LogFAQs > #937802084

Plus, I want you to think about what you really just said. You basically said 'The only thing keeping Christians from being monsters is their belief in God; unlike us enlightened atheists who are better people for dismissing such superstitious nonsense'. Do you REALLY believe that?

Oh yes, England is well-known for its lax laws on murder, we generally don't punish that /s. The US outright claims to be an athiestic country yet they don't have any less lax an approach to murder than the UK. That's weeeeeeird, brah.

Not true. First off, nations like America and England are AGNOSTIC and typically work to keep religion and government separate to varying degrees of success. This is NOT the same thing as an atheistic nation like we see with China, North Korea, and the U.S.S.R. This is an essential difference to note and remember and a failure to do so can lead to the difference between a successful nation and a totalitarian hellhole. Typically atheistic governments either outlaw religion or force it to serve the state. This results in things like them removing religious leaders who speak out against the government and replacing them with pro-party members if not outright openly exterminating members of a faith. For comparison in an agnostic government religion is not only permitted but is allowed to be outright contrary to the party/government. In America if you want to openly defy the federal government on religious grounds you have the right to do so. This is because America is agnostic. If America were atheistic you would likely see all your pastors suddenly start singing the praise of the government if not suddenly taking lengthy 'vacation trips' and your church being demolished because it's politically inconvenient.

This sounds like you're talking about countries that are already deeply corrupt and reject religion as that was used as a shield for other corrupt people to act immorally. They're corrupt shitholes, that's why they turn to shit.

The religious leaders have already instilled in the people that there's no higher power determining right and wrong so they're effectively starting from scratch. Because these religious leaders are still abusing them, they're taught that definitely these people deserve to be killed so nobody determines killing is wrong. Effectively a revolution happens and people learn rules of war, not rules of civility. The athiestic uprising is inherently violent as it's raised on war, not peace. The corrupt shithole has to have time to settle to start reordering their law based on civil action, but because they've already established loose rules on killing, naturally feuds keep the fighting going.

They're eternally fucked because their authority was already garbage, religion wasn't making them "good"

You don't seem to get it. When these governments exist the only thing that matters is the party. The party need not refer to any one specific party but, rather, the consolidation of power within the government and the removal of power from the masses. Religion, which inherently places a value on the divine, is beyond the control of the party and is, thusly, problematic. Be it the Pope, Lama, Iman, and through them God, or whatever else these people are beyond the control of the government and, thusly, a threat to its power. This is why the CCP is so intent on stomping out groups like the Uyghur's, installing puppet pastors in what few churches exist, and hunting down the Dahli Lama (whose mere existence serves as a rallying point for the Tibeten people). Just by existing they harm the power of the party. God is only allowed to exist so long as he is a party member and only to keep the uneducated, superstitious, masses in line.

This will play out a thousand times over a thousand times. An atheistic government will see any religious group, no matter how benign, as a threat to its power to be controlled. After all, God isn't real, but the uneducated masses refuse to abandon their superstitious ways, so they must either be made to conform or be stamped out. An agnostic government, meanwhile, acknowledges the divinity of God and his position above that of the party, regardless of what God does or does not exist, and labors instead to make their laws independent of him.

I am not saying an atheist cannot lead, of course. What I am saying is that a government which expressly professes atheism instead of agnosticism must find a way to deal with it's religious population and will do so by removing the potential threat to its power.

---

I am the gentle hand who heals, the happy smile who shields, and the foot that will kick your ***! - White Mage