What did he mean by this?

What did he mean by this?

He is part of the war on women.

He would rather rid the world of a human right rather than a heinous crime.


I.E. autistic

He means that a "tips fedora" moment is more important than ending rape.

he sees the continued existence of religion as a greater threat to humanity than violent sexual crime.

I guess a suitable analog to his point is that he'd rather end all wars than end the ability of man to kill/murder, but that doesn't do it justice.

I share his view. Religion is a shadow of its former self. Religion in and of itself isn't bad, I think it's good, but it does nothing but enable wackjobs, psychopaths, war criminals, and pedophiles

How is religion, which teaches things like love your neighbour and compassion for other people, equivalent or worse than one of the most degrading and shameful act a human can do: rape. I just don't get it.

institutionalized religion has wiped out countless millions of people. and enabled countless rapes.

>which teaches things like love your neighbour and compassion for other people

yep, religion is the only place you will ever learn those things. nice cherrypicking. even devoutly religious people divide into sects and rebel against the institution of religion.

People just use religion as an excuse. If it wasn't religion it would be something else.

Who cares what a retarded positivist says?

I would not accept they are in any way equivalent. but that love an compassion has usually come with several caveats. saints have argued for instance that its ok to kill heretics to protect innocents form being corrupted by them. By this logic killing a nonbeliever become the loving thing to do because it protects the salvation of others. Things like this have been extended to wars, where the normal rules do not apply because your fighting for the salvation of the masses or to save believers from heathens.

At the very least it creates yet another in group out group dynamic which is rarely healthy for a society

you, read this.

Take all the world religions today, go find the point in history where they were at their absolute worst, and they are still significantly more moral than ancient pagan religions, or even modern secular ideals.

Nazism was secular and ignored religion, Communism with it's purges and genocide surpassed anything religion has ever done, nationalism caused WWI and WWII. European Colonialism, slavery and Child labor a product of US capitalism. This is just off the top of my head.

Some of these things have even been ended by religion. Even today, more spirituality would do everyone good. ISIS themselves have proven repeatedly they know nothing of the Islam.

You're wrong on every point. There are more rules when fighting for religion, than fighting for anything other reason.

also, Communism killed more people for being religions than religions have killed people for being the wrong religions.

A normal person would avoid answering this question. An autistic person would pose the question himself.

that's true, but religion (usually in heavily religious areas, the sanctity of the church) holds a special place as something you can't fuck with, ever. look at rome and pedophilia. or islamofascism.

you won't ever hear me argue that religion couldn't easily be replaced by something else, but the unique way religion enables people is disgusting. it's a cult.

what evils would be caused by people being brought to live under a secular humanist society? a fuckton less than under religious law. or any other arbitrary set of laws that you can never challenge.

>you, read this

that might be true to an extent, but it doesn't say much for religion as a force of good

personally I dont think religion will ever go away because there is something in our psychology which is drawn to it. Doesn't make it right or wrong, its just the way we are set up

you just picked out the two worst authoritarian regimes in history to illustrate why atheists are evil.

so did marx kill those people or did stalin?

>colonialism

aight man. whatever fits your narrative. what about the catholic conquistadors? what about the exportation or christianity and erasure of native culture?

>Take all the world religions today, go find the point in history where they were at their absolute worst, and they are still significantly more moral than ... modern secular ideals.

holy fuck, are you crazy? 2 million died in the crusades. and how is modern islamofascism more moral than modern secularism?

If the religious back then had the weapons of today the death toll would easily be in the millions. even the dumbass sectarian wars like Iran-Iraq or the Armenian genocide have death tolls in the million point somethings.

Good lord.

>get rid of religion

Does this include all spooks?

Didn't this guy support the war in Iraq ?

Isn't he an apologist for Isreali apartheid ?

b8

Spooks are already nonexistent according to Stirner.

> ISIS themselves have proven repeatedly they know nothing of the Islam.

He pissed off Christfags and SJWs in one go.

I'm impressed.

Just a Jew attempting to destroy a pillar of western civilization. Shocker.

That was a long time ago. If you also really want to point fingers, I can tell you that one specific religion is responsible for a larger percent than all others. Can you guess which one?

>Take all the world religions today, go find the point in history where they were at their absolute worst, and they are still significantly more moral than ancient pagan religions, or even modern secular ideals.

This is hilariously false. Fuck off.

Anticlericalism killed more than any religion.

The Inquisition only killed 3000 people, while a random anti-religion event like the Vendée Massacre killed over 300000.

Irreligion is a good thing, anti-religion is not.

>what evils would be caused by people being brought to live under a secular humanist society?
The rampant child sex trade in [post-]Soviet countries caused by people trying to make an extra buck in a system designed to keep them hungry and subservient was for sure caused by religion.