The Horrors of Atheist Regimes

Modern Historians often cite the French Revolution as the beginning of the modern period. This should not surprise as most of our Universities over the last century were, and still are  imbedded with a Leftist philosophy. That philosophy sees the French Revolution as their own cultural watershed and coming of age. After all it was in this period of revolution that the ‘Cult of Reason’ was proclaimed, together with the invention of ‘The Enlightenment’ , the critique of Christianity and the coming to power of an atheistic movement that threw off religion and ‘backward superstition‘.

The fact is often conveniently overlooked that after the Revolution, in cold blood, that atheist movement publicly and systematically murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent Frenchmen first by guillotine and then by mass drowning when the method of public beheading was deemed to be inefficient. It is also overlooked that the Revolution self-imploded after only a few short years in brutal infighting and disillusionment  which mirrors the implosion of many 20th century Atheist states from Russia to Ethiopia to Portugal etc. After the horrors of murder and suppression were fully unleashed and had run its course, in the name of Progressive social engineering, there was no intellectual strength, morality or common desire  to support the subsequent Godless societies.

The short 18th century period of time where the French atheists came to power is called ‘The Reign of Terror’. Such brutality had not been seen in Christendom before. It would lift the curtain for subsequent European and global genocides which followed the same anti-religious rhetoric fuelled by the Enlightenment values of atheistic thinkers. The 20th century atheist horror is called the ‘Red Terror’. And terror it certainly was, even more bloodthirsty and savage then the one that it proceeded from. It still goes on today in parts of China and North Korea. Many other former atheist countries have today reversed their views of religion as a backward superstition and actively try to incorporate religion into the running of their failed states. We are seeing also in the intellectual West a quiet move away from the promotion of atheism as the full horrors and failures of where that philosophy leads becomes apparent.

For a short while after the bloodthirsty destruction and failure of the French Revolution atheism was shunned by the political and philosophical classes. Charles Darwin and the naturalist theory of ‘The Survival of the Fittest’ then provided a new impetus. It is interesting to note that Christian Churches were not generally against the theory of evolution and Charles Darwin himself left open the question of God although he personally apostatized from Christianity. In many atheist minds though, the new theory made it more credible, acceptable and even necessary to be an atheist.

Many of these atheistic thinkers drew their inspiration from Darwin and looked again to remake society in natural terms. Ideas of a God were again ridiculed and those who held such ideas were again considered intellectually superstitious and backward. Many of the ‘Enlightened’ thinkers from that period are today held as the founders fathers of atheistic philosophy. They also were  indirectly responsible for the horrors that descended upon us in the last century.

Karl Marx, the founder of what is called socialist Marxism took Charles Darwin’s notion of a struggle for survival in nature and applied it to his struggle between human social and economic classes proclaiming an inevitable evolution from Capitalism to Socialism. He viewed Christianity as outdated and scientifically disproved and a hindrance to the progressive evolution of society. Hitler subsequently took Darwin’s and Marx’s ideas, joined them with other Atheistic ideas of Nietzsche and Wagner and applied it to the struggle between different human races. Dozens of ‘enlightened’ megalomaniacs and  monsters of history took up the same insanity all around the globe in different local contexts in the 20th century. The result was the same in each context. Large numbers of people were de-selected (murdered) for the progressive evolution of the state into a socialist Utopia. Religion took the brunt of the destruction by this enlightened philosophy which somehow saw itself as exclusively following reason and science.

In the Christian West, Marx’s spiritual Socialist children had the idea that an outdated Christianity needed to be ruthlessly expunged and/or replaced for their modern progressive revolutions to succeed. The inspiration of the French Revolution together with Darwin’s idea of evolution by the removal of the weakest was the rationale for their subsequent progressive purges of large sections of their own populace and the purposeful purging of Christian intellectual opposition.

Whilst International Socialists viewed Christianity as an enemy which needed to be exterminated altogether, Hitler’s National Socialism viewed Christianity as a Jewish corruption that needed to be remade in a German context, controlled and put to use by the progressive state.

Soviet Socialists imprisoned and murdered hundreds of thousands of priests, demolished tens of thousands of Churches, made it illegal to teach Christianity in schools, allowed millions of Ukrainian peasant Christians to die of starvation, exiled millions of other citizens into concentration camps, made it illegal for people under the age of 18 to participate in religious ceremonies, taught children atheism in public schools and gave then homework projects of converting one of their family members to atheism.

