Debate:Who kills more innocent people: religious believers or atheists?

From Conservapedia

!

THIS IS A DEBATE PAGE, NOT AN ARTICLE. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of Conservapedia. Your opinion is welcome! Please remember to sign your comments on this page, and refrain from editing other user's contributions. New Users: Please read our "Editing etiquette" before posting

Contents 1 Numbers vs percentages 2 The religion of Atheism 2.1 November 11 3 Generalisation 4 The Religious Atheist 5 Interesting assumption 6 Depends on your Perspective

Numbers vs percentages

This is a no-brainer. As of 2001, the US Census bureau reports that 81% of Americans consider themselves to be Christians and 4% consider themselves members of non-christian religions. Only 15% consider themselves to be athiests or agnostics. Even if we assume that the rotten non-believers commit twice as many murders per person as believers, they would still only commit 30% of the murders. I might be way off base. I have tried to find statistics that breakdown murder and/or violent crime by religious affiliation but can't find any. Can anyone find any hard evidence one way or another? Anecdotal evidence or list of serial killers don't count. Mfa1957 14:37, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Just found this:

The Federal Bureau of Prisons does have statistics on religious affiliations of inmates. The following are total number of inmates per religion category:

Catholic 29267 39.164% Protestant 26162 35.008% Muslim 5435 7.273% American Indian 2408 3.222% Nation 1734 2.320% Rasta 1485 1.987% Jewish 1325 1.773% Church of Christ 1303 1.744% Pentecostal 1093 1.463% Moorish 1066 1.426% Buddhist 882 1.180% Jehovah Witness 665 0.890% Adventist 621 0.831% Orthodox 375 0.502% Mormon 298 0.399% Scientology 190 0.254% Atheist 156 0.209% Hindu 119 0.159% Santeria 117 0.157% Sikh 14 0.019% Bahai 9 0.012% Krishna 7 0.009%

Total Known Responses 74731 100.001% (rounding to 3 digits does this)

Unknown/No Answer 18381

Total Convicted 93112 80.259% (74731) prisoners' religion is known.

Held in Custody 3856 (not surveyed due to temporary custody)

Total In Prisons 96968

I hope that this information is helpful to you.

Sincerely,

Denise Golumbaski Research Analyst Federal Bureau of Prisons Mfa1957 16:56, 9 November 2007 (EST)

"Even if we assume that the rotten non-believers commit twice as many murders per person as believers, they would still only commit 30% of the murders. (Denise)" I would emphasize this point and agree. Numbers are rather irrelevant due to the high percentage of people who are religious. I'd even say that 30% is a pretty high estimate. CobraA1 15:12, 4 December 2007 (EST)

The religion of Atheism

If you collect enough data, you'll be able to prove anything. Here we go again with what constitutes a religion. Sophists, Humanists, athiests all are non-theistic religions. The Nazis triggered an estimated 55 million deaths. Another estimated 100 million deaths under socialism for the entire 20th Century such as Russia, China, North Viet Nam etc... Religion, right? Not individuals that get religious once they go to prison. But what's the point? People kill people. They merely justify murdering others with their religions.--Roopilots6 22:51, 9 November 2007 (EST)

The whole point of science or any method of critical thinking is just the opposite of what you are saying. The more that we discover and analyse, the more we can truly know (at least about the natural world). Let me concede the arguement that non-theistic philosophies can be considered religions. We can still study whether people who follow specific religions exhibit more or less behaviors than those who follow other religions. In fact, this is important to know. I am an atheist at this point in my life but I am open to the possibility that my POV might be leading me to behaviors that are detrimental to myself or others. I would sincerely like to know that. Shouldn't we find out? Mfa1957 09:35, 12 November 2007 (EST)

Some minor points. Calling Atheism a religion is like calling baldness a hair colour. In conservapedia, Nazism is equated with

atheism repeatedly, but Hitler was a sworn Catholic. Just look around the world and you can see that most of the conflicts are supported by religious beliefs. --JBuscombe 10:43, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Look, your comment is exactly the type of thing that should be avoided in these debates. Let's try to present real proof of our positions and demand real proof from the other side. I appreciate your attempt but now you open yourself up to tit for tat anecdotal evidence and you are not really going to advance your cause or the cause of "really" knowing. Mfa1957 10:49, 14 November 2007 (EST)

JBuscombe, Where is an example of school shooting were the person said he did the shooting because of his religion? For example:

November 11

Another school shooting:

And another one linked to evolution!

Atheist and evolutionist killer massacres 8 innocent people in a public school in Finland. He posted his video and this statement first on YouTube: "I am a cynical existentialist, antihuman humanist, antisocial socialdarwinist, realistic idealist and godlike atheist." and "I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit, disgraces of human race and failures of natural selection." [1], [2], [3]. --~BCS^Talk2ME 10:56, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Bethany, there are any number of serial killers who profess Christian faiths - Peter Sutcliffe, for instance, who murdered 13 women between 1975-1981 and insisted that he was simply the tool of God's will. I don't think we can blame whole belief systems for individual failures of humanity, and as I've said below, I think the topic of this debate is pointlessly divisive. Underscoreb 16:21, 15 November 2007 (EST)

If you look at school shootings, there have been more than 40 shootings in the more religious conservative United States compared to 3 in the more liberal Europe. What happened in Finland was an isolated incidence. --JBuscombe 11:07, 14 November 2007 (EST)

But did they say they were doing it because of their religion??? --~BCS^Talk2ME 17:20, 14 November 2007 (EST)

If a Christian kills another man, it shouldn't matter whether it was motivated by faith or not. The fact that Christian principles dictate that killing is wrong should be enough. ChrisQ 07:57, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Based on the heavy use of oxymorons in that killer's statements, I don't think it's atheism or religion or anything that caused him to do it. Sounds like teenage angst to me. ATang 14:48, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Generalisation

This is too much of a generalisation. Nobody kills just because of their religion, there are always other factors at work. Spanish Inquisition was based on imperialism not Christianity. USSR was based on the grab of power by a few, not atheism. Even modern cases such as 9/11 have compelling evidence showing that they weren't just based on religion but on political factors. So you simply cannot say that Christians or atheists kill more people, just as you cannot put the sole blame on a person's religion (or lack thereof) for their actions. TheGuy 23:03, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Ideas have consequences. No one is saying that the "sole blame" is someone's beliefs, but a big part of the blame is. Even liberals agree, for example, that teaching people to kill based on race will result in more racist killings. Teach people to be evolutionary atheists and you will get more killings like what just happened in Finland. The logic is inescapable.--Aschlafly 23:29, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Surely we can agree though that horrible acts have been undertaken in the name of God, and equally horrible acts have been undertaken by nihilists (as opposed to atheists, who tend to consider the anarchic nature of the universe as something of an abstraction). Stalin is a very appropriate example, as are the Lord's Resistance Army. If there's one thing this subject should teach us, it's that we need to tone down the fervor, attempt intellectually honest communication and maybe offer the benefit of the doubt to our adversaries. Underscoreb 23:52, 12 November 2007 (EST)

I agree - look, it's obvious if you look at history that people through misconception, misguidedness or sheer selfishness have perverted religion to justify unspeakable horrors - and sadly, Christianity has had its fair share of evil adherents and misguided zealots. But the Judeo-Christian tradition has a built-in and eternal moral authority that can act as a brake on the worst human impulses that is absent in all-encompassing ideologies like - for instance - evolutionism and communism, which rely on fallible and shifting human beings, and not the infallible and eternal word of God as their final authority. Dewey 23:36, 9 November 2007 (EST)

On the other hand Dewey, you could also say that atheists place more value on a human life than other religions do, since it's a world view which sees life as a random occurence and death as an inevitable and inescapable fate. Obviously there are exceptions to this, just as there are self-identified Christians/muslims who go on killing sprees to purge the world of sin, but I don't know that religious views necessarily have that much of an impact on moral resolve. Underscoreb 15:46, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Ideas do have consequences but once again, where is the evidence that atheism really contributes to increased violence or murder? And once again, anecdotal evidence just doesn't count. There are too many instances in these debates when one side points to incident X and another points to incident Y to justify their POV when really that method of arguement can go on and on without really coming any closer to the truth. I readily admit that my "statistical" arguements presented above are weak and would be interested to know if others can find really good studies that can conclusively show that atheist commit acts of violence out of proportion to their numbers.Mfa1957 09:25, 12 November 2007 (EST)

