Atheist leaders have suppressed religion because religion already has its rules for people, and those weren't rules issued by those leaders.

However, atheists fighting for the sake of imposing atheism on others because that's what they believe is about as likely as gay hairdressers fighting to break into your home to fix that horrible haircut they saw you with.

Those attrocities had nothing to do with those peoples' atheism, but rather with the political regime's they were promoting.

Atheist leaders have suppressed religion because religion already has its rules for people, and those weren't rules issued by those leaders.

However, atheists fighting for the sake of imposing atheism on others because that's what they believe is about as likely as gay hairdressers fighting to break into your home to fix that horrible haircut they saw you with.

so its fine for them to invade and spread atheism as by product as long as they didnt say it openly that its to destroy religions?

Religious wars weren't about imposing religion on people.  They were about taking over regions that weren't of said religion.

Aka taking over countries whose beliefs and rulership was different.  No different then the reasoning you gave for atheism.

Though, this is largely immatieral to the subject at hand.

People don't want to look at the actual studies and research and instead concoct ridiculious strawman points.

I guess so. The whole point of christianity is to believe in the teaching of jesus christ. The whole christian religion and faith is based on that. Jesus never said you have to be christian in order to be with God ( being in heaven ). He said you shouldt follow him.I remember someone (who is probably much smarter than me and you ) saying''you dont have to believe in Jesus, Mosses or Mohammed, rather believe in the teachings these men teach and you'll earn eternal slavation'' Christians, Muslims and Jews believe in the same God and some even have some same relgious characters.. When Muhammed escaped his enemies in Mecca, he came upon christian king who let him in his kingdom and said: come in and let me know about you God'' on which MUhammed replied: ''Our God is your God, and your God is our God''.

Communisam promotes atheisam andd sees the religion and religious people as their enemies. Its like saying ''KKK didnt lynch people black people for being black, thel lynched them for not being white''

Religious wars weren't about imposing religion on people.  They were about taking over regions that weren't of said religion.   -----so what's the difference?

People don't want to look at the actual studies and research and instead concoct ridiculious strawman points.----- of course they don't. People are going to believe what they believe. It's not like i'm doing a research paper on the whole subject. What's makes what you believe any more vaild then what I believe and vice versa?

It's the same as the reasoning he gave for communists.  Religious wars were about one thing.  Politics.  Not religion.

"Spreading" of religion was a byproduct.  Though it wasn't even spreading... it was pushing those of a different group out.

Additionally, the research being missed, is that atheists (on average) are far less charitable.  The interesting question is why... not trying to develop all kinds of pointless unrelated strawman arguements.

You couldn't of missed the point any harder if you tried.

Likely because your in "angry self defense mode" rather then "lets look at the numbers and causes" mode.

I'll try and explain again, though it'll be hard to do in a different way.  Please try and look at it from an objective viewpoint and don't assume anything.

1) On average (note: average)  religious people are more likely to give money, blood and effort to both secular and nonsecular charities.  If you are currently religious, there is a much higher chance you are going to donate to charity and give blood/donate time.

2) We need to find a reason for why this would be true.  My hypothesis is that the church works as a large community that peer pressures people into doing the right thing.

Lots of people go to churches who may have moderate to no interest in helping people.

Almost no one is going to join amnesty international unless they REALLY want to give to charity.  Also, you don't have to be catholic to donate time or money to a catholic charity.

As a LOT of charity people will tell you, there is a LOT of untapped money and potential of people who want to be charitable... the only trick is, you need to find ways to coax it out of people.

So what atheism should do if it grows, is find a way to create a "Church like" community like churches, that draw in everybody and then individually asks for help and support.

The point is, getting people to go to a charity event... who wouldn't normally go to a charity event... it's pretty much the biggest dilema charities have had since... well existance.

Religion is much better at in general "reigning in morality" just based on the fact that it's a meeting of the community.

I think it's likely that rather then the particular religion, since religion doesn't seem to matter.  All that does matters is that you practice it.  Statistically that is.