Imagine No Religion

Send to Facebook | Send To Twitter
  • Twitch


  • Leave A Comment

    Notify of
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments

    Stalin, Pol Pot, Chairman Mao. Don’t you people ever get bored of this same back and forth?

    Anyway, this is quite dull. Only 3000 people died in 9-11. There were plenty of incidences of religious violence where far more than 3000 civilians died.




    I wanna see a picture of Iraq how it used to look before it got raped, with the caption, “Imagine no fascist pigs”.
    Whether it’s in the name of religion that people fuck things up, or whatever Bush & co were thinking, it’s still people doing it
    If tomorrow all religion was forgotten, there would be still enough irrational lunatics who’d find a reason to kill a bunch of people.

    And how come the Iraqi people have no memorial day? Oh yeah right, they’re still being slaughtered.

    3000 Americans = 1 million Iraqis
    Mathematics with Bush is no fun.


    Also, John Lennon was a fucking poser:

    1) He talked about politics and charity all day, but in the end what did he do with his millions of dollars? ‘bed-ins’ to raise awareness of what? His own public image.

    2) Once he got into heroin he basically quit music. Sgt. Pepper? The White Album? Abbey road? All he did was come into the studio with some chord changes and a few lyrics and let Paul actually work it into a song. Paul lived in the Studio while John was busy having bed-ins and shooting heroin. Paul even played most of the instruments on the Last four albums.

    3) For all his hippy peace-and-love idealism, he was sure a woman beater. He beat both of his wives black and blue. He once beat up a waitress and would have probably rotted away in prison but she refused to press charges.


    The difference is that Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao didn’t claim their actions in the name of atheism. Of course they persecuted religious groups, but so have other pious leaders.

    Now to the most important issue of today. I spilled half a bottle of maple syrup all over my pants and a little bit on my shirt. How do I make it so I don’t smell like a pancake at work?


    “The difference is that Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao didn’t claim their actions in the name of atheism. Of course they persecuted religious groups, but so have other pious leaders”

    They claimed their actions in the name of an inherently atheistic belief system just the same as as the 30 Years’ War was “fought in the name of religion”. Of course there were ulterior motives (especially in the case of Stalin), but there always are.

    I see your powers of confirmation-bias-fu are sophisticated, young lotus.


    Do you know why the Spanish Inquisition happened? Europe was shifting away from classic feudalism to a more merchant-based economy. Estate owners – which included monastic orders – were increasingly losing their grip to townsfolk, which included Jews because when the townsfolk were the poorest the Jews were restricted from profitable excursions. Portugal’s adventures in Africa started to flood both Spain and Portugal with gold (and trading commodities), and thus the merchant classes were becoming increasingly rich and powerful and disturbing the old order.

    The Spanish Inquisition was just an attempt to weaken the merchant classes and maintain the old Feudal order. What a lot of people don’t realize was that there was more to it than killing Jews. The country was flooded with dominican spies, instructive secular books (ie how to be a merchant) were censored, and merchant ventures were randomly closed for no reason.

    So, yes, there was very much an economic and strategic motive to the Spanish Inquisition, but that doesn’t mean it was still religious: it was a complex historical event with a great deal of context and motivation.

    But, seriously, Camel, stupid cunts like you use their magical power of confirmation-bias-fu to spin everything towards ‘I’m great, they suck”


    You’re right. Communism doesn’t work when people are free to choose a religion which tells its followers that they’re superior to non-believers. However, atheism isn’t the only qualifying factor to be aligned with one of these leaders. An atheist man who opposes the state is just as much of an enemy as a religious one.

    Oh, and don’t worry about my syrup pants. I peed my pants on accident and I think the two smells have neutralized eachother.


    I meant “wasn’t a religious reason.” I’m saying there were both religious and economic motivations.

    Now the Crusades:

    There’s a well-accepted theory amongst historians that the rise of Islam broke a lot of the old Mediterranean trade routes, which is why the economic power of Europe switched from Italian and Spanish ports to Rhineland/Parisian agriculture.