The Religious Atheist

To be an atheist requires oneself to meet all of the criteria of a religion. That of doctrine, a belief system as well as having faith in those doctrines. Yet this is the one thing that an atheist hates the most; to have themselves be called religious, or belonging to a religion. Yet it is exactly what they profess when calling themselves believers of atheism. Of course they reject the term to describe their practices because they so like to use it like a four-letter word for everyone else. Which is also why this debate question is framed the way it is. How about religious believers and Libertarians? To everyone else that has the intellectual capacity and critical thinking skills to understand what constitutes a religion and act religiously then atheism is indeed one of them. Do atheists think they are merely members of a political party?--Roopilots6 17:12, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Actually Roos, most atheists tend to think of it as an absence of belief. I believe Bertrand Russell said it best that "calling atheism a religion is like considering 'not collecting stamps' a hobby". Basically, and forgive me if this sounds frivolous, we tend to treat reality as something which must be subject to either empirical evidence or logical inference. For this reason we see no more reason to believe in an interventionist God than the Loch Ness monster. There is however an interesting twist to this. While a fringe element of radicals insist on disparaging religion with an ironically religious fervor, most atheists would be open to the existence of God should new evidence suggest itself. This is why atheists and agnostics find science so damned exciting - new discoveries are being made in mathematics and physics every year that yield fascinating new revelations, such as the fundamental oddness of prime numbers or pi that seem to indicate some kind of cosmic signature. Conversely, the work done by Kurt Godel seems to indicate that there is no Unified Theory of Everything, which would have huge repercussions if anyone could figure out what this actually means about God. :-D Underscoreb 16:37, 15 November 2007 (EST)

First of all, one of the sysops originally framed the debate this way. And in fact, a good deal of the articles on this website are basically framed in the same way. As I said earlier, at least for the purpose of this debate, the point of whether atheism is a religion or not is conceded or irrelevant. Go debate that somewhere else. Just step up and prove, without resorting to anecdotes or changing the nature of the discussion, that atheist are really more prone to committing acts of violence or murders. So far no one can, so maybe the debate is over. Mfa1957 08:57, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Debate should include the signature of whoever authors it. Maybe also initiating what the intent of the debate is would also be helpful. As for proving that those followers of the atheistic religions are prone to kill more innocent people, I've already done that. The Humanist religions political sects of socialist countries that includes that formally nationalist socialist one wins out for the 20th Century. Nobody has debunked that. But for individual crimes it is practically impossible to tell since for the most part they are usually insane. Conceding what constitutes a religion is most definately not irrelevant though especially when it concerns the subject matter.--Roopilots6 11:36, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Proof is not anecdotal evidence you can't just relate some incident, no matter how dramatic it is or big and say that proves something. Gather or provide statistical evidence or you are just spewing air. Mfa1957 12:47, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Spewing air? I don't think so. The statistical evidence is overwhelming and supported by multiple sources in any historic record. Invoking the sacred word 'science' and 'critical thinking' like a talisman doesn't work any magic either. To get you started and for your perusal you can examine statistics from here:

The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, Hardcover: 912 pages Publisher: Harvard University Press (October 15, 1999) Language: English ISBN-10: 0674076087 ISBN-13: 978-0674076082

Let us also not forget the death toll due to infanticide in the US is 51,299,852 with an additional death every 24 seconds. The direct result of an atheistic world view. The degrading of a human life to a mere carbon offset. Just another man-made religion of death just like all the rest that has proceeded it. Whether they are theistic or non-theistic really doesn't matter once people use it for their own totalitarian purposes.--Roopilots6 13:03, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Roopilots6, how is infanticide a result of an atheistic point of view? Are you including abortion in this statistic? Also, it is hardly a religion of death. I myself am an atheist and I think that killing another human being is wrong.--Phillipps 13:22, 17 November 2007 (EST)

• Except, Phillipps, you most likely don't consider even an 8 month old "Fetus" as Human, and therefore don't include in your reasoning that is indeed the killing of a human being. --şyŝoρ-₮K^{/Ṣρёаќǃ} 13:39, 17 November 2007 (EST)

I am amazed at your ability to read minds TK!-JonathanToews 13:47, 17 November 2007 (EST)

• Of that, I am almost certain. As you progress through life, you will undoubtedly be amazed by much, much more. Perhaps one reason for you being too easily amazed is fatigue? That swift commuting between Dallas and Waterloo, Canada, must really leave you done in! Godspeed to you, Troll. --şyŝoρ-₮K^{/Ṣρёаќǃ} 14:02, 17 November 2007 (EST)

• Thank you for sharing my private information with the world TK, and for ignoring the point: you are forming an opinion based on a wild assumption. Not all atheists support abortion. Similarly, very few atheists support abortion in the third trimester.JonathanToews 14:09, 17 November 2007 (EST)

I am sorry if I stirred up a hornet's nest with my comment. I was genuinely curious if it was included in that statistic. Phillipps 16:04, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Interesting assumption

There's such a thing as an innocent person? Anmeris 17:01, 18 January 2008 (EST)

Depends on your Perspective

In reality, it depends on your perspective of the matter. If you were to consider the killing of innocent people by those who ARE of a certain religion, then Atheism wins by a longshot. Communist, religion-oppressing governments (most notably the Soviet Union) have killed more than Muslims, Catholics, or any other major religion. However, it's nearly universally agreed that these killings were not the result of the believe in no God, but in the belief that the leader at the time IS God. Therefore, they are not backed by true Atheist beliefs (that belief actually stems more on that of non-theistic Satanism, a philosophy not a religion). If you were to look at it as if innocent people were killed in the NAME of a religion, Christianity would win. Islam would come in second. I don't have the numbers with me, but you can look them up if you oh-so desire. Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Paganism, and other major religious systems are barely represented. Note that I'm just taking this as mass killings by a large government. If we were to look at it at a person-to-person killing, Christianity would more than likely be ahead solely because they hold the religious majority, not due to religious passages or assumptions.--Elephantgun 18:02, 13 May 2008 (EDT)

The non-theistic atheist does in fact put himself in place of God by the exclusion of God. Maybe this is why they spend so much time and effort in the denial of something they don't believe in. This is why an atheistic leader puts himself in place of God. That others will bow down to only him. How someone comes to the equation that person-to-person killing is dominated by a majority of Christians is whistling in the dark since there aren't any factual evidence to back up that claim. This is stemming from a lack of knowledge of what denotes a Christian from a person-to-person perspective, of course.--Roopilots6 12:18, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

Could you elaborate on the point that a non-theistic atheist puts himself in place of God? ATang 15:39, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

The hierarchy of rank that any person places themselves in. The theistic person will tend to not put themselves at the top position in relation to others in a spiritual order. The non-theist has no spiritual level to adhere themselves too. Especially the non-theist at the top level of authority over their group. They have supplanted God in that to them there is no greater authority. To the perception of the theist the non-theist has made himself his own god. The non-theist(atheist) doesn't have to proclaim this though it is in fact what has been done. Only a self seeking rationale will be the only needed guidestone to if you like it, do it. No restraint necesary to the person who is their own god. An attractive and potentially deadly choice for some to make. But sometimes even deadlier for those in the way of a person who has become their own god.--Roopilots6 16:22, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

You forget about all of the wars launched in the name of religion Here is a list and the estimated deaths:

Premodern Expansion of the Muslim empire (after the death of Mohammad): 10,000,000 total The Mughal conquest of North India: 100,000 Human sacrifices: innumerable. 1,000,000 seems like a conservative guess, although that might not even cover the Aztecs.

Middle ages 16th century invasion of Korea by japan: estimated losses are 1,000,000 according to Jones, Geo H., Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 254, but due to the destruction of records, I will say 500,000 The peasants war against the Roman Catholic Church and other minor revolts against the RCC: Usually estimated at 100,000 Protestant and catholic wars: 14,000,000 is commonly cited, but I will say 10,000,000 The crusades: some say 1,000,000, some say 5,000,000, so will go with 2,500,000 The Albigensian Crusade (separate from regular crusades): 1,000,000

Early Modern The annihilation of the Native Americans by the puritans: Some guess as many as 100,000,000, but I'll go with 20,000,000. The Spanish conquistadors (nearly eliminated 3 civilizations; the maya, inca, and aztecs): at least 15,000,000

Modern: Armenian Genocide: 1,500,000 The 1948 Arab-Israeli War: 20,000 First Sudanese Civil War: 500,000 Second Sundanese Civil war: 2,000,000 Operation Searchlight(genocide): 1,500,000 Hindu extremest group Tigers of Tamil: 200,000 The 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War (known as the holy war to Iran): 750,000 Holocaust (Hitler was a self-proclaimed catholic): 6,000,000 Jews and Jehovah witnesses.

Total: 72,670,000, possibly over 100,000,000

Atheist

French revolution: Not religious in nature, but anti-religion 1,000,000-2,000,000, I will use 1,500,000 Cultural Revolution/Great leap forward (mostly indirect starvation): estimated 20,000,000 to 40,000,000, I will use 30,000,000 Pol pot regime (anti-most religion, may not have been atheist): 3,000,000 max. Stalin: He was a Deist, not atheist, despite what your un-editable page on atheism and mass murders says. His regime was anti-religious, estimated at 15,000,000

Total: 46,500,000

You can check all of the figures, they are accurate.

Not included in theism related deaths: Denial of medications and other medical services Opposition to safe sex practices, and missionaries contributing to the HIV problem in Africa Mose's orders of genocide against the Midians. Religion's war on vaccines The burning at the stake of heretics everyday religious oppression.

Sorry for not including the sources, but quick research should back up all the information. -Formatting error, there should be a new line after each event, sorry.

That's your case for religion killing more people? Usually people back up their statements with evidence and don't expect others to do their work for them. You probably got this all from some atheist site and just didn't want to admit it. ameda 23:01, 17 November 2009 (EST)

Most of the event were off the top of my head, I used websites for the death counts. If there is any incorrect information I will gladly correct it.