Adolph Hitler also made it illegal to teach Christianity in schools, united all Protestant Churches under the authority of the state replacing Church crosses with Swastika’s, made it compulsorily for German youth to attend weekly Hitler youth camps which clashed with Sunday Church services, closed Catholic newspapers, tried to replace Catholic school crucifixes with pictures of Hitler, negotiated the removal of Catholic parties from German politics, then orchestrated a media campaign against the Church, threw hundreds of nuns out of the state social services, sponsored the state confiscation of Church property, imprisoned thousands of priests in concentration camps and planned to kidnap and assassinate the Pope.

China and North Korea today imprison Christian intellectual opposition and it is illegal to be a Catholic in those countries. They both have de-selected (murdered) countless millions of dissidents and unborn children in their own population by forcibly arresting and ripping to shreds the babies from the wombs of young mothers in the name of the progressive natural engineering of society.

Hitler was directly influenced by German atheist writers such as Nietzsche and Wagner. For example, Hitler made comments  such as ‘one cannot understand National Socialism unless one first understands Wagner’ which clearly link  his National Socialism with the atheistic thinker. Hitler also was on friendly terms with the sister of the atheist philosopher Nietzsche. Nietzsche was one of the great founders of modern atheism. Freud for example made the comment that no other man saw the human condition quite so clearly as Nietzsche. Hitler personally presented Elizabeth Nietzsche with flowers for her then dead brother and received from her Nietzsche’s favourite walking stick. He also posed for a book photograph under a Nietzsche statue, visited often the Nietzsche museum and presented a collection of Nietzsche writings to his fellow dictator Mussolini who was both an admitted atheist and an admirer of Nietzsche‘s writings. Hitler also used terms and ideas that were developed by Nietzsche such as ‘Lords of the Earth‘ who were defined as a particular ruling race who would subsequently exterminate lesser races. A favourite term of Hitlers was Nietzsche’s ‘Übermensch’ that was used in the context of Hitler’s master race ideology.

While calling themselves socialists and following much atheistic ideology, the Nazis looked originally to forcibly discredit and take over Christianity rather than destroy the concept altogether. Alfred Rosenberg, one of  Hitler’s ministers and known for his hatred of Christianity was a leading figure in this history. He was a prominent player in the Nazi state creation of what was called ‘Positive Christianity’ and later published his plan to confiscate all Christian church property, replace the bible with Mein Kampf,  ban the printing of the Bible in Germany and make it illegal to import bibles from other countries.

These two strands of socialism, national and international, both based on atheistic philosophy and underpinned by Social Darwinism and Enlightenment thinking has caused terror, pain and death on a scale that has never before been seen and God willing, never again will be.

Modern progressive atheist regimes de-selected (murdered) their own people in mass quantities numbering collectively into the hundreds of millions. Just a few of these countries include China, Russia, Cambodia, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Poland, Ethiopia and Yugoslavia. The number of people killed by these regimes is staggering and it was all done in a very short time period.

By comparison, the much heralded Spanish Inquisition, run by the secular (civil) authorities of Spain in the Medieval Period after 800 years of Muslim colonial rule,  executed a maximum of 4,000 people over a timeframe of well over 300 years.  The entire Spanish Inquisition’s death toll would not make the top 30 of Atheist Government atrocities just in the 20th century alone. Places like Mongolia and Albania in the last century had atheist regimes who each brutally killed 25 times more people than did the secular run Spanish Inquisition. These atheist atrocities were themselves 25 times smaller than the atheist atrocities in Yugoslavia and Ethiopia and yet even these atheist atrocities were themselves more than 25 times smaller than the Russian and Chinese atheistic atrocities.

Yet how many even know about such numbers of atheist atrocities in the West? How many atheists burst with forced indignation about distant imagined atrocities by the Pope all the while creating a false history in their own minds in which to justify their present irrational anger towards Christianity? Is that healthy? Is that rational?

My thesis is that the militant atheist mind needs to justify its attacks on religion by forcing itself to perceive both history and science in an absurd and illogical way which is intellectually narrow and ultimately mentally unhealthy. That’s not to say atheists are mentally ill, but the direction that an atheist philosophy pushes one is to be super critical of the world around him that was forged by Christianity. Psychologically it is advantageous if Christianity, Christians and Christian history is imagined as evil and backward. Such a direction can produce a gradual mean spirited, arrogant and super critical closed mind.


