I know Nai is arguing intent. I conceded that point. I'm arguing a whole different issue. Deaths caused by the religious vs. deaths caused by the secularists, since it's usually the #1 argument condemning religion.
Now, I COULD bring up the holocaust and say that 6 millions Jews were killed because they were Jewish. Wouldn't you agree?
Yes, I would. To clarify, are you arguing that atheism/secularism itself has driven so many to kill so many others (and if so, are you saying those killers targeted theists because of their beliefs, or despite them?) Or are you just saying that atheists/secularists have killed many, but their religious beliefs are not what made them do it?
Originally posted by Nephthys
You can only really appreciate a character when your forced to defend them and become invested in them.
Originally posted by psmith81992That's a tricky one. Are you implicating atheism/secularism as the catalyst for the Nazi's genocide?
The latter, but if one is going to try and nitpick and make a distinction, such as religion itself caused people to kill while secularism did not, then I would throw in the Holocaust as an example of that not being accurate.
In part, regarding the Holocaust for sure. Stalin would be a little more tricky. Although a few million Christians were killed, a lot more non denominational people were killed.
But again, that's only if you're going to nitpick that religious murders are treated in one way while secularist/atheist/communist are necessarily treated in another.
Originally posted by psmith81992
Who were the first to go in the Hitler and Stalin genocide? The Jews and Christians. The religious groups are the first ones to go.
Nope. The "first to go" were political dissidents in both regimes and by far more of them, than those getting killed because of their religion.
Really irrelevant considering:1. Atheists use the Crusades and 'religious killings' in a historical context to condemn religion, and then ignore the opposite side of the coin, which is Communism/Secularism.
The Crusades caused round about 20 million deaths over the course of two centuries. The Conquistadores and other European settlers wiped about 60 million people out on the Amercian continent (South, Middle, North). Then you have fun stuff like the Spanish Inquisition, Witch burnings, people being killed because of being "heretics" and antisemitism also wasn't "invented" by Hitler. It had a long lasting history in Europe.
That being said, I find it rather absurd to argue against religion based on crimes commited in the name of it. Your everyday Christian has as much in common with a Crusader as your everyday Muslim has with Osama bin Laden. Yet, when religious reasons are utilized to opress or even harm people, one should argue against that. But you don't need to be an conservative Christian/Jew/Muslim to be homophobic (just as example).
2. Even if atheism/secularism is a 20th century construct, Mao and Stalin were responsible for close to 100 million deaths. You spend your time in education, count up all the religious bodies throughout history, see if you get to 1-2% of that amount.
I'm already at 80 million deaths with just the Crusades and the Conquest of America.
As to your nitpicking regarding religion vs. secularism, I can argue that religious deaths are simply the product of people who intentionally misinterpret their bibles for their own agenda. Otherwise you're using double standards.
Well. You aren't wrong with that statement, but you're overlooking the most crucial fact here: Religious people have an easy option to justify murder in two ways. First, they can just assume that they are allowed to do so, essentialy based on a "my god is better than your god" mindset. Second, they don't even need to think about killing "their own" people, because some metaphysical entity will sort the "good ones" out for an afterlife in paradise.
Most certainly, you can do the first thing using pretty much any ideology at hand, but the second step is rather hard to archive with a secular mindset. If you don't believe in an afterlife or a higher moral power, you can't get rewarded after your death for the atrocities you commited in the name of your favourite cult and neither can you ignore "mistakes" in your judgement, because the omnipowerful entity will correct them anyway.
The latter, but if one is going to try and nitpick and make a distinction, such as religion itself caused people to kill while secularism did not, then I would throw in the Holocaust as an example of that not being accurate
And I have to correct you once more: The Holocaust was clearly not something motivated by secularism. Hitler believed, that the Christianity was a religion "corrupted" by Jewish influence, that he wanted to remove. But Antisemitism isn't even possible without a "religious" mindset. You can't blame people for their system of believe, if you don't have one that differs from it. And the latter thing is something that secularism doesn't offer.
Yet, the "destinction" between religious / secular murders lies within the fact, that the religious once wouldn't have been possible without Religion, while the crimes of Mao and Stalin have next to nothing to do with their atheism / secularism, meaning that most of them would have happened, even if the communist states didn't feature state atheism. Most of that people were killed, because of opposing the political agenda (even it they did so based on religious beliefs) and not because they believed in God, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti-Monster.
he Crusades caused round about 20 million deaths over the course of two centuries. The Conquistadores and other European settlers wiped about 60 million people out on the Amercian continent (South, Middle, North). Then you have fun stuff like the Spanish Inquisition, Witch burnings, people being killed because of being "heretics" and antisemitism also wasn't "invented" by Hitler. It had a long lasting history in Europe.That being said, I find it rather absurd to argue against religion based on crimes commited in the name of it. Your everyday Christian has as much in common with a Crusader as your everyday Muslim has with Osama bin Laden. Yet, when religious reasons are utilized to opress or even harm people, one should argue against that. But you don't need to be an conservative Christian/Jew/Muslim to be homophobic (just as example).
And I have to correct you once more: The Holocaust was clearly not something motivated by secularism. Hitler believed, that the Christianity was a religion "corrupted" by Jewish influence, that he wanted to remove. But Antisemitism isn't even possible without a "religious" mindset. You can't blame people for their system of believe, if you don't have one that differs from it. And the latter thing is something that secularism doesn't offer.
Yet, the "destinction" between religious / secular murders lies within the fact, that the religious once wouldn't have been possible without Religion, while the crimes of Mao and Stalin have next to nothing to do with their atheism / secularism, meaning that most of them would have happened, even if the communist states didn't feature state atheism. Most of that people were killed, because of opposing the political agenda (even it they did so based on religious beliefs) and not because they believed in God, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti-Monster.
I'm already at 80 million deaths with just the Crusades and the Conquest of America.
Add to the fact that numerous sources have Europe's population at its height during the Middle Ages/Crusades at 120 million (highest estimate), and your exaggeration is essentially stating that the Crusades were responsible for 66% of the deaths in Europe, so no Nai.
But of course, I'm not even sure why you would intentionally try to mislead us unless you accept the accuracy of the death toll of secularists vs. religious fundamentalists.
Also to liven the mood: