have no such orders and wouldn't follow them anyway. They also have orders (or "had," depending on your level of honesty) to murder people for gathering firewood on the Sabbath, and for a bunch of other stupid ****. But we're the evil ones.

Atheists, with the exception of AKR, don't hate other religions. Atheists typically are of the live and let live mindset. You can worship whatever you want, just don't try to force me to worship it with you.

Chistians have an insane persecution complex.

lol, I'm the ONLY atheist on the planet that doesn't hate religions? And what do you mean "other" religions, as if I have a religion? And I don't hate all religions... Just the dumb, violent, bigoted ones.

[FIVE OAKES]

People hate what they fear. People fear what they don't (can't) understand.

Thus, theists who hate atheists are just ignorant little chicken****s.

[HoosierBoy]

People hate what they fear. People fear what they don't (can't) understand.

Thus, theists who hate atheists are just ignorant little chicken****s.

And vice-versa.

[FIVE OAKES]

And vice-versa.

Naturally.

[TheBigL]

Where is the statistic that 70% of Norway are atheists anyway? I realize it is a rediculous cartoon by an atheist with too much time on their hands, but since so many people put faith into it I wouldnt mind seeing the stat.

According to the most recent Eurobarometer Poll 2005, 32% of Norwegian citizens responded that "they believe there is a god," whereas 47% answered that "they believe there is some sort of spirit or life force" and 17% that "they do not believe there is any sort of spirit, god, or life force."

so technically, the number is more like 50%. Could be significantly higher depending on how you interpret "believe in some sort of spirit or life force." Nonetheless, 96% don't appear to belong to any organized religion.

Who's "we"? Speak for yourself.

Clearly, we = society. It's not a personal statement. No one is speaking for you. You, personally, needing religion does not refute the argument. Adding reading comprehension to philosophy and reason as "things you do not understand."

[bamatank]

lol, I'm the ONLY atheist on the planet that don't hate religions? And what do you mean "other" religions, as if I have a religion? And I don't hate all religions... Just the dumb, violent, bigoted piece ones.

Ok so you can nit pick my grammar. I should have said, "hate religions," instead of, "hates others religions." I wasn't siggesting you have a religion and don't start this accuse me of saying atheism is a religion bull**** either. I'm atheist.

My point: Atheists don't hate the religious

Atheists don't believe in a god

Atheists get irritated at religious forcing their religion on us

Religious get butt hurt when people don't believe like they do then cry that they are being persecuted

Disagreeing is not the same as hating

Christians have the worst persecution complex

Atheists have a live and let live mentality and wish that religious would as well

Religious, get over your cry baby, narcisistic, persecution complex Nobody cares what you believe. Go believe it and leave the rest of us alone.

[Death Strike]

And vice-versa.

Not really, I think it's safe to say most people can understand why others believe in God but not many people can understand why someone truly wouldn't.

I think if you ask most atheist, which would they rather believe, they'd probably choose religion, over all it's the nicer possibility. If what atheists believe is true, then when we die, IT'S GAME OVER, and this world is unjust and is kind of pointless. It sucks to believe something like that, so why would we unless we truly thought it was so?

[AKR]

Ok so you can nit pick my grammar. I should have said, "hate religions," instead of, "hates others religions." I wasn't siggesting you have a religion and don't start this accuse me of saying atheism is a religion bull**** either. I'm atheist.

I was just messin' with you, dude. Besides, who am I to knit pick grammar? I just found two mistakes in my last post.

[Astaldoath]

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistb...heitsHated.htm

I see this everyday too, everyone associates atheism with a negative connotation. Like, atheists dont have morals or something and they are the devil or some ****.

what do you expect when they are mostly a bunch of flaming asshats like the ones on these boards. Quit spreading your anti god hate speech and maybe people will be more accepting of you.

[TheBigL]

If what atheists believe is true, then when we die, IT'S GAME OVER, and this world is unjust and is kind of pointless. It sucks to believe something like that, so why would we unless we truly thought it was so?