  • tildeb  On September 30, 2011 at 11:50 pm

    You state that Karl Marx, the founder of what is called socialist Marxism took Charles Darwin’s notion of a struggle for survival in nature and applied it…

    Here I sit with the Communist Manifesto published in 1848 that you say incorporates Darwin’s evolution by natural selection published in The Origin of Species 1859! That Marx must have possessed either precognition or experienced a miraculous revelation! Also, regarding Darwin’s Decent of Man, it’s even later: 1871.

    You claim to be educated yet you take well-refuted and mistaken opinions of others an present them as if true (they’re not, obviously). This is not critical thinking in action (which is what an educated mind should be capable of exercising): it’s an example of how trusting one’s beliefs as if they were true is always problematic when dealing with facts about reality. It’s not that difficult to check these simple facts, but why check if you’re already convinced of the righteousness of your opinions without needing any verification from reality? That, in a nutshell, is why your opinions are in desperate need of legitimate and necessary criticisms (if you care about what’s true over and above about what you believe to be true). Perhaps we will find out where your actual priorities lie.

    So let’s now see if you have the moral courage, the intellectual integrity, the inquisitive honesty to allow my comments through your moderation. Just to be clear, I certainly wouldn’t censure yours on mine because I only care about what is true and not who is right.

  • Whatswrongwithatheism  On October 4, 2011 at 5:30 am

    Thankyou for your reply,
    I commend you on your allegiance to the truth and I welcome critical comments because that it a large part of how we learn. I would reject though the assertion that what drives me is somehow what you believe to be ‘beliefs’ whereas what drives you is the quest for the truth. I would suggest that you do not build up a belief system that rejects the religious simply because you believe “a priori” that their comments are being driven by an irrational process. I can see that your belief about ‘beliefs’ is important in your Atheistic formation and I will address this more fully in my reply to your post regarding “Do Atheists Believe”.

    Regarding the topic at hand. I didn’t say that you will find Marx using Darwin as a support in his Communist Manifesto dated 1848. In 1867 Marx wrote Das Kapital as a critique of Political Economy and how the capitalist mode of production was the precursor of the socialist mode of production. We know that Marx sent Charles Darwin a signed copy of his book and in footnote 4 of chapter 15 states :

    “Darwin has interested us in the history of Nature’s Technology, i.e., in the formation of the organs of plants and animals, which organs serve as instruments of production for sustaining life. Does not the history of the productive organs of man, of organs that are the material basis of all social organisation, deserve equal attention? And would not such a history be easier to compile, since, as Vico says, human history differs from natural history in this, that we have made the former, but not the latter? Technology discloses man’s mode of dealing with Nature, the process of production by which he sustains his life, and thereby also lays bare the mode of formation of his social relations, and of the mental conceptions that flow from them. Every history of religion, even, that fails to take account of this material basis, is uncritical.”

    Marx when writing to Ferdinand Lassalle in Berlin, January 1861 barely a year after the release of Darwin’s Origins of Species reveals :

    “Darwin’s work is most important and suits my purpose in that it provides a basis in natural science for the historical class struggle. One does, of course, have to put up with the clumsy English style of argument. Despite all shortcomings, it is here that, for the first time, ‘teleology’ in natural science is not only dealt a mortal blow but its rational meaning is empirically explained.”

    And Joseph Dietzgen who Marx considered both a friend and the “Philosopher of socialism” wrote in his essay on Ethics of Social Democracy in 1875:

    According to recent researches in the domain of natural science “the image of God” is a product which with its hair, with its body and soul, with its religion and morality, descended from the animal kingdom. “As far as I am concerned,” says Darwin, “I am as willing to derive my descent from that heroic little ape which defies its dangerous foe in order to save the life of its guardian, or from that old baboon which, coming down from the hills, victoriously takes away its young comrades from the amazed dogs – as from a savage who finds pleasure in torturing his enemies, offers up sanguinary sacrifices, commits child murder without any compunction, treats his wives as slaves, knows no decency and is controlled by the grossest superstition.” And indeed, my friends, it is more praiseworthy to work oneself up from brutality to the social-democratic ideal than to sink from a heaven-born Adam to the Christian worm, who, conscious of his sinful nonentity, creeps in the dust of humility. Progress is moral, and morality is progressive. As all other things in the world, morality is in constant evolution. It begins its existence with the animal, but does not win the name until it has grown in man. Fitness and efficiency, that is morality and virtue in the life of our species must, as everything else, struggle for existence against arrant reaction.

