Is atheism as morally responsible for Chapel Hill as Islam

[jeager106]

is for Charlie Hebdo?
The muderer was a self proclaimed atheist.
Thoughts?

[Divine Insight]

Does the KKK represent Christianity?

[jeager106]

Does the KKK represent Christianity?

Ummmmm. Yeah in that KKK member must be W.A.S.P.
So represnt some nastiness in the name of Xtianity
but answer the question you did not.

[Tailor]

[Replying to post 1 by jeager106]
What I think we mean when we say Islam or some Religeon is to blame for attrocities, is that their common beliefs say this violence is justified. I would say that only those Muslims that called for violence against Charlie Hebdo, or who generally called for violence in response to insults against Muhammad, are responsible.

Are atheists as culpable? First, we don't have any common SET of beliefs, just one common belief, no God(s). As an example Karl Marx and Ayn Rand were both atheists, but they believed very different things (Communism and Capatalism).

Second, although many atheist speakers have spoken out against Islam, I can't think of any that advocated violence against them. Certainly no one else was telling Hicks to harm these people.

[Divine Insight]

but answer the question you did not.

No atheism is not responsible for the behavior of any individuals. Atheism doesn't even claim to preach morality at all.

Having said that, there are famous atheists who have proposed that a system of secular morality can be constructed using reason, logic, human compassion and common sense.

And it should be crystal clear to anyone who is paying attention that those proposed secular moral systems do not support the behavior of the individuals you have referenced.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 1 by jeager106]

I think a lot of deaths can be attributed to atheism. Suicides, abortions - many of the shooting massacres. Most crime.

Most atheists thankfully don't practise what evolution teaches.

Except for the eugenics underpinning the 19th and 20th centuries.

I can barely think of a single atheist friend that hasn't regarded humanity as a virus and that we need a lot less humans.

But in fairness it isn't atheism. All Christians are atheists. It is whatever beliefs fill the void and in this case mostly evolutionary thinking.

[jeager106]

Does the KKK represent Christianity?

Are saying that atheist can be compared to the KKK?
Seems not likely to me.
Makes no sense.
I don't propose atheists are responsible in any way for Chapel Hill but I read that
some bozos do think so.
The muslims seem to be making quite a fuss about the mental case killer
being a self proclaimed atheist gun enthusiest.
I doubt he was shouting "Jesus does not exist" while murdering the innocent
students, doubt the victims being muslims had any motivating factors either.

[Divine Insight]

Are saying that atheist can be compared to the KKK?

No of course not.

I was saying that an individual doesn't represent atheism anymore than the KKK represents Christianity.

Your thread topic asks: "Is atheism as morally responsible for Chapel Hill"

Of course it isn't.

In fact, "atheism" isn't responsible for anyone's behavior. To begin with it only exists because theism exists. Secondly it's a questionable "organization" when it is organized. It's obviously nothing more than a rejection of religious mythologies.

Sam Harris (popularly labeled as a "Famous Leading Atheist") actually renounces the very term. He claims to be a advocate of Reason. Atheism simply happens to be one of many things that are reasonable.

Sam Harris described the label of "Atheist" graphically as a chalk silhouette drawn on a sidewalk at a crime scene of a dead body. It is drawn there by theists, and "atheists" (i.e. Advocates of Reason) simply walk up and lay down in the silhouette voluntarily. He thinks it's absurd.

He advocates a change of label. But at the same time he recognizes that labels take on a life of their own and they aren't easy to change in a major way overnight.

Many "atheists" are actually quite proud to lay in the silhouette of a dead man and proclaim their atheism. Like Sam Harris prefer not join that particular war. However, also like Sam Harris I am a advocate of reason.

The Abrahamic religions are unreasonable. They are also extremely arrogant in terms of theologies. Not to imply that their followers are arrogant, but rather their doctrines are arrogant, as well as being immoral, and unreasonable.

The only label I accept is "Human". That's what I am. I'm not an theist, atheist, or any other war-mongering label.

I'm an human. My views are those of a human. A human who advocates reason over idiocy. IMHO, the Abrahamic God-myths in particular are idiotic. (again I'm make no claim about their followers. I see the followers as often being innocent victims who have been unfortunately misguided into believing that supporting these absurd religions is somehow the right thing to do.) For me, Abrahamic theists are victims of a huge historical scam. Whether that scam was intentional or borne out of ignorance and superstition is irrelevant. I personally think it was a combination of both of these forces.

~~~~~

So while I have no need to defend "atheism" since it's not even a valid "organization" in terms of holding up any specific beliefs. I do recognize that it cannot be morally responsible for the actions of anyone. However, certain individuals most certainly can do horrible things in the name of "atheism" just as individuals can do horrible things in the name of any "theism".

I'm totally with Sam Harris on the point that "atheism" should basically be laid to rest and a movement for the "Advocates of Reason" should replace it. Although we don't currently have a popular buzzword for "Advocates of Reason".

Atheism actually hands theism a spotlight by willfully granting to be their enemy in a Holy War.

Clearly the ignorance of Abrahamic theism must be addressed. But I agree with Sam Harris. Laying down in the chalk outline of a dead man marked "atheist" drawn by theists is hardly a productive way of addressing the immorality and ignorance of the Abrahamic theism.

So I'm all for getting rid of "atheism".

But I'm not for abandoning the Advocacy of Reason.

These archaic immoral superstitious religions must be exposed for the irrationality they are through the rise of reason.

So we need to keep that torch burning. Creating a Holy War between theists and "atheists" isn't really productive in the end. It only serves to cause people to want to pick sides.

A movement for "Reason" would only have unreasonable people as its "enemy".

So Sam Harris is a genius to be sure.

Maybe the new keyword should simply be "Reasonists" instead of "Atheists".

Then if anyone does anything unreasonable they can hardly lay claim to being a "Reasonist".

[Goat]

is for Charlie Hebdo?
The muderer was a self proclaimed atheist.
Thoughts?

Yes, and not only that , he is a self proclaimign liberal, but also a gun nut. His actions in rage were at odds with his self proclaimed views. He was more than just an atheist, but a self proclaimed anti-theist.

I don't know how much of his actions were because of the religion of the victims, or if he was just plain nuts. In any case, he indulged in the exact same behavior that he complained about when it comes to his anger against religion, which makes him a dangerous hypocrite.

[jeager106]

Of course he is a dangerous something or another.
Probably mentally ill.
I don't subscribe to the notion that atheists are in anyway responsible
for the Chapel Hill murders.
I simply posted a question reference some that claim atheists are morally
responsible.
Same about muslims.
After all the tens of thousands of islamic killers hardly represent the 1.6 BILLION
islamics that don't murder others.