Hysteria versus Reality: The Secular Left has killed over 100 Million People

[afx114]

I volunteer to be the Christopher Guest character!

This has become an exquisite discussion. My metaphor for argument is the hockey fight. Non-hockey fans see the cliche’d “went to a hockey game and a fight broke out” side of the game, but true hockey fans see the deeper beauty. You have two guys on two teams who serve a very specific role. That role is to protect the skilled players, or get the crowd back in the game, by any means necessary.

At the end of the fight, the crowd cheers, and the warriors get sent to the “sin bin.” But what people on TV don’t see, is the gamesmanship and sportsmanship between the two warriors.

Watch this video of a mic’d hockey player getting into a fight:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvIK-FLJgn4

Transcript:
“You want to?
… yeah
Ok… square up?
… yeah
Ok… good luck man.”

You see, these guys both have to do their best to support their team. They don’t hate their opponent, they simply have to “take care of business” and then be on their way. There is a mutual respect between the warriors, and while their job is to smash your face, it’s just business, no hard feelings. It is because of this that you’ll see the same two warriors in the bar after the game buying each other beers, reminiscing about their encounter on ice a few hours before.

That, to me, is a gentlemanly battle worthy of duplicating, and a perfect metaphor for intellectual debate.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Concering the asshole response above, either “Gandy” has very poor reading comprehension skills or was crying when he/she typed it out.[/quote]

Making a response that is equivalent to his and saying he is a crybaby does not do much to make your case stronger.

So here is a question for you:

Which of these conflicts you (or your book really) mention did NOT involve religious people as a major component?
I can’t see any of these as being an indictment of atheism or anything other than a political dispute.

And the assertion that political dispute leads to death is intuitive.

Its neither revolutionary nor insightful.

Communism is primarily political and economic. The
religious component was not generally enforced very effectively (eg: Cuba and China). There were authoritarian attempts to restrict religion but none were successful in achieving this.
This is why the Pope was elevated in Poland. It was known that having a dissident in a position of religious authority gave him some level of political immunity (though certainly not complete). The importance of the solidarity movement was a huge consideration to the Vatican in their choice.

There is one movement that is conspicuously absent from the stats and the book. That is national socialism. This is a right wing movement. To my knowledge this is the only political movement in the 20th century that had atheism as a successfully (defined as near universally) adopted component.

Here is a better list of the dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_disasters_by_death_toll

My question is which of these major events had atheism as a major point of contention?
As far as I can tell, only WWII and that was with the atheist right wing.

The assertion that the left is somehow an atheistic death dealer does not appear a tenable one.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Concering the asshole response above, either “Gandy” has very poor reading comprehension skills or was crying when he/she typed it out.[/quote]

Making a response that is equivalent to his and saying he is a crybaby does not do much to make your case stronger.

So here is a question for you:

Which of these conflicts you (or your book really) mention did NOT involve religious people as a major component?
I can’t see any of these as being an indictment of atheism or anything other than a political dispute.

And the assertion that political dispute leads to death is intuitive.

Its neither revolutionary nor insightful.

Communism is primarily political and economic. The
religious component was not generally enforced very effectively (eg: Cuba and China). There were authoritarian attempts to restrict religion but none were successful in achieving this.
This is why the Pope was elevated in Poland. It was known that having a dissident in a position of religious authority gave him some level of political immunity (though certainly not complete). The importance of the solidarity movement was a huge consideration to the Vatican in their choice.

There is one movement that is conspicuously absent from the stats and the book. That is national socialism. This is a right wing movement. To my knowledge this is the only political movement in the 20th century that had atheism as a successfully (defined as near universally) adopted component.

Here is a better list of the dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_disasters_by_death_toll

My question is which of these major events had atheism as a major point of contention?
As far as I can tell, only WWII and that was with the atheist right wing.

The assertion that the left is somehow an atheistic death dealer does not appear a tenable one.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Concering the asshole response above, either “Gandy” has very poor reading comprehension skills or was crying when he/she typed it out.[/quote]

Making a response that is equivalent to his and saying he is a crybaby does not do much to make your case stronger.

So here is a question for you:

Which of these conflicts you (or your book really) mention did NOT involve religious people as a major component?
I can’t see any of these as being an indictment of atheism or anything other than a political dispute.

And the assertion that political dispute leads to death is intuitive.

Its neither revolutionary nor insightful.

Communism is primarily political and economic. The
religious component was not generally enforced very effectively (eg: Cuba and China). There were authoritarian attempts to restrict religion but none were successful in achieving this.
This is why the Pope was elevated in Poland. It was known that having a dissident in a position of religious authority gave him some level of political immunity (though certainly not complete). The importance of the solidarity movement was a huge consideration to the Vatican in their choice.

There is one movement that is conspicuously absent from the stats and the book. That is national socialism. This is a right wing movement. To my knowledge this is the only political movement in the 20th century that had atheism as a successfully (defined as near universally) adopted component.

Here is a better list of the dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_disasters_by_death_toll

My question is which of these major events had atheism as a major point of contention?
As far as I can tell, only WWII and that was with the atheist right wing.

The assertion that the left is somehow an atheistic death dealer does not appear a tenable one.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Concering the asshole response above, either “Gandy” has very poor reading comprehension skills or was crying when he/she typed it out.[/quote]

Making a response that is equivalent to his and saying he is a crybaby does not do much to make your case stronger.

So here is a question for you:

Which of these conflicts you (or your book really) mention did NOT involve religious people as a major component?
I can’t see any of these as being an indictment of atheism or anything other than a political dispute.

And the assertion that political dispute leads to death is intuitive.

Its neither revolutionary nor insightful.