On the contrary, life becomes far more important and beautiful when you realize it's all we have. In my opinion, that "belief" is liberating.

[bamatank]

what do you expect when they are mostly a bunch of flaming asshats like the ones on these boards. Quit spreading your anti god hate speech and maybe people will be more accepting of you.

Speaking of a flaming asshat ^^^^^^

[HoosierBoy]

Clearly, we = society. It's not a personal statement. No one is speaking for you. You, personally, needing religion does not refute the argument. Adding reading comprehension to philosophy and reason as "things you do not understand."

"Society" is not some abstract, independent entity. Society is composed of individuals, many of whom need religion. You fail miserably.

Not really, I think it's safe to say most people can understand why others believe in God but not many people can understand why someone truly wouldn't.

I think if you ask most atheist, which would they rather believe, they'd probably choose religion, over all it's the nicer possibility. If what atheists believe is true, then when we die, IT'S GAME OVER, and this world is unjust and is kind of pointless. It sucks to believe something like that, so why would we unless we truly thought it was so?

And yet I see a tremendous amount of fear coming from atheists...

[hank-williams]

They did not commit crimes because they were atheists. There are far more religious people in this world who have committed atrocious crimes. Must I remind you of the crusades? Spanish inquisition? Witch trials?

Atheists do not hate themselves, nor do they hate other atheists.

I'd be interested to see the proof you have for all those statistics.

So Christians did not committ crimes because they were Christians?

[gumbyonroids]

They did not commit crimes because they were atheists. There are far more religious people in this world who have committed atrocious crimes. Must I remind you of the crusades? Spanish inquisition? Witch trials?

Atheists do not hate themselves, nor do they hate other atheists.

I'd be interested to see the proof you have for all those statistics.

Their atheism was part of the mind set and philosophy that allowed them to wreck the destruction they did.

[hank-williams]

You guys love to say this kind of stuff but you don't have any proof to back it up....why does that surprise me?

That's all you religious nutcases ever do, is make claims and never back them up with evidence.

Look no more, here is what you are looking for, evidence.


Atheists are quick to point out that throughout history large numbers of people were killed in the name of religion; but they fail to mention the countless millions who were killed by leaders who worshipped themselves or by atheist-Communists who were driven by a hatred for God and Religion.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, published by Harvard University Press, is the work of eleven scholars that ignited a continental firestorm when it first hit bookstores in France in 1997. The authors estimate the century's death toll at the hands of Communist governments (excluding wars) at 100 million people. Country by country, deaths by the state in China stand at 65 million, in the USSR 20 million, Vietnam 1 million, North Korea 2 million, Cambodia 2 million, Eastern Europe 1 million, Latin America 150,000, Africa 1.7 million, and Afghanistan 1.5 million. Additionally, the international Communist movement murdered about 10,000 people throughout the world."



WAS ATHEISM RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CRIMES OF COMMUNISM?

A major atheist (Richard Dawkins, I believe) was interviewed not long ago on a national station. During the interview, he was asked to justify the evils perpetrated on tens of millions by the atheist leader, Stalin. The atheist?s response was that the connection between Stalin?s atheism and his great crimes is unfounded. Stalin, he said, had mustaches; could you not use the same logic, he added, and conclude that he killed people because he had mustaches?

The atheist?s response is foolish to such a magnitude that it is not really deserving deserving of an answer. Nonetheless, for the sake of fairness, we will endeavor to assess his objection.

Was the philosophy of atheism espoused by communists responsible for the mass murders perpetrated by communist leaders such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Ceausescu? Let's look at some enlightening facts that militant atheists prefer not to acknowledge.

