This excerpt is, of course, part of the counter-argument against the bogus old assertion that "religion" leads to violence and war. Hype simply cannot stand up to fact.
Since your reference claims that atheism was the cause of those examples of violence against humanity, does it actually show a causal link between the two?
You might take another look at the excerpt. The author explains how 'causal' it is.
I think he could've pursued a little more. The idea that cigarette smoking has been shown to "cause" cancer is statistical. I maintain this is abuse of the term 'cause', but... In any sense that religion can be said to 'cause' violence, war, etc. it can be said that atheism "causes" much more.
I could just as easily point out that the overwhelming majority of convicted murderers in the US are Christians and claimed to be so before they committed their crimes.
You could easily assert it. Some of the crime myths are debunked pretty thoroughly in the book, although I don't recall "convicted murderer" stats coming into play. And some of the statistics weren't U.S.
You're welcome to try, I suppose.
So what? I can't link their religion to their actions any more than your so-called researcher can link atheism with inhumane behavior.
So it's okay for atheists to lie & say "religion is bad because (xyz)", but it's not okay for someone to show that these lies are lies and if one actually looks into (xyz) one finds the opposite to be the case?
I did mention that these are
counter-arguments, did I not?
Now if you want to use statistics, it is well known that the percentage of all atheists that commit crimes is lower than the percentage of all Christians that commit crimes.
That myth
is debunked.
Can I say that atheism leads to more proper behavior? Absolutely not!! That statistic alone doesn't take into account a myriad of other possible influences on the behavior of the people in the study.
So the atheist argument was a poor one from the get-go? Well, you have to understand that they don't have much quality in any of their arguments.
Basically, the claim, implied or otherwise, that atheism leads to the type of behavior described in those two passionately written paragraphs is bunk. Being adamant about it doesn't change it from the bunk that it is.
The crime figures, that's an individual sort of thing. The systematic slaughters are another story. That pattern is something everyone should look into and decide for themselves. It's a very serious and dangerous issue.
