One of the facts that the religious fail to mention when they bring up Stalin and Mao is that a huge number of their victims were fellow communists and atheists. If that doesn't prove that they were not motivated by atheism when killing, then I don't know what does. So, you can say something like:
"Stalin and Mao killed anyone who opposed them, including huge numbers of other atheists. They were obviously not motivated by atheism."
To this the religious might reply that it was their atheism than made Stalin and Mao so immoral. The response to that can take several forms:
"Atheism is a lack of belief in god. It does not necessarily include a lack of moral philosophy."
You can follow that with:
"Atheism is separate from moral philosophy, unlike religion which is inextricably intertwined with a twisted, infantile moral philosophy."
You can then add:
"That intertwined moral philosophy didn't stop all the religious mass murderers in history. You have claimed moral superiority based on belief, yet the facts do not bear it out. The fact that some atheists are just as bad doesn't mean that your claims to moral superiority are valid. The issue isn't whether all atheists are good; the issue is whether religious people are. Clearly, they are not. In fact, not only are they immoral, their immorality is very often a direct result of their religion."
You can also say:
"Stalin and Mao also didn't believe in fairies either. Perhaps that is the cause of their immorality."
Or,
"Hitler was a vegetarian and a non-smoker. Should we blame his crimes on those traits?'
Most important, remember that this is a classic straw-man type argument. The religious have claimed strenuously for centuries that religion makes them moral. They bring up Stalin and Mao when an atheist points out religious atrocities. The issue isn't really Stalin or Mao. The issue is the claim to moral superiority. A claim that the religious use to justify their incredible bigotry toward atheists. So, when they bring up Stalin and Mao, just throw out a basic refutation and follow it quickly with:
"Don't try to change the subject. You have claimed that religion gives people morality when that is manifestly untrue."
Then follow that up with the points I make in my numerous posts on Religion and Morality and the Moral Insanity of Religion. (I won't link to them now, because there are so many of them at this point. Just look through the archives.)
"Stalin and Mao killed anyone who opposed them, including huge numbers of other atheists. They were obviously not motivated by atheism."
To this the religious might reply that it was their atheism than made Stalin and Mao so immoral. The response to that can take several forms:
"Atheism is a lack of belief in god. It does not necessarily include a lack of moral philosophy."
You can follow that with:
"Atheism is separate from moral philosophy, unlike religion which is inextricably intertwined with a twisted, infantile moral philosophy."
You can then add:
"That intertwined moral philosophy didn't stop all the religious mass murderers in history. You have claimed moral superiority based on belief, yet the facts do not bear it out. The fact that some atheists are just as bad doesn't mean that your claims to moral superiority are valid. The issue isn't whether all atheists are good; the issue is whether religious people are. Clearly, they are not. In fact, not only are they immoral, their immorality is very often a direct result of their religion."
You can also say:
"Stalin and Mao also didn't believe in fairies either. Perhaps that is the cause of their immorality."
Or,
"Hitler was a vegetarian and a non-smoker. Should we blame his crimes on those traits?'
Most important, remember that this is a classic straw-man type argument. The religious have claimed strenuously for centuries that religion makes them moral. They bring up Stalin and Mao when an atheist points out religious atrocities. The issue isn't really Stalin or Mao. The issue is the claim to moral superiority. A claim that the religious use to justify their incredible bigotry toward atheists. So, when they bring up Stalin and Mao, just throw out a basic refutation and follow it quickly with:
"Don't try to change the subject. You have claimed that religion gives people morality when that is manifestly untrue."
Then follow that up with the points I make in my numerous posts on Religion and Morality and the Moral Insanity of Religion. (I won't link to them now, because there are so many of them at this point. Just look through the archives.)
No comments:
Post a Comment