If Scott Roeder was an Atheist would he still have murdered Dr. Tiller?

[loco]

So what you are claiming is that Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot only targeted people who were religious.  Is that correct?

Otherwise, if they murdered a single atheist, there is no way you can draw a comparision with your little example.  They were murderers.  Plain and simple.

I am claiming only the truth, that Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were atheists and they murdered millions of innocent people.  That's what I'm claiming.  Deal with it!

This guy, Scott Roeder, may have claimed to be a Christian, but he shot another Christian.  And his justification for it was not a religious one, but the same secular argument that both secular and religious anti-abortion people use, to defend the unborns' right to life.

[tu_holmes]

I doubt he would have murdered Dr. Tiller... He probably would have found another reason to murder someone else though.

Crazy is crazy.

[Dos Equis]

Loco didn't you post something about Jeffrey Dahmer becoming a Christian after he was in prison, after his murderous rampage?  

Did Ted Bundy have a jailhouse conversion too?  

[Dos Equis]

I doubt he would have murdered Dr. Tiller... He probably would have found another reason to murder someone else though.

Crazy is crazy.

I agree.  Crazy is crazy.  This nut was apparantly previously treated for mental illness. 

[BM OUT]

Just five?  The atheist guy from Finland murdered more than that by himself in one day.  And millions of innocent people were murdered by atheists like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.

I said FIVE abortion doctors in this country!!!I cant speak for the rest of the world.

[24KT]

I said FIVE abortion doctors in this country!!!I cant speak for the rest of the world.

How many receptionists, innocent passersby, etc were merely collateral damage?
How many businesses interfered with, locks glued shut, offices blown up resulting in a lack of prenatal care for women who wanted to give birth to healthy babies.? To say it's only 5 is ridulous. It's 5 too many.

[BM OUT]

How many receptionists, innocent passersby, etc were merely collateral damage?
How many businesses interfered with, locks glued shut, offices blown up resulting in a lack of prenatal care for women who wanted to give birth to healthy babies.? To say it's only 5 is ridulous. It's 5 too many.

Thats your opinion.I wish it were 5,000.I find it amusing that the left gets all worked up over the anti-abortion crowd,but votes in a guy who was pals with Bill Ayers who DID THE SAME EXACT STUFF except ,like a typical lib,he was so icompetant at it ,they ended up blowing themseloves up.

[Deicide]

Oh, yes you can, especially considering the Crusades laster far longer than Stalin's regime.

D’Souza covers that weak canard in the same chapter:

Religion-inspired killing simply cannot compete with the murders perpetrated by atheist regimes. I recognize that population levels were much lower in the past, and that it’s easier to kill people today with sophisticated weapons that it was in previous years with swords and arrows. Even taking higher population levels into account, atheist violence surpasses religious violence by staggering proportions. Here is a rough calculation. The world’s population rose from around 500 million in 1450 to 2.5 billion in 1950, a fivefold increase. Taken together, the Crusades, Inquisition, and the witch burnings killed approximately 200,000 people. Adjusting for the increase in population, that’s the equivalent of one million deaths today. Even do, these deaths caused by Christian rulers over a 500-year-period amount to only 1 percent of the deaths caused by Stalin, Hitler, and Mao in the space of a few decades

Basically, Hitler's regime topped the body count of the Crusades, Inquisition and the Salem Witch trials, by at least TENFOLD......ALL BY ITSELF.

We can see the difference by looking at attitudes towards Jews in medieval Europe. In 15th-century Spain, a Jew could escape Christian persecution simply by converting to Christianity. Ferdinand and Isabella did not object to having ethnic Jews in Spain; they objected to the practice of Judaism in what they wanted to be a completely Catholic country.

Hitler’s objection to Jews, on the other hand, was not religious. A Jew could not escape Auschwitz by pleading, “I no longer practice Judaism”, “I am an atheist”, or “I have converted to Christianity”. This mattered nothing to Hitler because he believed the Jews were inferior racial stock. His anti-Semitism was secular.


So, this claim that atheist regimes slayed millions more, due only to possession of  better and more weapons is preposterous.

