Harris sits down with Pinker for a discussion about the history of violence.

Sam Harris asks, “Need I remind you that the ‘atheist regimes’ of the 20th century killed tens of millions of people?”

Steven Pinker has a great response.

This is a popular argument among theoconservatives and critics of the new atheism, but for many reasons it is historically inaccurate.
First, the premise that Nazism and Communism were “atheist” ideologies makes sense only within a religiocentric worldview that divides political systems into those that are based on Judaeo-Christian ideology and those that are not. In fact, 20th-century totalitarian movements were no more defined by a rejection of Judaeo-Christianity than they were defined by a rejection of astrology, alchemy, Confucianism, Scientology, or any of hundreds of other belief systems. They were based on the ideas of Hitler and Marx, not David Hume and Bertrand Russell, and the horrors they inflicted are no more a vindication of Judeao-Christianity than they are of astrology or alchemy or Scientology.

Second, Nazism and Fascism were not atheistic in the first place. Hitler thought he was carrying out a divine plan. Nazism received extensive support from many German churches, and no opposition from the Vatican. Fascism happily coexisted with Catholicism in Spain, Italy, Portugal, and Croatia.

Third, according to the most recent compendium of history’s worst atrocities, Matthew White’s Great Big Book of Horrible Things (Norton, 2011), religions have been responsible for 13 of the 100 worst mass killings in history, resulting in 47 million deaths. Communism has been responsible for 6 mass killings and 67 million deaths. If defenders of religion want to crow, “We were only responsible for 47 million murders—Communism was worse!”, they are welcome to do so, but it is not an impressive argument.

Fourth, many religious massacres took place in centuries in which the world’s population was far smaller. Crusaders, for example, killed 1 million people in world of 400 million, for a genocide rate that exceeds that of the Nazi Holocaust. The death toll from the Thirty Years War was proportionally double that of World War I and in the range of World War II in Europe.

When it comes to the history of violence, the significant distinction is not one between theistic and atheistic regimes. It’s the one between regimes that were based on demonizing, utopian ideologies (including Marxism, Nazism, and militant religions) and secular liberal democracies that are based on the ideal of human rights. I present data from the political scientist Rudolph Rummel showing that democracies are vastly less murderous than alternatives forms of government. [Read More.]

While us atheists realize that Hitler’s world philosophy was shaped from Christianity and the bible, some people still like to say he was an atheist. He considered Jews to be atheists because they did not accept Jesus as the messiah. He hated Jews. He hated atheists. He hated a lot of people. As an atheist Jew, I take much offense to allegations that Hitler was an atheist. As far as the others go, I don’t have nearly as much personal angst. In any case, it wasn’t so-called atheist philosophies that shaped their policies.

The book: The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

Seen this? “Everything I need to know about Islam I learned on 9/11”

Well, then, I could just as easily say: Everything I need to know about Christianity I learned from the crusades.

Islam has a lot of problem in it, as do all religions. Islam isn’t that much different, it’s only newer and there’s been no reformation. Hatred and violence are in the Bible just as the Koran. Don’t get me wrong, I do not defend Islam. I also don’t defend Christianity or Judaism.

However, Islam may be a bigger problem because its horrors from it are happening now. The crusades were 800-900 years ago. The doings of Islam are more prevalent in today’s world. While Islam is a bigger issue, if I said the latter, “Everything I need to know about Christianity I learned from the crusades,” there’d be a barrage of negative comments from Christians telling me why that “logic” is false.

Anyway, here’s that Easter comic. ;)

Via

Yesterday, I attended the Military Religious Freedom Foundation conference. It was graciously hosted by John Whiteside and featured Mikey Weinstein (above) from the MRFF. Simply stated, it was a great presentation.

And guessed who showed up? Penn Jillette and his wife (not pictured).

96% of the MRFF members are of a Christian religion (including Catholicism). 4% is “other”. Other meaning Atheists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. Most of their members are Christian but are being told that they aren’t “Christian enough”. And, yes, this is in the United States! There are many members of MRFF and some politicians who speak to the MRFF choose to remain anonymous because of a possible backlash.

The fundamentalist Christians are making it a priority to convert our service men and women. Making our wars “God’s wars”, converting Atheists, Jews, Muslims, etc, and other Christians to – not just Christianity – but their version of Christianity. A version so extreme and heinous that it’s usually referred to as “fringe”.

How did we allow this extremist group control over our military and the minds of the politicians? It’s a small group in the America, probably smaller than atheists (definitely than ”nones”).

This type of proselytizing, and blurring the lines between church and state, is like spitting on the constitution. The fact that so many senators and congresspeople are afraid to protect the first amendment is gut-wrenching. I’m not new to this topic, but I didn’t realize how many people are willing to enable this behavior. No one’s afraid to protect the second amendment but they are the first? I don’t think the placement was coincidental. First, most important. Second, next. Not a difficult concept.

Just to be clear, Weinstein’s mission is not to remove religious expression in the military. It’s about superiors forcing it on subordinates. It’s not fair and it’s not right. And, sadly, it happens very often.

Wicca (or Neo-Paganism), for instance, is empowering for women in a sense. I thought about Wicca many years ago but couldn’t get into it. Though, I’ve known many who could and did. The Abrahamic religions (especially Christianity and Islam) are often criticized; religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, and Wicca aren’t criticized as much. There’s probably a reason behind it. The wars and hate crimes caused and created around religious dogma come to mind. Maybe I’ll cover that later on; but – for now – I’m interested in women, how they are portrayed and their roles with these religions. From a woman’s perspective, I am not offended by Wicca or Buddhism or Jainism. And Hinduism does have some female gods, though true equality is debated.

I still find myself saying, “Why?” “Why is it necessary to take a leap of faith?” It isn’t. At least not for me.

I’ve thought about Zen Buddhism; not really as a religion- just using some aspects for managing stress. I needed to maintain distance from panic attacks and so I read up on Zen. I never got involved with it, more than incorporating a few ideas into my process of lessening the stress. I still find most of it as silly as any other religion.

I don’t think I need to give examples of how women are seen in the Abrahamic religions. Women are not to speak much and are to submit to their male counterparts. We are responsible for men’s wild hormones. We are supposed to cover up or sit behind. It’s a big part of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam; when followed more closely by the book. And it has always made me wonder: why aren’t more women atheists?

Buy and view this poster.

Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effects of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites.

Thomas Jefferson

I always had issues with the phrase “the chosen people”. It wreaks of bigotry to me, stating that we are better for no other reason than we are us. I understand where this comes from but I cannot embrace it, by any means. I don’t think any group is better than any other group by the mere description of what they are. That stated, theists who are certain everyone who doesn’t believe in their version of religion will go to hell (a place they “know” exists) can be such assholes.

This sort of ignorance is quite common in the United States, as we saw when Ann Coulter said Jews need to be perfected. My jaw dropped when my mother agreed. :\