    You may also be interested in this piece by Anton Pannekoek from the Marxist Archive titled “Marxism and Darwinism” :

    and this from Mark Scott in the International Socialist archives titled “The Philosophy of Marxism”:

    and this article in the Journal of Economic Issues March 2001 titled Marx’s Ecology :

    • tildeb  On October 4, 2011 at 6:33 pm

      Marx did not apply Darwin’s theory of evolution when he wrote his manifesto, and it is this manifesto that introduces his (and Hegel’s) notion of class struggle. All the rest you write merely tries to show that Marx was rather taken by Darwin’s theory later. So what? Your causal chain of events remains out of whack, out of alignment, out of sequence with historical fact.

      Do you honestly think for one second that the French revolution was caused by atheism?

      Do you honestly think for one second that any totalitarian state has been motivated by respect for reasoning, for respecting what’s true?

      Your Hitler suggestion is that atheism was somehow a motivating factor. This is ludicrous. There is not a single mention in any of Hitler’s works that he ever read anything about Darwin. In stark contrast, Churchill does. Which of these WWII leaders do see as fighting the good fight?

      You have been fed a packet of lies and you’ve swallowed them whole for one reason only: to try to protect your religious beliefs about creationism when all evidence – every last scrap found in reality – fits seamlessly with evolution. In exchange, you’ve got nothing except misrepresentations, historical revisionism, and outright falsehoods on your side of this so-called ‘debate’.

      There is no debate except in your mind. There is no controversy that evolution is true. No amount of lying for jesus will change the facts as they truly are, that evolution is true. And that’s why medicine works, why vaccines work, why new strains of flu and viruses continue to evolve, why our medical technologies actually work, why our drug regimens are efficacious. This is what you must refute, this causal effect by means of a natural and reliable mechanism that we can understand and apply successfully for everyone everywhere all the time. In contrast, you religious folk can’t even get one faith-based story straight to find consensus even among yourselves!

      Pretending that there is some other explanation of how life has come to be derived from belief in some intervening oogity boogity requires evidence for this intervention. This, too, is lacking. That’s why maintaining a belief contrary to what is true in reality is legitimately equivalent in all ways to what we call a delusion… a set of faith-based beliefs that fails spectacularly to address in any cohesive, consistent, predictive, and reliable way the evidence we have in THIS reality, in THIS universe. Your contrary faith to what is true in fact, true in reality, is no equivalent ‘side’ in any so-called ‘debate’ because you bring exactly zero evidence to the discussion table. And that’s why all you can do is try to obfuscate and misrepresent what is true and knowable. The sad fact of the matter is that you do not have what’s true on your side; all you have are your contrary beliefs and you’ve shown to what extent you will prostitute and manipulate what’s true in reality to further your faith-based beliefs.

