Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Does Atheism Lead To A Bad Society?" video.

Khalkara It is the fault of the person, no different then when Charles Mason told those women to kill people. It isn't religion's fault, it is that individual's fault. There are people who kill others for radical reasons that don't involve religion at all. How about those LA Dodger fans that beat up the SF Giants fan a few years ago, should we ban sports as well? Should we all just sit in our little home, learn the same way, and not be different at all? That is what you are basically saying. There is a lot of positive things that come from religion. Basically it helps people go on with life. Do you have some sort of hobby? I have mine that I enjoy doing that lets me get away from it all in life. Why do you want to take that away from others? Because some individuals did something wrong? Drinking allows people to make it through life, we have people dying because of drunk drivers, how about we ban alcohol.
2
vuk911 Look at "Religious views of Adolf Hitler" on Wikipedia. It lays out what I have been saying. There are some cases where it seem that Hitler was an atheist. It is clear that he really wasn't a set religion. It is clear that it is complicated. As a whole, to me, he was just a power hungry individual and his religious background had nothing to do with that. It falls in line that religion isn't the problem, thirst for power is. That is why we do see atheist do terrible things as well along with religious individuals. Atheism and religion are not to blame and not the cause of it. That is like saying someone being raised in FL or MN led to them being a mass murder, it is a shallow argument.
2
Exactly.
2
Khalkara Religion isn't the cause of problems in this world, individuals are. Don't blame religion for individuals' actions just like I won't rip on atheists just because one is wanting to be a fascist.
1
Khalkara What is the main goal of a competitive sports game? To beat your opponent. That sounds like a suggestion to fight and injure someone to me. Just because someone has thoughts of committing actions, or reads a book that says it doesn't mean they are going to do it. One can believe that a certain set of people are evil, so what? That is their right. As long as they leave them alone then fine. You want to arrest people for thought crimes and want to have people think exactly like you, that is fascism right there.
1
Khalkara It isn't twisting the meaning of the words, beat your opponent, sounds pretty clear to me. If someone feels it is ok to hurt others then you can't do anything about it until they do it. We don't arrest people on thought crimes. That is fascism right there. I feel the obese people are a problem in our society, I have little remorse for them and honestly if they die, along with homeless bums, I wouldn't mind. Should I be put in jail? Someone acting out in violence isn't because of religion, it is because they have a violent nature. When a terrorist hurts someone they should be punished. But arresting people for thought crimes is something we shouldn't be doing.
1
Khalkara Taking beating too literally. That is similar to someone taking the bible or a religion too literally. So I see no difference now. So according to you we should now ban sports. Terrorists are a group of people who don't like the greatest of lives and are easily motivated due to lack of experience and low quality of life. It is human nature. Just like how in Germany they were willing to follow Hitler due to poor economic times and were willing to kill a group of people. Religion has nothing to do with it, it is people in power convincing others to do some dirty work.
1
Khalkara And in athletics you are told to beat your opponent, so yeah, some people follow that. Look at soccer matches in other countries. Makes perfect sense to me.
1
Khalkara How doesn't it mean to beat them down physically? Beat your opponent when taken literally means to physically beat them. I will tell you why, because there are rules against it. Just like there are rules against murder. Those two LA Dodgers fans beat their opponent but broke the law. It is no different then if someone killed someone in the name of religion, or if someone killed someone because Charles Manson told them too. Your problem is that you feel that religion is evil because is says to kill someone. If someone follows that literally then that person is evil, not religion. Billions of people follow a religion and don't harm anyone. They don't take it literally just like others don't take beating you opponent literally. You are incredibly bias on this issue and I suggest you just keep your feelings to yourself. Thankfully not everyone is a fascist like you.
1
Ever thought that someone can change their beliefs? I was an alter boy at a young age and I am no longer religious. I am not an atheist, just not religious.
1
***** I am a doubter, I doubt everything. I can't commit myself to any kind of faith or belief knowing there a possibility of being wrong.
1
It is a dumb question. It isn't religion that causes violence just like it isn't atheism that causes, it is individual greed and the thirst for power that does that. Religion may be used as a motivational tool, but so do economic crisis, for example Germany in WWII. It is pure human nature. To blame problems on one issue is being myopic. The Sweden comparison is shallow. One, they are a country of 10 million people, that is less than 3% of the US population. Also, Sweden has problems as well, they have poverty that is comparable to the US. It is debatable that Hitler was an atheist. Communist is not a religion. There are atheists that are a problem. Bill Maher is an example, Richard Dawkins is the worse. Going around thinking you are the smartest person on earth when in reality you are just living off of your ego and convinced a few idiots to follow you doesn't make you so. In fact, that is similar to a religion. There is a place in society for religion. Blame individuals, not religion when there are problems. And if you have a problem with religion then don't worry about it. Don't continue to bash it like this fool on this video does. For the record, I am not religious, I just hate stupidity.
1
It is debatable. Chances are he used religion to motivate people but there are some indications he was an atheist.
1
vuk911 Nice genetic fallacy. There are writings that shown he could have been an atheist. Read up on other sources of Hitler from historians. The real fact was that he kept his beliefs very settle. He may have used religion to motivate people but his beliefs are not well known and some sources say that he was an atheist.
1
Because Kyle is a communist himself.
1