Response to Mr. K Rahman - Atheism → atrocities?
Aparthib Zaman
USA
E Mail :
aparthib@yahoo.com
This is in response to an article by Mr. K Rahman which appeared on NFB dated July 23. (Titled "Islam Bashing -- favorite pastime for some ) in which he linked atheism with acts of atrocities committed by various dictators in history.
Now one need not be an atheist to refute the unqualified assertion made by people like K Rahman that only atheists can and do commit atrocities, just as one need not be a Muslim to refute that only Muslims can and commit atrocities, or just as one need not be a Christian to refute the allegation that only Christians can and commit atrocities and so on.
So I will argue from a neutral vantage point in trying to refute the views of K Rahman and other folks holding such belief whom I will label AI people (Who literally equate Immorality with Atheism). Mr K Rahman remarked : "it is pointless to ignore the atrocities and injustices people have perpetrated by using religion as their source of inspiration.." By that he admitted that atrocities and injustoces have been committed by USING RELIGION AS SOURCE OF INSPIRATION or lets say in the name of religion.
Now these people he admitted as having committed atrocities CANNOT be atheists.
Because atheists do not commit any atrocities USING or IN THE NAME OF religion. So they must be THEISTS. Hence his very premise that only atheists commit attrocities falls flat on its face. In fact let me turn it around and show examples after examples of crimes by NON-ATHEISTS. Does Yahya Khan, Tikka Khan ring the bell? Does the Spanish Inquisition ring the bell?
It is easy to cite ample examples of oppressive Hindu/Christian/Jewish/Muslim rulers ?
Now consider some non-oppressive, moral (by human standard) non-theists. Does Nehru ring the bell? Does Gorbachev ring the bell? Does Buddha ring the bell? (Yes, he was Godless, never preached or expressed belief in God, preached only love of human and all animals). Were Greek Philosopher Democritus, Bertrand Russell, Darwin, Thomas Alva Edison, Sigmund Freud, George Bernard Shaw, H.G. Wells, Charlie Chaplin, Carl Sagan, Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg, Richard Feynman etc etc criminals? Did they try to be? Many of them led a life which only a truly religious person people is supposed to lead! (as claimed by theists themselves).
Now the AI people may he may argue, oh those theists who commit atrocities IN THE NAME OF RELIGION were bad theists, not good theists, or they were not TRUE theists, but FAKE theists etc. So what. Regardless of whether they were good or bad theists,the fact remains that THEY WERE NOT ATHEISTS.they all believed in religion and God., many of them even pray and perform rituals (like offer Qurbani, offer Friday prayers etc.).
Their belief did not succeed in offering any deterrent to their crimes. Only an effectively enforce legal and penal system can act as a deterrent for both theists and atheists. The AI people may still insist that only the TRULY religious will never commit atrocities. Well, is that such a deep statement ? Even under atheistic regimes like former China and USSR theft, murder, rape etc were against the law and punishable crimes.
An atheist who is TRULY law abiding would also not commit any crime either. So what is so unique about theism in deterring crime? There are significant number of atheists in Singapore where crime is very low. In India a survey of prisoners reveal that majority of them believe in God.
Then K Rahman went on to cite the atrocities of Communists of China, Russia and Polpot of Cambodia and concluded that it was the atheists who commit atrocities.
This exemplifies A common fallacy called guilt by association fallacy. Just because Stalin, Hitler, Polpot ruler etc were all atheists do not mean they committed their atrocities IN THE NAME OF or BECAUSE OF atheism. Lets take Stalin. He may be described as a human who was (1) A white, (2) A male , (3) A communist, (4) A Russian , (5) A tall guy, (5) A guy with moustache, (6) An atheist etc.
Now one might conclude generalizing from his atrocities that:
1. Whites commit atrocities (Suits a non-white)
2. Russians commit atrocities (Suits an American)
3. Communists commit atrocities (Suits capitalists)
4. Tall guys commit atrocities (suits a short guys)
5. Guys with moustache commit atrocities (Suits a guy who lost his girlfriend to a guy with moustache)
6. Atheists commit atrocities (Suits AI people among the theists, like K Rahman).
Of course common sense thinking and a little knowledge of history should should convince anyone that it is Stalin's personality and his obsessive hunger for power and love for communistic philosophy and intolerance of any opposition (perceived as well as real) to his ambition that was the reason for his atrocities.
Once can play the same game and pick a non-atheist who had committed atrocities and succeed in concluding that theists commit atrocities.
Atheism is not a dogma where there are orders like "kill believers" etc. Just as the AI people argue that a bad theist may commit crime, the same logic can be used to argue that a bad atheist can also commit crime. Not only that, a bad atheist who commits crime does it NOT in the name of atheism, but in the name of some other dogma like communism or due to political/nationalistic goals, like a military dictator, Nazism, fascism, racism, etc or a politically oppressive civilian regime, there are plenty of examples of such, committing human rights abuse on its innocent citizens.
By the way Hitler is also mentioned to by many AI people to validate their position. In fact Hitler was not an atheist, he was very much a Christian, but by ideology a racial supremacist. If at all his example can be used to argue the other way that theists commit atrocities.
All repression, persecutions that have been committed in history were committed by Racial supremacist (e.g Hitler), or communist dictators (e.g Stalin), or simply politically oppressive regimes not behaving democratically, none of which represents atheism, though they may all have been non-believers but that was an incidental secondary factor, dogma (racial supremacy, state control of human life etc) was the primary. So it is ridiculous to cite the examples of atrocities of Stalin or Pol Pot communists to characterize them as atheistic crimes.
It only proves a morbid disgust of the AI people towards atheists.
===================================================
Published in NFB ( http://www.bangladesh-web.com/news/jul/27/gv4n639.htm#A2 )