Hi Russ T

Yes this does rather seem to be in the wrong place, what has this to do with Evolution/Creation.

This fallacy of the angry atheist is a very old one. The evidence simply does not support it. I’m not saying there aren’t angry atheists, I’m sure they are but, logically, if they are angry at god they are not an atheist are they? I could hardly be angry at santa claus because I don’t believe in him. I might be angry at people who try to push the idea of him on me, the over the top Christmas commercialism that is all too common these days but not at santa claus himself. Non existence is the perfect out clause.

Likewise with god, if he really did all the things the bible claims for him angry would be the only rational position IMHO but I don’t believe he exists and the stories in the bible that paint him in such a horrible light are just that, stories. I may not like the writings of many authors but I don’t get angry at the characters in the books they write. I don’t hate the Joker for example despite the rotten things he does because he’s a fictional character. Anger could reasonable be directed against the authors of some books for the way the portray women or blacks or so many other things they write that diminish us but not at the fictional characters they portray in their writings.

OK so we’ve dealt with the fallacy that an atheist could be angry with god while still being an atheist. Now let’s look at the ‘filling the void’ fallacy. This one is simpler and again I’m not saying that there aren’t some self proclaimed atheists who drink to fill the void left by god but I’ve never met or heard of one. As for the idea that atheists abuse their girlfriends again the evidence simply does not support that. The federal prison statistics, discussed here earlier, clearly show that by any reasonable measure atheist are more moral and far less likely to commit crimes than christians. Those statistics are repeated in other countries in their general prison population statistics. Atheists are far less likely to physically abuse people, to steal, to defraud etc. Given the divorce statistics for Atheists are also lower than for christians the idea that they are bad at relationships is also unsupported by the evidence. Again I’m not saying that there aren’t some atheists who rape, murder, abuse their girlfriends, drink and take drugs, I’m sure there are but then christians do all of those things too and the statistics suggest that it is a higher percentage of christians who do so than atheists. Does that not suggest that atheism is the ideal you christians should strive for, if good morals are your aim at least?

It’s an old story, you give god the credit for all the good things and blame the people involved personally for the bad. A higher percentage of christians commit crimes than atheists but when a christian commits a crime you blame them while with atheists you blame their rejection of god and you give god the credit for christians who are good people. An obvious question must be to whom do you give the credit when the vast majority of atheists, a higher percentage than christians, are good people who do not abuse drugs or their girl friends or perpetrate other unsocial acts?

This article is a very old story, it’s been false since it was first penned and it doesn’t matter how may articulate people pen an newer version of it under how many names it’s still rubbish.

Are you actually gullible enough to fall for this sort of propaganda Russ T?

In Reason

Russell