What good is Atheism?

[John Eric Tiessen]

WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING

Extreme view points are likely to be expressed in this discussion and a flame war will most likely break out. Please do not continue with your reading if you are any of the following: Easily offended, weak minded, pregnant, nursing, or may become pregnant (this debate will probably ruin the mood if you are trying to get pregnant)

The question: Atheism is a system of belief that purports to believe that there is no God/gods and no divine powers in our world. That said Atheism believes that the world is as we see it. With that in mind the obvious question that most theist would have is, what is the reason for doing good then? I will concede to the Atheists that doing good out of feeling guilty towards a higher power isn't really doing good, it is being scared. When Atheists do good then they are doing out of genuine compassion more often then not. If they are doing it for selfish reasons well then they are no better than the theists. Unfortunately however, there is a lot of blood on the hands of both the theists, and more recently, the atheists.

Here is what I am getting at. In the 20th century there where more people living on this planet than there had been at any other time in the past. The blood shed of the 20th century is also some of the greatest that humanity has ever seen. Communism played no small part in that blood shed. Communism is a political philosophy that believes at heart that there is no God/gods. Therefore, almost all communists were atheists (in theory). This included people like Stalin, Mao Zedong, and members of the Khmer Rouge. According to The Black book of Communism, in the 20th century there where between 85 and 100 million people where killed in various communist uprisings and takeovers. Compare that to the Holocaust, around 10 million people.

What I want is a reasonable answer from theists and atheists as to why so many enlightened people would do such a horrible thing over the course of the 20th century. Atheists have a right to criticize theists for their crimes against humanity. However, these crimes must be answered for too.

If atheism is so superior then why did all this death and destruction occur in communist societies?

*Note: In no way am I trying to say that Atheism is morally wrong! It is a philosophy that should be respected and appreciated. This is just a bit of history that has always bothered me. By the way the statistics given can be found on both Wikipedia and Amazon, just look on pg. 4, in The Black Book of Communism.

[Abreo]

Uh well what your referring to isn't really communism seeing as all of those cats were dictators. 

Also your belief or disbelief in a god/s has nothing to do with whether or not you're a good person and anybody who strives for power is probably evil. 

[運命]

I agree with you, Adolf Hitler and the Communists were believed to be Atheist, but not all Atheists are like them! Bad people are bad people, no matter what religion they worship. Evil is in the human mind, no religion can change that. Did you know that many murders were "In the name of God"? I believe that the article that they put up is unfair to Atheists, showing no blood on the hands of theists. It is truly unfair that this article idolized religion.

[Griffin Jones]

I verily agree. Religion has led to the deaths of millions, and this article doesn't show it- it just idolizes religion.

[Vertigo_One [Ops Mod]]

Erm, did you read the article...

What I want is a reasonable answer from theists and atheists as to why so many enlightened people would do such a horrible thing over the course of the 20th century. Atheists have a right to criticize theists for their crimes against humanity. However, these crimes must be answered for too.

[Abi]

Well for a start atheists aren't superior. And communism doesn't have anything to do with atheism. It's just an idea that everyone can be equal. Don't gods also want that? And think about all the blood that has been shed in the name of gods, there hasn't been anything by athiests in the name of atheism. and also I don't think a whole belief can be blamed for an individuals actions, unless that belief is something like I must kill these people or whatever. 

[Vertigo_One [Ops Mod]]

there hasn't been anything by atheists in the name of atheism

Communism was officially a enforcement of state atheism.

[Fake Crowley]

I'll admit that atheism doesn't preclude corruption, but neither does it support it.

 

Having no real standard for behaviour, Atheism could be used as an excuse for persecution (Id est, these people are idiot believers, so we'll force them to convert to the true belief) or it could be used with tolerance (Self explanatory, just not telling others what to believe) without any perversion in it's beliefs--Atheism is a simple religion, with only one or two beliefs and no defining moral codes, texts, or anything of the sort. Meaning anything done in it's name is done by a personality rather than a religion.

 

So what differentiates atheism from religion? After all, when Christianity or Judaism are perverted by personalities, is it any different from Atheism? I can't really say. My guess would be that Atheists tend to try and scientifically explain everything whereas the religious tend to scientifically explain only what is in their interests, along with acting based on what they think is what's good rather than deciding for themselves.

 

Neither can be called, "Superiour," or, "More suited for society." Atheism is good because it promotes independant thought, but bad because it leads to elitism occasionally. Religion could be considered good because it promotes morals and fear, but bad because it occasionally leads to actions and beliefs not in societies best interests.

[Kenny]

Can people like Staling and Mao Zedong really be called Atheists?  Yes, in the technical sense they were individuals who did not believe in god.  But these people formed an ideology with the intention of controlling people.  Stalin pretty much had a religion he forced upon his populace, there just wasn't a god in it.

[God ~blogs/forums admin ~]

"Atheism is a system of belief "

Okay, I'll stop you right there. If non-belief is a belief, non-stamp collecting is a hobby. Not watching the telly, is a hobby and not going for a walk, is getting a work out. Atheism isn't, nor has it ever been, a belief. It is the LACK of belief. Honest to whatever god, why do so many people screw up on that point?

As for the idea that 'Atheism' should answer for what a couple of crazies did, when there's no reason that two Atheist should even be looked at the the same way, is complete stupidity. It wasn't their Atheism that made them go kill a bunch of people, it was their fecking crazy ass. Atheism wasn't the tool they used to make this mass murder acceptable, it wasn't a weapon. It was non involved. 

Had they tried to justify the killing with Atheism, then yes. Atheism would be connected, but no one has ever used Atheism to justify mass murder. No one has ever said your sins will be forgiven if you die fighting for communism, if you're an Atheist. So, to even suggest that a non-belief, should answer for what a couple of crazies did, when that non-belief had nothing to do with what they did, is just.. well, retarded.

PS: What Kenny said, you do know about Stalin's cult of Lenin, right?

[Fake Crowley]

Strictly speaking, atheism isn't non-belief. It's non-theism, perhaps, but non-belief? Atheist believe that there is no God. It is the denial of certain things, whereas non-belief would be apathy or ignorance towards said things. "Not believing that something is the case," is different from, "Believing that something is not the case."

That said, atheism isn't unjustified--there's certainly no need for a God, based on our knowledge as it is now, whcih is limited to say the least. Meaning that just because we can't explain, say, the Big Bang, or gravity, doesn't mean an explanation doesn't exist. Belief can be justified. I believe that I just had a sandwich, for instance. I don't see the sandwich, and it exists only in my memory as far as I know--and memory is easy to fool. But I trust my memory, as I should.

 

Other than that nitpicking, agreed.

[God ~blogs/forums admin ~]

Oh, but when do you properly hear someone suggest that Atheism is the denial of God? Sure, that's one way it's looked at, but in most cases the position held is Agnostic-Atheism. Not knowing, but more leaning to the left of the spectrum, because the evidence is yet to convert you otherwise. But agreed, slip on the point by myself there. 

EDIT: Thought for a moment, the boldest form of Atheism is as much a fallacy as any given belief without proof. That said, for anyone reading, any time I comment on Atheism, unless you're directly making a point on the stupid Atheism, I'm talking about the Agnostic-Atheist side of things.

[Fake Crowley]

Ah, sorry. I'll keep that in mind.