Wow, they only wanted to force them to convert. How nice of them...

As has been said a million times before none of these men did these things in the name of their atheism. They followers and leaders of secular religions. Whatever their specific reasons it is clear they didn't do these things because they were demanding too much rationality and too much evidence for their beliefs.

[MCWAY]

Wow, they only wanted to force them to convert. How nice of them...

As has been said a million times before none of these men did these things in the name of their atheism. They followers and leaders of secular religions. Whatever their specific reasons it is clear they didn't do these things because they were demanding too much rationality and too much evidence for their beliefs.

And the difference between secular religion and atheism would be.............

[Deicide]

And the difference between secular religion and atheism would be.............

Secular religion is filled with dogma; that is the real problem, unquestioning adherence to some set of unproven beliefs or principles. Dogma pervades both secular ideologies and religious ones. Atheism is the mere absence of belief in deities and whilst it is true some people choose to organise themselves around their atheism that still doesn't fit the standard definition of atheism. The vast majority of my friends are atheists for example and we never talk about it, much less organise anything around our shared atheism. Dogma, be it Communist, Fascist, Christian or Hindu is dogma. As I said, all these belief systems share a lack of evidence and a lack of demand for rational enquiry.

[MCWAY]

Secular religion is filled with dogma; that is the real problem, unquestioning adherence to some set of unproven beliefs or principles. Dogma pervades both secular ideologies and religious ones. Atheism is the mere absence of belief in deities and whilst it is true some people choose to organise themselves around their atheism that still doesn't fit the standard definition of atheism. The vast majority of my friends are atheists for example and we never talk about it, much less organise anything around our shared atheism. Dogma, be it Communist, Fascist, Christian or Hindu is dogma. As I said, all these belief systems share a lack of evidence and a lack of demand for rational enquiry.

That may be the definition, in theory (jury's still out on that). But in practice, atheism is HARDLY the mere lack of belief in a supernatural deity. It is, instead, a deliberate and calculated hostility towards religion and people of faith, in both word and deed.

You might to tell them that they ain't really atheists, along with those folks in California, discussed some time ago, who attend those humanist centers on Sundays to mimick their Christian counterparts' church attendance.

[tu_holmes]

That may be the definition, in theory (jury's still out on that). But in practice, atheism is HARDLY the mere lack of belief in a supernatural deity. It is, instead, a deliberate and calculated hostility towards religion and people of faith, in both word and deed.

I disagree with this completely.

[MCWAY]

I disagree with this completely.

A number of atheists do. However, some of the (as I like to call them) Flavors-of-the-Month in the world of atheism (Dawkins, Hitchens, et. al.) espouse views and rhetoric that hardly reflect people who simply don't believe there is a God.

[loco]

That may be the definition, in theory (jury's still out on that). But in practice, atheism is HARDLY the mere lack of belief in a supernatural deity. It is, instead, a deliberate and calculated hostility towards religion and people of faith, in both word and deed.

I agree with this completely, and Straw Man's multiple anti-Christian threads are a great example of it.

[Deicide]

That may be the definition, in theory (jury's still out on that). But in practice, atheism is HARDLY the mere lack of belief in a supernatural deity. It is, instead, a deliberate and calculated hostility towards religion and people of faith, in both word and deed.

You might to tell them that they ain't really atheists, along with those folks in California, discussed some time ago, who attend those humanist centers on Sundays to mimick their Christian counterparts' church attendance.

I think I have gone on record for saying I think those things they do are very strange to say the least. I would NEVER be part of that.

[a_joker10]

Secular religion is filled with dogma; that is the real problem, unquestioning adherence to some set of unproven beliefs or principles. Dogma pervades both secular ideologies and religious ones. Atheism is the mere absence of belief in deities and whilst it is true some people choose to organise themselves around their atheism that still doesn't fit the standard definition of atheism. The vast majority of my friends are atheists for example and we never talk about it, much less organise anything around our shared atheism. Dogma, be it Communist, Fascist, Christian or Hindu is dogma. As I said, all these belief systems share a lack of evidence and a lack of demand for rational enquiry.