  • whatswrongwithatheism  On October 16, 2011 at 2:51 pm

    Again I am not saying that Marx applied Darwin’s theory before he wrote his manifesto. I’m saying he used the evolutionary theory to support it. The point of the thread is to look at those times when atheistic philosophy gained political power. To do that we look at the French Revolution and the host of Marxist revolutionary regimes. When we do this we see a constant story of repression and murder. The rhetorical question you ask of whether atheism caused the French Revolution is not something that is being discussed. All large scale political changes have a myriad of causes and a myriad of effects. You are arguing only with yourself here.
    Likewise most of your post seems to deal with the emotional defence of Darwin and evolution. Nowhere in my many links will you find a negative criticism of evolution nor Darwin. Again you are arguing with yourself here and categorising me in all sorts of negative ways for an argument that is only happening inside your own head. From this debate in your own head you project all sorts of traits and motives for me, lecturing me in the process of why this imaginary me is saying the imaginary things you would have me say.
    I am quite taken with Darwin and think he is one of those great investigative Theologians of the Christian tradition which has built western civilisation. The fact that he became an agnostic in later life is one reason why the atheists have taken to him so much. I think it is a shame that other Christian thinkers, theologians and scientists are not studied as closely. If they were then the whole belief system of atheists trying to defend science would look as amusing to them as it does to us.
    As far as the totalitarian regimes and reason goes then yes, the smashing of Churches, the cold blooded murder of the clergy, the banning of Christianity in education and the forced removal of Christians to mental asylums was done in the name of a progressive reason and was stated so by the regimes themselves. Christianity was seen as an outdated primitive concept and the new regimes as the modern scientific progressive one.
    As far as Darwin and the Nazis then we have to say that the German rallying philosophy was the superiority of German genes. The Nazis had the mentally ill neutered and then later killed altogether, they was in favour of abortion for non Germanic peoples of the East; the liquidating of non Aryan genes both within Germany and then the occupied territories, especially the eastern territories in which the rabid anti Christian Rosenberg was minister for. The Nazis created baby factories of strong Aryan stock where German mothers would be mated out of wedlock to different selected SS officers and the mother would be paid to bring up the children; the Nazis instigated the state removal of Aryan looking children from the occupied territories to be raised in German families and they made it illegal for Aryans to marry non Aryan (Jewish) people.
    Hoess was the builder and commander at Auschwitz in the East and oversaw the murder of a million Jews, He wrote in his auto-biography that during the war there were constant internal friction between different German ministries. One wanted the quick destruction of non Aryan population under the German command and another wanted the non Aryan population as slave labour for the German army. Hitler also gave Rosenberg (a racial theory ideologist and rabid anti-Christian) the important ministry of the occupied Eastern territories. Rosenberg was a large part of the Nazis racial extermination policies and he hated both Jew and Slav.
    He stated in his book The Myth of the 20th Century which was perhaps the Nazis second most sacred book after Mein Kamp : :

    “Humanity, the universal church, or the sovereign ego, divorced from the bonds of blood, are no longer absolute values for us. They are dubious, even
    moribund, dogmas which lack polarity and which represent the ousting of
    nature in favour of abstractions. The emergence in the nineteenth century of
    Darwinism and positivism constituted the first powerful, though still wholly
    materialistic, protest against the lifeless and suffocating ideas which had come from Syria and Asia Minor and had brought about spiritual degeneracy. Christianity, with its vacuous creed of ecumenicalism and its ideal of HVMANITAS, disregarded the current of red blooded vitality which flows through the veins of all peoples of true worth and genuine culture.

    Hoess, who was a proud atheist also made it clear that in the SS circles religion was considered absurd and that progress (reason) would see it’s removal. He also verifies in his auto-biography that Bormann would write down Hitlers comments in a notebook, especially when Hitler would say something against Christianity – hence the Table Talk documents where Hitler says that the progess of science will kill the myth of Christianity.
    It is quite clear where the racial supremacy of the Nazis came from and it is quite clear they saw themselves as embodying modernity, progress and scientific reason. Hitler’s Nazis even created the important ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda given to key person of Goebbels . So the Nazis very much saw their role as educating the masses through their own self described modern enlightenment.
    Now Darwin, who I said above I quite like, did provide the scientific reasoning for the Nazis. I in no way blame Darwin for that, even if he got the following quite wrong in my opinion.
    Darwin quotes :
    “It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.”
    “If – various checks – do not prevent the reckless, the vicious and otherwise inferior members of society from increasing at a quicker rate than the better class of men, the nation will retrograde, as has occurred too often in the history of the world. We must remember that progress is no invariable rule.”
    “extinction follows chiefly from the competition of tribe with tribe, race with race,” allowing the victorious tribe or race to pass on their superior endowments.
    “At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous [i.e., most human-looking] apes — will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”

    OK i’m giving long quotes and contexts and you just keep repeating as a mantra that i am somehow just being driven by an irrational faith based motive and then you start arguing things with yourself. Discussion closed.

  • Arkenaten  On June 23, 2012 at 9:52 pm

    Interesting post.
    The unfortunate tone seems to intentionally lead a neutral reader to denounce atheism as it can only lead to one outcome.
    A similar effect could be achieved if one were to do a post of Christian horrors.-and maybe the numbers could be skewed to achieve a similar shock value?
    And there are of course many other religions besides Christianity.
    I am an atheist and I can assure you if I held the reins of power I wouldn’t set up death camps for dissenters.
    Ironically your God destroyed the entire human race (the Flood) bar a few individuals and on His command, Joshua liquidated everything that lived and breathed in Canaan, did he not?

    I would like to venture a question, if I may?
    If no religion existed would any of these atrocities have happened?

    • DarwinsMyth  On April 25, 2014 at 11:41 am

      “If no religion existed would any of these atrocities have happened?”

      You are actually trying to defend Hitler, Stalin, Marx, and Mao? So… do you blame innocent Christians and Jews for being murdered by the milllions, by atheistic, racist dictators? Do you blame the 100s of millions of dead pre-born babies for abortions, too? Do you blame the Antelope for the Lion’s rage when going in for the kill? Do you blame the little girl when the pedophile rapes and murders her?

      Are you trying to justify the mass murders and atrocities by atheistic dictators, by bringing up God’s judgment on a wicked world, where there were only people who had “evil on their minds continually”? Equating a holy God with evil-minded atheists and equating the wicked people of Noah’s day with innocent Christians and Jews, is completely backwards thinking on your part. Also, since God is the Creator of everything, He makes the rules. And why would you bring up God at all, since you don’t believe in Him?

      I’ll venture to say, that atheism is a religion of death. It’s a religion that says,”There is no God!”, and it won’t be content to allow Christians and Jews to live in peace with their own beliefs. This is proven throughout history, and has been even more prevalent in the last 100 years. We haven’t seen the last of Hitler, Stalin, Marx, and Mao, much to your delight, no doubt.

    • DarwinsMyth  On April 25, 2014 at 1:04 pm

      I forgot to address something else you said, about “Christian horrors”. The definition of a Christian or follower of Jesus Christ, is clarified in the New Testament. Jesus said,”Love your neighbor as yourself”, and,”Love your enemy”, and, to forgive those who sin against us,”up to seventy times seven”, not up to just seven times. These are commandments given by Jesus, to His true followers. There are also the Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-26) which should be a part of every Christian’s make-up. You can no doubt, find people who call themselves Christians, whom Jesus would call “hypocrites” (Matthew 25:31-46), but, they are not Christians, just as Judas was proven not to be a Christian. You’re not going to find a Christian mass murderer, just like, there is no such thing as a Christian homosexual, because it would be a contrdiction in terms.

      The human mind is weak, as proven by the millions of German people who had followed Adolf Hitler into destruction, and just because you say,”I can assure you if I held the reins of power I wouldn’t set up death camps for dissenters”, that doesn’t mean, you won’t do something else that takes away the rights and beliefs of dissenters. When I think about Peter denying Jesus Christ three times, after saying, he would never deny HIm, it causes me to think more about my own weaknesses and to be on guard against them… and maybe, that still won’t be enough.

  • whatswrongwithatheism  On July 13, 2012 at 2:46 pm

    Numbers should not be skewed Arkenaten. They should be accurate.

    My belief rests on reasoned argument. It is impossible for you have a reasoned argument for God doing the things you mention because firstly you don’t believe in God and secondly i am assuming you don’t accept any book in the bible as a reasoned argument.

    If you can make a reasoned argument for your assertions, i am all ears.

    • Anastasia  On March 11, 2015 at 2:12 am

      I have heard many Atheist argued that religion only cause wars; even though none of them look for historian written facts that is not all true. Even though you give the a true historian fact to make an example, many Atheist would still deem that it’s not true. I find it odd that if one only believe that “Science is only truth and truth alone” you think you would also believe in Historical Science and not just Observational Science. Let’s just say hypothetically speaking that everyone and every country were atheist, there would still be war. Either by personal political views or by gaining territory and resources; in the end it doesn’t matter if you are religious or not, people are going to start wars either way. That being said as far as I can understand people are always going to hold a personal belief or a grudge towards something they are bias towards, by holding made up stereo types; religious profiling is also discrimination.

  • Jefry Thomas  On August 7, 2017 at 4:58 am

    I think to catalogue atheists as killers and mentally unhealthy due French Revolution, is like to do the same to Christians due the dark ages. This is just an ad hominem argument.

    • whatswrongwithatheism  On November 13, 2017 at 9:46 am

      The comments were regarding the dangers of atheistic thinking and where it can go. The Dark Ages were caused by the fall of the Western Roman Empire by the invasion of pagan Germanic tribes who had no writing and law beyond the clan allegiances. Over the next few centuries it was the Christianisation of these conquerors that led Europe out of the Dark Ages and laid the way for the modern world.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: