I’m sick of taking a passive position. I’m sick of limp-wristed atheists who regurgitate tiresome maxims like “you can’t prove a negative, nor disprove a non-falsifiable claim”. Some of us live in hyper-religious Muslim societies where atheism is automatically seen as an active denial of god’s existence instead of simply being a LACK OF BELIEF in the existence of any gods.

Even “moderate” Muslims who don’t actively call for the death sentence for apostates at the very least support it tacitly on grounds that it counts as treason against the supra-state that is Islam.

It’s easier for atheists living in more liberal and secular countries, but for atheists like me, militancy is more a matter of reactive self-defence rather than aggression.

Heck, Hitler’s government was essentially a perversion of the principles of Darwinian evolution. “Preservation of the favored races”, and all that.

The greatest Christian invention = the printing press

The greatest atheist invention = the atom bomb.

And as for the nihilist Hitler…Remember how deeply he was a student of Freidrich Nietzche; a militant atheist. Hitler also thought Christianity should have been stamped out.

Hitler was not a Lutheran, not even by culture. Catholicism was strong in Germany during Hitler’s reign. He was a professed Roman Catholic….till his death.

You would be surprised how easy it is to find that out using some type of search engine.

Marx and Hitler were both products of a Protestant Lutheran culture.

The Communism of the Soviet Union was a religion that just substituted one mysticism for another – replacing “God” with “historical determinism.” Antagonism towards Christianity was hostility to a rival religion. Like Russian Orthodox Christianity, Soviet Communism’s first requirement was belief in it and its foremost ethical demand was obedience.

As for Hitler, he was a Roman Catholic who never repudiated his faith. The Nazis proudly displayed Martin Luther’s books at their Nuremberg rallies.

The worst Holocaust in history was when Christians massacred Christians, and while the Nazi attempt didn’t even come close to eradicating Judaism, the Albigensian Crusade exterminated forever and totally the Cathar culture.

Christians are the last people in the world qualified to lecture others for murderous social behavior.

If you knew anything about it then you would not be skeptical about the ability of atheists to make principled moral judgements.

And let me ask you: How do you propose to justify following any one of the multitude of possible ‘scriptures’, and having chosen, how will you justify which chapters of that self-contradictory nonsense to throw out?

As for Peter Singer: Firstly, by mentioning him you actually refute your own rhetorical point, because despite being an atheist, his moral judgements *have* been derived in a principled manner after all.

Secondly, it’s idiotic to imply that Singer’s moral judgements follow from his atheism. No moral consequences whatsoever can be inferred from God’s non-existence. Hence, whatever morality an atheist subscribes to will have arrived at totally independently of their being an atheist. Look at someone like Thomas Nagel – also an atheist – whose views are completely different from Singer’s (and more concordant with everyday intuition).