Communism is primarily political and economic. The
religious component was not generally enforced very effectively (eg: Cuba and China). There were authoritarian attempts to restrict religion but none were successful in achieving this.
This is why the Pope was elevated in Poland. It was known that having a dissident in a position of religious authority gave him some level of political immunity (though certainly not complete). The importance of the solidarity movement was a huge consideration to the Vatican in their choice.

There is one movement that is conspicuously absent from the stats and the book. That is national socialism. This is a right wing movement. To my knowledge this is the only political movement in the 20th century that had atheism as a successfully (defined as near universally) adopted component.

Here is a better list of the dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_disasters_by_death_toll

My question is which of these major events had atheism as a major point of contention?
As far as I can tell, only WWII and that was with the atheist right wing.

The assertion that the left is somehow an atheistic death dealer does not appear a tenable one.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=luchabee]Concering the asshole response above, either “Gandy” has very poor reading comprehension skills or was crying when he/she typed it out.[/quote]

Making a response that is equivalent to his and saying he is a crybaby does not do much to make your case stronger.

So here is a question for you:

Which of these conflicts you (or your book really) mention did NOT involve religious people as a major component?
I can’t see any of these as being an indictment of atheism or anything other than a political dispute.

And the assertion that political dispute leads to death is intuitive.

Its neither revolutionary nor insightful.

Communism is primarily political and economic. The
religious component was not generally enforced very effectively (eg: Cuba and China). There were authoritarian attempts to restrict religion but none were successful in achieving this.
This is why the Pope was elevated in Poland. It was known that having a dissident in a position of religious authority gave him some level of political immunity (though certainly not complete). The importance of the solidarity movement was a huge consideration to the Vatican in their choice.

There is one movement that is conspicuously absent from the stats and the book. That is national socialism. This is a right wing movement. To my knowledge this is the only political movement in the 20th century that had atheism as a successfully (defined as near universally) adopted component.

Here is a better list of the dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_disasters_by_death_toll

My question is which of these major events had atheism as a major point of contention?
As far as I can tell, only WWII and that was with the atheist right wing.

The assertion that the left is somehow an atheistic death dealer does not appear a tenable one.

[afx114]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]We have become a narcissistic, egocentric and very rude society over the last twenty years or so, and the up and coming generation shows no signs of improving. To the contrary, these kids are even ruder, even more entitled and even more ignorant.[/quote]

Allan:
I often feel the same way, but then I wonder if I just have crazy-kids-get-off-my-lawn disease. I am certain that the generation before mine was saying the same exact thing about me.

[afx114]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]We have become a narcissistic, egocentric and very rude society over the last twenty years or so, and the up and coming generation shows no signs of improving. To the contrary, these kids are even ruder, even more entitled and even more ignorant.[/quote]

Allan:
I often feel the same way, but then I wonder if I just have crazy-kids-get-off-my-lawn disease. I am certain that the generation before mine was saying the same exact thing about me.

[afx114]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]We have become a narcissistic, egocentric and very rude society over the last twenty years or so, and the up and coming generation shows no signs of improving. To the contrary, these kids are even ruder, even more entitled and even more ignorant.[/quote]

Allan:
I often feel the same way, but then I wonder if I just have crazy-kids-get-off-my-lawn disease. I am certain that the generation before mine was saying the same exact thing about me.

[afx114]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]We have become a narcissistic, egocentric and very rude society over the last twenty years or so, and the up and coming generation shows no signs of improving. To the contrary, these kids are even ruder, even more entitled and even more ignorant.[/quote]

Allan:
I often feel the same way, but then I wonder if I just have crazy-kids-get-off-my-lawn disease. I am certain that the generation before mine was saying the same exact thing about me.

[afx114]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]We have become a narcissistic, egocentric and very rude society over the last twenty years or so, and the up and coming generation shows no signs of improving. To the contrary, these kids are even ruder, even more entitled and even more ignorant.[/quote]

Allan:
I often feel the same way, but then I wonder if I just have crazy-kids-get-off-my-lawn disease. I am certain that the generation before mine was saying the same exact thing about me.

[gandalf]

Non, non… (courteous French)

It was jest, my friends.

God, you two have ‘neutered’ me.

From henceforth, the grey wizard will speak only in non-opinionated, neutral, journalistic elven tongue. He will translate any insults into French so that they might sound lovely and as nice as a female’s floral deodorant whilst any that might take offence at such rabid chatter are lulled into a sense of flattery by such a delightful musical incantation…

[gandalf]

Non, non… (courteous French)

It was jest, my friends.

God, you two have ‘neutered’ me.

From henceforth, the grey wizard will speak only in non-opinionated, neutral, journalistic elven tongue. He will translate any insults into French so that they might sound lovely and as nice as a female’s floral deodorant whilst any that might take offence at such rabid chatter are lulled into a sense of flattery by such a delightful musical incantation…

[gandalf]

Non, non… (courteous French)

It was jest, my friends.

God, you two have ‘neutered’ me.

From henceforth, the grey wizard will speak only in non-opinionated, neutral, journalistic elven tongue. He will translate any insults into French so that they might sound lovely and as nice as a female’s floral deodorant whilst any that might take offence at such rabid chatter are lulled into a sense of flattery by such a delightful musical incantation…

[gandalf]

Non, non… (courteous French)

It was jest, my friends.

God, you two have ‘neutered’ me.

From henceforth, the grey wizard will speak only in non-opinionated, neutral, journalistic elven tongue. He will translate any insults into French so that they might sound lovely and as nice as a female’s floral deodorant whilst any that might take offence at such rabid chatter are lulled into a sense of flattery by such a delightful musical incantation…

[Author]

Posts