1. Communists leaders were motivated by a strong desire to impose an ideological "package" over the whole world. The package included the eradication of religion, defined by arch-atheist, Karl Marx, as ?The opium of the people.? According to Marx, religion helped keep the masses passive before the abuse of the wealthy and powerful, and the only way to free them from the ?stupor," God and religion had to be eradicated. The enforcement of Atheism was a ?critical? requirement for Communism?s success, and thus it had to be implemented at all costs. This meant oppressive measures, such as brainwashing, the closing of houses of worship and abolishing the priesthood.

2. Karl Marx?s extremist followers were not in any way impeded in their blood-thirsty global quest by fear of a Higher Power. Atheism took very efficient care of this ?limiting factor.? Since the end justified the means, as Machiavelli had instructed, they could do whatever was necessary to bring about a workers? paradise. Because the opposition in some cases proved to be powerful and resilient, drastic means were used and tens of millions were mercilessly butchered. Large numbers were killed for refusing to abandon their religious beliefs.

3. Communist-atheist leaders, in their own eyes, became supreme, all-knowing, all-wise and all powerful "gods." They had total control over people?s lives and over who lived and who died. Being "god," they asserted their evil schemes over the masses with brutality and mercilessness.

4. People like Stalin were interested in propagating an ideology, not a look. Nobody was persecuted in the Soviet Union for not having a mustache like Stalin, or for not wearing a uniform similar to his, or for not liking the same food, music or sports. Large numbers were persecuted and killed for practicing religion, and for being interferences to atheist-communist expansion. The atheist?s assertion was, therefore, inane and absurd.

Atheism, therefore, was a major factor in the murder of countless millions, during the past century. Unfortunately, atheism is still alive and well and a segment of it, known as "militant atheism," is still driven by some of the same extremist views reminiscent of atheist-communist regimes of old. They, like their predecessors, do not hesitate to admit that they hate God, religion and that they would like to see both disappear forever. Furthermore, they are driven by a hatred for the unborn, and a blind support for common-law living, sexual immorality, euthanasia, etc. The understandable concern of many is that a propagation of their philosophy of meaninglessness and their blind allegiance to atheistic evolution would lead, in the long run, to a return to a cold-hearted and dangerous devaluing of the weak and the needy in society; though they "assure" us that that is not part of their agenda. We believe that their cold-heartiness toward millions of unborn babies, and their total support of euthanasia indicates otherwise.

Theist author, Dinesh D'Souza, eloquently expresses similar concerns in the following quote:

The crimes of atheism have generally been perpetrated through a hubristic ideology that sees man, not God, as the creator of values. Using the latest techniques of science and technology, man seeks to displace God and create a secular utopia here on earth. Of course if some people - the Jews, the landowners, the unfit, or the handicapped - have to be eliminated in order to achieve this utopia, this is a price the atheist tyrants and their apologists have shown themselves quite willing to pay. Thus they confirm the truth of Fyodor Dostoyevsky's dictum, "If God is not, everything is permitted.

http://atheismexposed.tripod.com/atheist_crimes.htm

[bamatank]

http://atheismexposed.tripod.com/atheist_crimes.htm

Christian propaganda site isn't proof of anything.

[hank-williams]

But they're less likely to be in prison and less likely to divorce.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm


http://www.holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm

Not all together true about divorce


The article found below was originally written as a response to research completed by Barna about ten years ago, which helped fuel atheist propaganda about their supposed high marriage success. Barna has just completed an enlightening new study which "conclusively" spotlight the fact that atheists have no reason whatsoever to gloat about any special success in marriage.

?Thirty percent of atheists and agnostics had been married and subsequently divorced. However, the three-point difference from the national average was within the range of sampling error, suggesting that their likelihood of experiencing a dissolved marriage is the same as that of the population at-large. A representative from Barna also pointed out the atheists and agnostics have lower rates of marriage and a higher likelihood of cohabitation, a combination of behaviors that distort comparisons with other segments











http://atheismexposed.tripod.com/atheists_divorce.htm

[hank-williams]

Christian propaganda site isn't proof of anything.

Glad you spoke up, it is only the right thing to do if you call something false because you feel like it is a Christian web site, to at least read it and debate what you feel like is stated wrong. It is not wrong it has evidence to back it up, if you disagree prove it wrong, bet you can't

[TheBigL]

"Society" is not some abstract, independent entity. Society is composed of individuals, many of whom need religion. You fail miserably.

I should've expected something like this.

Your personal interests and characteristics are not the same the collective's. In this sense, society is absolutely an abstract entity that takes on it's own characteristics which may or may not coincide with those of various random individuals such as yourself. How the hell are we supposed to discuss social issues without this understanding? Or, do you just like to cherry pick when to apply it, so you can sound offended when others argue that we (as a whole!) should be able to get past each day without lying to ourselves?

[HoosierBoy]

I should've expected something like this.

Your personal interests and characteristics are not the same the collective's. In this sense, society is absolutely an abstract entity that takes on it's own characteristics which may or may not coincide with those of various random individuals such as yourself. How the hell are we supposed to discuss social issues without this understanding? Or, do you just like to cherry pick when to apply it, so you can sound offended when others argue that we (as a whole!) should be able to get past each day without lying to ourselves?

When the majority of society needs religion, we can safely say that "society" needs it too. Society is a collection of individuals. Just so happens that the majority of individuals in our society depend on God. (Actually everyone depends on God, whether they admit it or not.)

[TheBigL]

When the majority of society needs religion, we can safely say that "society" needs it too. Society is a collection of individuals. Just so happens that the majority of individuals in our society depend on God. (Actually everyone depends on God, whether they admit it or not.)

There, now you've allowed the argument rather than dismissing it. I dont know if I like your requirement for a majority, but it's irrelevant so I'll allow it. Now...

The argument presented: We (society) do not need religion to be successful.
Proof: Norway
Conclusion: Religion is not a requirement for society to be successful by evidence given of successful societies without such reliance.

Our society may rely on religion (debatable). The argument was that it doesn't need to. You dismissed it in a stupid manner, and I was just pointing it out because its funny to point out your failures. I realise "successful" is undefined, but use reasonable judgement.

[tenthirtytwo]

If people needed religion, nobody would be able to convert away from religion. Pretty easy to win this argument.

[bamatank]

Glad you spoke up, it is only the right thing to do if you call something false because you feel like it is a Christian web site, to at least read it and debate what you feel like is stated wrong. It is not wrong it has evidence to back it up, if you disagree prove it wrong, bet you can't

This is a link to a study showing that predominantly atheist nations tend to have lower crime rates.

http://www.humaniststudies.org/enews...=219&article=7

That being said the article suggests that it is religion that causes depraved behavior. I disagree with this. The article I'm posting below shows what is really happening.


In summary it is not religion that causes good behavior or niceness nor is it atheism. What results in good behavior is a sense of community and belonging. In the US atheists are generally pushed to the perifery of society.

http://www.slate.com/id/2203614/

This is an article I think everyone should read.

[TheBigL]

If people needed religion, nobody would be able to convert away from religion. Pretty easy to win this argument.

Of course, but HoosierBoy needed a very clear explanation of the difference between "people" and "himself."

[HoosierBoy]

There, now you've allowed the argument rather than dismissing it. I dont know if I like your requirement for a majority, but it's irrelevant so I'll allow it. Now...

The argument presented: We (society) do not need religion to be successful.
Proof: Norway
Conclusion: Religion is not a requirement for society to be successful by evidence given of successful societies without such reliance.

Our society may rely on religion (debatable). The argument was that it doesn't need to. You dismissed it in a stupid manner, and I was just pointing it out because its funny to point out your failures. I realise "successful" is undefined, but use reasonable judgement.

Society remains a collection of individuals, nothing more.

Some cultures can exist without religion (though certainly not without God). Not ours here in the United States.

[HoosierBoy]

Of course, but HoosierBoy needed a very clear explanation of the difference between "people" and "himself."

I never once said that it was only me. Try to keep up. The vast majority of people around the world are religious.