Bullying. Needs. To. Stop.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Conservapedia. A wiki for conservatives. That sounds like a good place to get raw, accurate, unbiased information about atheists and atheism.

edit: Come to think of it I'm pretty sure this webpage is a giant troll. After looking over it for 5 minutes it has to be a joke. I don't see how you could take this seriously.. lol.
 
Last edited:
I don't... anyone with a brain knows it takes a bigger bully to actually stop a bully I learned that in grade school. The bully police cannot be there when you actually need them they only punish them after the damage is done. Bullying is not usually a problem when you are an adult unless one chooses to hang with that sort of folk. I don't know about it being a troll but to think any legislation can PREVENT bullying is definitely a joke and a bad one to those that think it will save them from bullying. If someone wants to bully you bad enough they will do it in a way to not get caught.

Conservapedia. A wiki for conservatives. That sounds like a good place to get raw, accurate, unbiased information about atheists and atheism.

edit: Come to think of it I'm pretty sure this webpage is a giant troll. After looking over it for 5 minutes it has to be a joke. I don't see how you could take this seriously.. lol.
 
My guess is they were referring to some past mass murders like Pol Pot, Stalin or Mao Zedong or many other self proclaimed atheist murders.

They also all had brown hair, but calling them "brown-haired murderers" makes about as much sense as calling them "atheist murderers." Their murders were not a result of them being atheists any more than they were a result of them having brown hair.
 
They also all had brown hair, but calling them "brown-haired murderers" makes about as much sense as calling them "atheist murderers." Their murders were not a result of them being atheists any more than they were a result of them having brown hair.

I also doubt they were consistently atheist. Like how murderous dictators use religion as a form of control, the Atheist dictators used atheism as a form of control.
 
I also doubt they were consistently atheist. Like how murderous dictators use religion as a form of control, the Atheist dictators used atheism as a form of control.

There have been more religious murdering dictators/leaders than athiest ones, thats for sure. So, one thing that is clear, religiousity does not prevent someone from committing atrocities.
 
I also doubt they were consistently atheist. Like how murderous dictators use religion as a form of control, the Atheist dictators used atheism as a form of control.

It was more about competition between dogmas. Those leaders mentioned sought to replace the belief held by religion with the belief in their own doctrines, regardless of whether or not they were based on logic and reason. It's a battle between conflicting "because I said so" philosophies. They also sought to battle any science that didn't fit in with their ideas -- google "Lysenkoism" to see how Stalin treated scientists who didn't comply with the form of inheritance promoted as being true despite evidence to the contrary.
 
Seems it's just been recently that people started to bring up Pol Pot and Mao being atheists.. usually I see it in a rebuttal to people bringing up the crusades. What one atheist does is not connected to the other. To me, atheists are independent of one another, not connected by beliefs or lack of beliefs. Yes, there are the atheist trouble makers that like to lease billboards in religious neighborhoods and post images that mock the particular religion but there are jerks everywhere.. look at the Westboro Baptists. There's no doubt that religion has been responsible for millions of deaths but there's a pretty good chance that if there never was such a thing as religion those same people would find other reasons to steal and kill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom