Quantcast
Texas church shooting leaves many dead (atleast 27).

Forums - Politics Discussion - Texas church shooting leaves many dead (atleast 27).

vivster said:
numberwang said:

According to his "friends" and his social media posts he was a militant atheist, ranting about stupid believers.

"Classmate Nina Rosa Nava write on Facebook that the mass murderer used to rant on the social network about his atheist beliefs. She said: “He was always talking about how people who believe in God were stupid and trying to preach his atheism.”"

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4851812/texas-church-shooting-devin-kelley-facebook-atheism/

This might be the first case of atheist-terrorism in the US.

If that's actually the case I'm suprised it took so long.

Can't wait for the religious right to connect atheism to violence. Oh wait, they probably already did.

State-atheism (USSR, Red China, Cambodia etc) were one of the most violent movements in history.



Around the Network

The man who chased away the shooter. Edit: there was another shooter earlier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwYd2kIZxk4

Last edited by numberwang - on 06 November 2017

numberwang said:
vivster said:

If that's actually the case I'm suprised it took so long.

Can't wait for the religious right to connect atheism to violence. Oh wait, they probably already did.

State-atheism (USSR, Red China, Cambodia etc) were one of the most violent movements in history.

There is no such thing as "state-atheism". Atheism is a belief based on rational thought that a person will find on his own. That's the great thing about atheism, you don't need to be indoctrinated by your parents or the state to find it.

None of the states you mentioned used atheism as a tool to oppress people, simply because there are no atheist policies to use because atheism does not have policies. It just so happened that those states were not ruled my religion.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
numberwang said:

State-atheism (USSR, Red China, Cambodia etc) were one of the most violent movements in history.

There is no such thing as "state-atheism". Atheism is a belief based on rational thought that a person will find on his own. That's the great thing about atheism, you don't need to be indoctrinated by your parents or the state to find it.

None of the states you mentioned used atheism as a tool to oppress people, simply because there are no atheist policies to use because atheism does not have policies. It just so happened that those states were not ruled my religion.

I was about to say it, but you beat me to it, so I'll just say... pretty much this. I would only change from "belief..." to "disbelief in gods"

Nothing more is needed. No rules or instructions bind every atheist together. It's just an opinion on 1 single subject.



numberwang said:
vivster said:

If that's actually the case I'm suprised it took so long.

Can't wait for the religious right to connect atheism to violence. Oh wait, they probably already did.

State-atheism (USSR, Red China, Cambodia etc) were one of the most violent movements in history.

That's not how that works.  A lack of religion is not a religion.  It's not like those nations were making speeches on atheism.  Nor where they violent as a platform for being non-religious.

It's like not having a favorite sports team.  Some fans will fight over which team is the best but nobody is going to fight others on the basis that they don't follow sports. 



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Around the Network
vivster said:
numberwang said:

State-atheism (USSR, Red China, Cambodia etc) were one of the most violent movements in history.

There is no such thing as "state-atheism". Atheism is a belief based on rational thought that a person will find on his own. That's the great thing about atheism, you don't need to be indoctrinated by your parents or the state to find it.

None of the states you mentioned used atheism as a tool to oppress people, simply because there are no atheist policies to use because atheism does not have policies. It just so happened that those states were not ruled my religion.

Only one correction. Atheism is not belief based. It is a lack of belief.

Rest is correct. There is no agenda, no doctrine, no rules, nothing of that sort in atheism. Atheism is just a theological position whereas an atheist don't believe in a god or gods.

But some theists, mostly apologists, doesn't understand this simple explanation. 



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti 11GB VRAM | Asus PG27UQ gaming on 3840 x 2160 @120 Hz GSYNC HDR| HTC Vive Pro :3

Reached PC Masterrace level.

I think people are saying that peoples adherence to craziest fringes of the ideologies like communism in Cambodia and Stalin Russia or Mao China are the equivalent to fundamentalist religious belief.



vivster said:
numberwang said:

State-atheism (USSR, Red China, Cambodia etc) were one of the most violent movements in history.