    It could be easily argued that Papal support of religious wars in the Levant and Spain weren’t merely an attempt to convert the infidels, but were also an attempt to reestablish old sea-trade routes and once again make Italy (which he Popes had a heavy economic share in) a major centre of Naval trade. Religion was an easy excuse because, you know, it was the Pope and also its easy to get foreign troops excited about religion than “I want to make Italy rich.”

    Again, these are never easy or simple things and there are typically a multitude of conditions and motivations, and bits of contextual information. Spinning complex historical events for the sake of your own propaganda is childish and irresponsible.


    I fail to see how we disagree now.


    Well, my point is that there will be a buttload of violence no matter who believes what, and your argument is that, apparently, religion can be faulted for violence but atheism can’t.


    “Well, my point is that there will be a buttload of violence no matter who believes what”

    Agreed 100%

    I was just trying to refute the belief that “less religion = more Stalins, Pol Pots, and Maos.”

    Evil men will find a reason to be evil with or without religion.





    Well, then, Camel… awesome.

    The Matrix: Rebooted

    Use of historical examples is misleading. Does it matter whether the Crusades were economic or policital in nature? Does it matter that Mao was an atheist? No even China is trying to imitate Mao anymore.
    What matters is that RIGHT NOW, religion is being used as an excuse to commit violence, enforce ignorance and oppress human rights. Getting rid of religion wouldn’t cure all the evil in the world, sure, but it would be an improvement. Its really hard to convince people to blow themselves up if there’s no such thing as heaven.


    But, again, I would say there are some major economic and political motivations there.

    I mean, come on. All these people are seeing the West toy with the economy of their region, and maybe these suicide bombers don’t have a deep understanding of the subtleties of the situation, but they must know that the US and Europe – more prosperous parts of the world – have their fingerprints all over the politics of the region. And I would wonder if the relatively recent European teardown of the Ottoman Empire and the resulting colonialism hasn’t been imprinted on the collective memories of the Arabs. When white folks march in, start a bunch of localized wars, start untaxed factories, destroy local industry and strip you of the few natural resources you have, you don’t forget it. Hell, from the Arab point of view, I doubt there’s much of distinction between the pre-WWII great game policies and the current oil-driven game of chess that’s been going on since Eisenhower.

    I mean, hell, the average Arab has no reason to know that the US or Europe even exist except in the broadest terms (go to India and Mozambique and ask questions about the US; you’ll be surprised how people little know about the US there).

    The Jihads or whatever might be framed in specifically religious terms, but I doubt the Middle East and the West would even know about each other if there weren’t clear economic motivations on both sides.


    OOOOOOOOOO Religious debate. Where everyone’s a loser. See Palestine Jackasses!


    O-key doke:

    The Jews “made the desert bloom” as the cliche goes. They used their ability to read and research modern agricultural techniques to reroute the little fresh water there was to form a genuinely productive and strong watershed which could cope even in drought years. They gradually and carefully worked previously infertile land into productive farm land. They then used a strong agricultural base to build a modern service economy.

    Meanwhile, the Arabs, who had little access to modern agricultural techniques, and an economy devastated from the conservatism of Ottoman rule, the destruction of European rule, and decades of western-driven war, see that these foreigners, speaking a different language and practising an alien, are suddenly prosperous on land they consider their own.

    Do the math.


    The picture dose have some truth to it.

    And please do not pull a “McCain” and use my words of “Truth” out of context… that would be uber lame…


    Have you not been following, little grasshoppa…? What truth? There is no truth here. I agree with Caio on this point.

    This picture is meaningless. It is anti-religious propaganda, nothing more, nothing less. “Religion” is merely being used as a convenient scapegoat for our evils.

    Humans will still find ways to be evil to one another regardless of whether we are all the same religion, race, creed, etc. No need to single any one thing out…

    Alec Dalek

    As much as some of you want to downplay the religious angle, the fact remains, the losers that attacked on 9/11 did it because they honestly thought that they’d go to heaven. Without religion, I doubt the Saudi’s would have been able to convince them to take their own lives (so the price of oil would skyrocket).


    I`d rather imagine no stupidity at all.Be it religion,politics,prejudices or anything else.


    i used this as a visual aid in my speech. OWN/WIN

  • Here's a few awesome images!