Posted on 03/05/2008 12:28:56 AM PST by Simi Valley Tom
Historical facts clearly prove the murderous evils of atheism and big government
At a minimum, atheist dictators in the Soviet Union, Red China, Cambodia, North Korea, Vietnam, and Yugoslavia murdered 105 million people in the 20th Century, more than 60% of the mass murders, genocide and political murders in that time.
In comparison, only about 2% of the 169 million examples of democide in the 20th Century were due to religious conflict.
Also in comparison, the Crusades murdered only 1 million people over several centuries, the Spanish Inquisition only murdered 350,000 people over several centuries, and the witch hunts added up together only killed about 100,000 people from 1400 A.D. to 1800 A.D. In fact, before the 20th century, religious conflict only accounted for about 3% of the genocide, mass murders and political/religious murders, or democide, in the world during recorded history.
Furthermore, regarding the Crusades, it should be noted that they were undertaken to defend people, including Christians, against the murderous tyrannical hordes of Mohammed’s children, who continue to ravage the world and destroy true human liberty and dignity under the God of the Bible.
Thus, Americans, Latin Americans, Europeans, Africans, Asians, Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians, and Polynesians have more to fear from a big atheist government than a few moral reforms supported by Evangelical Christians, such as pro-life laws against abortion, laws against same-sex marriage and the cleansing of the culture of moral filth and gross obscenity.
Of course, as Paul writes in Romans, the government is established by God to commend the good and punish the wrongdoer. Properly run, the government should therefore hold no terror for the Bible-believing Christian who does good, including those fighting abortion, same-sex marriage and depravity in the mass media.
- www.godandscience.org and MOVIEGUIDE®, www.movieguide.org.
Even a thinking atheist should see communism goes against human nature.
The problem is they are deceived in a lot of things, not just victims of a single mistake.
In this report, Human Rights Watch/Asia focuses on the persistent crackdown against religious expression of Catholics and Protestants. We note, however, that repression in China is directed against all religions, the five that are officially recognized (Buddhism, Daoism, Islam. Catholicism, and Protestantism) and all allegedly aberrant and superstitious sects.
I really can't understand how you can look at things like that, a gov't that is atheist, persecuting EVERY religion, and not draw a conclusion that atheism plays a major part in that.
Good night.
You mentioned ‘official’ Atheist governments, and you also mentioned their recognition of five major religions.
Logical Dissonance.
Or closer to the truth, Political Advantage.
Zimbabwe
"...people would be naturally selfish if their progeny survived over generations solely by how strong their self-preservation and self-replication urges were, and how willing they were to kill others to save themselves in times of conflict."
The people, as in the general population, or the specific ancestors of the progeny? Could you please elaborate?
Even a thinking atheist should see communism goes against human nature.
You don't need to be an Atheist to figure that out. Common-sense notions of freedom and economics more than suffices.
The problem is they are deceived in a lot of things, not just victims of a single mistake.
On the whole, a lot of people are stupid, despite and/or because of, their beliefs. I am not referring only to Atheists.
Yes, indeed. I’ve noticed your interest in such discussions, and thought this might interest you.
[Historical facts clearly prove the murderous evils of atheism and big government
At a minimum, atheist dictators in the Soviet Union, Red China, Cambodia, North Korea, Vietnam, and Yugoslavia murdered 105 million people in the 20th Century, more than 60% of the mass murders, genocide and political murders in that time.]
And though the facts can not be disputed, the majority will simply choose to ignore the facts if the facts upset their opinions, hence proving the fact that the children of men are proud,vain and liars and will always abuse power to benefit themselves. Only GOD is good.
Redundant.
[Did Stalin and the others kill specifically for the sake of Atheism? Or did they do so for political purposes? It’s important to make a distinction.]
If men do not beleive they are accountable for their sin, they will break every commandment of God in their lust for power and greed and will eventually stand before the Lord God Christ Jesus in the day of their judgement.
This is why I cling to the cross, that I may be forgiven all my sin against God and His only begotten son, Jesus of Nazareth.
“Yes, and another aspect the author of the original post ignores out of convenience, is the advantage of time that the Communists and other modern mass-murderers had- technology.”
“Want to bet on the efficiency of the Inquisition, had the machine gun, electronic telecommunications and nuclear bombs been invented in the Middle Ages?”
You need to read Elliot’s book. “High technology” certainly gives mass-murderers more powerful tools, and they have occasionally been applied (WWI trench warfare, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, gas chambers, allied fire-bombing of German and Japanese cities), but in fact most of the mass murder committed so far, even in the 20th century, has been a pretty low-tech affair.
Hutus slaughtered Tutsis in Rwanda-Burundi mostly with machetes and other low-tech means, e.g., herding victims into churches and other public buildings and then setting the buildings on fire. Stalin’s slaughter of the Ukranians was largely accomplished by state expropriation of their food and letting them starve to death (and the government of North Korea is even now doing the same to its own population, reserving the high tech tools for use in extorting wealth from its neighbors, having failed utterly in its economic management at home). Most of the 100 million plus excess (approximately) deaths in 20th century slaughters were of that sort: famine, disease, low-tech mayhem.
As for the Inquisition, you need to do some study.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition
It’s death toll has been greatly exaggerated. If the point was extermination of the heretics, it could have killed a lot more than it did.
In earlier centuries, there were many great slaughters, in the hundreds of thousands per episode, but all with ‘low tech’ methods, methodically applied by large numbers of killers. Read the accounts of the Mongols in Asia and the various jihad expeditions running from the 7th century to the 20th (ending with the Ottoman’s dying gasp - the massacres of the Armenians during WWI). A useful account of the latter phenonomen, which is likely to be more relevant in the 21st century, may be found in Fregosi’s and Bostom’s books:
http://www.amazon.com/Jihad-West-Muslim-Conquests-Centuries/dp/1573922471
http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Jihad-Islamic-Holy-Non-muslims/dp/1591026024
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad
Tom. Are you all right? you never call. You never write. We worry.
Without the products of technology such as transport vehicles, railroads and the telephone, Hitler and Stalin wouldn’t be able to gather and exterminate the millions, and do so with barely any opposition, for the fear that the tools imposed on those who even thought of revolting.
It’s one thing when sword/ arrow is used against another weilding the same or similar. It is easier to defend oneself from attacking swordsmen, than it is, from the same bunch with machine guns.
The game changes, and with it, the scale, when modern assault weapons and chemicals are brought into the mix.
Dostoevsky rightly observed that if there is no God or eternal life, man can justify any action. This is why communism has brutalized and murdered so many.
A more exacting question would be why does the Roman Catholic church continue to maintain priests, nuns and bishops secretly in (formerly?) Red China? Care to post a picture of one of those?
I knew someone would jump at it!
You have to read the entire sequence of posts to know why the picture was posted. It was not, as you’ve mistaken, to point out that the Church is free in China. It was meant to indicate that the Communists are not absolute Atheists like the original article, and some of the commenters, paint them to be. They use religion when it fits them. Not unlike the ones who were responsible for the Inquisition.
Again, read the whole sequence of comments.
Despite believing in a creator and in eternal life, the Jehadis have not had religion stop them from justifying any action.
You, and Dostoevsky, for that matter, are assuming that Atheists are maniacs who would love to do anything without any fear of consequences, and with wanton abandon. The truth is, Atheists fear chaos, too. Any situation that encourages anarchy, also threatens the Atheist, and his or her descendents. That in itself, is reason enough to seek order, on a pure, Darwinistic level.
An atheist may choose to deny the existence of God, while pragmatically choosing to adhere to codes that have sprung forth from the idea of God and immortality.(they are the only ones that endure)
Even Richard Dawkins, in his book "The Selfish Gene" admits that humans are born selfish as a biological reality. He proposes the need for ethical training to "learn generosity and altruism." What he can't admit is that if a human is just a biological being. . .it doesn't make natural sense for a human to act in contrary to his biological nature. . .this was Dostoevsky's point. This is what George Washington meant when he stated in his farewell address, "reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles." The "religious" view of a human is that we are not just biological in nature. . ..we are also spiritual. It is the spiritual component. .."God's image" that then makes us worthy of the "endowment" from our Creator. . .of liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness.
I don’t follow- altruistic behaviour is not limited to the human species alone. Or have I wrongly interpreted what you had meant to convey?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.