Burnt out arguing with nut cases?

[Thumpalumpacus]

NEVER has an atheist bombed someone, stoned them, beheaded them, burned them at the stake, or crucified them in the name of Atheism.

Stalin did work thousands of Anabaptists and others to death due solely to their religious affiliation, according to Solzhenitsyn in Gualg Archipelago.

[Caecilian]

NEVER has an atheist bombed someone, stoned them, beheaded them, burned them at the stake, or crucified them in the name of Atheism.

Stalin did work thousands of Anabaptists and others to death due solely to their religious affiliation, according to Solzhenitsyn in Gualg Archipelago.

Yeah, its quite true that the Marxists have done hideous things in the name of state atheism- the Chinese attack on Tibetan Buddhism is another example.

Having said that, I'd tend to view Marxism as a kind of mutant religion. It has its sacred texts, its heresies and its martyrs. And its deity is the state- an infinitely more dangerous object of worship than the imaginary friend that christians believe in. For unlike yahweh, the state is very real, and very powerful. The paradise that the marxist holy books promise- the withering away of the state and the communist utopia- is just as illusory as its christian equivalent. Freedom cannot be achieved through the instruments of slavery.

[Gawen]

NEVER has an atheist bombed someone, stoned them, beheaded them, burned them at the stake, or crucified them in the name of Atheism.

Stalin did work thousands of Anabaptists and others to death due solely to their religious affiliation, according to Solzhenitsyn in Gualg Archipelago.

Yeah, but Thump, Stalin did this not for "atheism" but for his brand of political ideology...that being Stalinist Communism.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I agree that he was likely more concerned about eliminating a rival to the Orthodox Church with which he'd made a wartime deal to secure their patriotism, and that the persecution of the religious minorities was not based on atheist but rather secular motives.

The fact remains that it was their religion that caused their death.

So far as discussing the religious aspects of Leninism/Stalinism, I am in broad agreement, but again, that doesn't obviate my point:  An atheist has indeed killed a human based on the victim's religious denomination.  

"Never", like "always", is rarely a good choice of wording.

[Caecilian]

I think that what the Soviet example demonstrates is that the problem is not so much religion per se as faith. Systems of thought which are based on faith rather than reason and rational inquiry are always dangerous, and if possible will normally try to:

a) Destroy competing faiths
and
b) Distort science in the interests of maintaining the faith.

In my view, there is a clear parallel between creationism and the Lysenko case. Both are examples of faith-based ideologies opposing science which conflicts with some alleged 'higher truth'.

Communism is/was a secular faith that drew heavily from the well-established model of christianity. Now that it has fallen, religion is once again the main enemy of free thought.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Agreed.   If you analyze it memetically, Communism is simply a meme which is highly efficient at eliminating competitors.