The same people hold science up as religion.
People like to think that science can explain everything.
Which it can't and which scientific method is strictly against.
The scientific method is the based on finding flaws in what is existing theories.
Almost all of the greatest advancements in science are based in this.
Examples of theories that people and almost all atheists hold as true are evolution, global warming, the big bang, the extinction of dinosaurs.

If someone speaks against them their are now considered crazy, however the basic premise of science holds that they are not true and that a better theory exists.

As for atheists killing an abortion doctor. Maybe you should look at Columbine or Virginia Tech. Atheists do some strange stuff too.

Most of all though murder of this type has more to do with mental illness than religion.

[Deicide]

The same people hold science up as religion.
People like to think that science can explain everything.
Which it can't and which scientific method is strictly against.
The scientific method is the based on finding flaws in what is existing theories.
Almost all of the greatest advancements in science are based in this.
Examples of theories that people and almost all atheists hold as true are evolution, global warming, the big bang, the extinction of dinosaurs.

If someone speaks against them their are now considered crazy, however the basic premise of science holds that they are not true and that a better theory exists.

As for atheists killing an abortion doctor. Maybe you should look at Columbine or Virginia Tech. Atheists do some strange stuff too.

Most of all though murder of this type has more to do with mental illness than religion.

Do you think it is safe to say that the Garden of Eden, talking snakes and magic apples are probably myths?

[a_joker10]

Do you think it is safe to say that the Garden of Eden, talking snakes and magic apples are probably myths?

I think that they are symbols.
I don't believe that bible is the inerrant word of God.

But I do believe in God.

I like to view science as tool that reveals God's work.

[tu_holmes]

A number of atheists do. However, some of the (as I like to call them) Flavors-of-the-Month in the world of atheism (Dawkins, Hitchens, et. al.) espouse views and rhetoric that hardly reflect people who simply don't believe there is a God.

Don't really listen to them either.

[Deicide]

I think that they are symbols.
I don't believe that bible is the inerrant word of God.

But I do believe in God.

I like to view science as tool that reveals God's work.

Which god? Vishnu? Jesus? Zeus? Odin? Quetzalcoatl? Dagda?

[a_joker10]

Which god? Vishnu? Jesus? Zeus? Odin? Quetzalcoatl? Dagda?

Jesus isn't a God.
God is God.

However I don't rule out a single God,with multiple titles, forming multiple religions.

I won't know this until I am dead.

[Deicide]

Jesus isn't a God.
God is God.

However I don't rule out a single God,with multiple titles, forming multiple religions.

I won't know this until I am dead.

Do you rule out the possibility of no god(s)?

[a_joker10]

Do you rule out the possibility of no god(s)?

That could be a possibility but,
I don't believe it to be true.

Something stared the big bang.
There is some reason I can think and use logic.
There is some reason that we as a species succeed, when we are constantly trying to kill each other.

I believe that God is responsible for this.

Science can't prove that there isn't a God.
That is why I have faith.

However I won't know for sure until I am dead.

[Straw Man]

I agree with this completely, and Straw Man's multiple anti-Christian threads are a great example of it.

If my threads are "anti" anything it would be religious extremist....any religion

you and I have had enough dialogues that I figured you would know that already

[Straw Man]

As i stated earlier there is a point when religious beliefs stop and a persons personal beliefs begin obviously its not a religious belief to go around killing ppl. Sure they are his religious beliefs but they are not religious beliefs if you understand the difference. you cannot use his actions to demonize religion like you want to do.

until you can show that the bible advocates such actions then those actions taken by roeder where not in the name of christianity, they were in the name of his individual beliefs

Tony - your denials are getting tiresome.

Anti-Abortion activists are motivated by their religious beliefs but the guys like Roeder let their beliefs drive them to crazy extremes.

Why the absurd denials of the obvious.  There actions have nothing to do with you or the millions of other peaceful christians

This is no different than Muslim extremist and peaceful Muslims.  Surely you understand it in that example so why do pretend not to get it when the example has to do with your religion?

Anyone who watches the Randall Terry video that I posted will know that his religious beliefs are the motivating factor in his anti-abortion activism