There is no such thing as "state-atheism". Atheism is a belief based on rational thought that a person will find on his own. That's the great thing about atheism, you don't need to be indoctrinated by your parents or the state to find it.

None of the states you mentioned used atheism as a tool to oppress people, simply because there are no atheist policies to use because atheism does not have policies. It just so happened that those states were not ruled my religion.

Actually, I think most atheists these days had to have come to that belief through being made aware of it, not by finding it on your own. I know that I didn't become an atheist until after I was made aware that such a thing existed. And by state atheism, it's not necessarily in that atheism is the official policy, but many religious institutions were shut down, and the religious leaders executed.

setsunatenshi said:
vivster said:

There is no such thing as "state-atheism". Atheism is a belief based on rational thought that a person will find on his own. That's the great thing about atheism, you don't need to be indoctrinated by your parents or the state to find it.

None of the states you mentioned used atheism as a tool to oppress people, simply because there are no atheist policies to use because atheism does not have policies. It just so happened that those states were not ruled my religion.

I was about to say it, but you beat me to it, so I'll just say... pretty much this. I would only change from "belief..." to "disbelief in gods"

Nothing more is needed. No rules or instructions bind every atheist together. It's just an opinion on 1 single subject.

I do agree that atheism is a generic term, and that people cannot be grouped together based on it, but that doesn't mean that a harsh, authoritarian regime cannot do such a thing.

SpokenTruth said:
numberwang said:

State-atheism (USSR, Red China, Cambodia etc) were one of the most violent movements in history.

That's not how that works.  A lack of religion is not a religion.  It's not like those nations were making speeches on atheism.  Nor where they violent as a platform for being non-religious.

It's like not having a favorite sports team.  Some fans will fight over which team is the best but nobody is going to fight others on the basis that they don't follow sports. 

I don't know if they made speeches on atheism, but they made speeches against religion. I'm not sure if you want to use Wikipedia as a valid source, but they mainly ended the campaign because they needed support for the regime after Operation Barbarossa:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USSR_anti-religious_campaign_(1928-1941)

Peh said:
vivster said:

There is no such thing as "state-atheism". Atheism is a belief based on rational thought that a person will find on his own. That's the great thing about atheism, you don't need to be indoctrinated by your parents or the state to find it.

None of the states you mentioned used atheism as a tool to oppress people, simply because there are no atheist policies to use because atheism does not have policies. It just so happened that those states were not ruled my religion.

Only one correction. Atheism is not belief based. It is a lack of belief.

Rest is correct. There is no agenda, no doctrine, no rules, nothing of that sort in atheism. Atheism is just a theological position whereas an atheist don't believe in a god or gods.

But some theists, mostly apologists, doesn't understand this simple explanation. 

Yes, that is true in that atheism is not a set ideology, and more of a generic term. However, we can talk about regimes in that sense, like the policies of the CPSU, CCP and Khmer Rouge.



VGPolyglot said:

Actually, I think most atheists these days had to have come to that belief through being made aware of it, not by finding it on your own. I know that I didn't become an atheist until after I was made aware that such a thing existed. And by state atheism, it's not necessarily in that atheism is the official policy, but many religious institutions were shut down, and the religious leaders executed.

You weren't aware that it was possible to not believe in deities? I should think everyone would be aware that that is indeed possible, even if they don't know the exact word to describe it...



Bet Shiken that COD would outsell Battlefield in 2018. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8749702

Ka-pi96 said:
VGPolyglot said:

Actually, I think most atheists these days had to have come to that belief through being made aware of it, not by finding it on your own. I know that I didn't become an atheist until after I was made aware that such a thing existed. And by state atheism, it's not necessarily in that atheism is the official policy, but many religious institutions were shut down, and the religious leaders executed.

You weren't aware that it was possible to not believe in deities? I should think everyone would be aware that that is indeed possible, even if they don't know the exact word to describe it...

No, I wasn't aware of it. I just assumed that believing in dieties was something everyone did.