Athiests (the community) are known for being outspoken about the damage that certian religions have caused and are causing, but they're also known for supporting the free exchange of ideas including those that they think are harmful. Atheists (the definition) aren't known for anything because atheism doesn't demand any specific behaviors.
I wonder if there have been any explicitly Athiest regimes? That is, governments based on an ideology that explicitly denies the existence of God and devalues all religions?
If only we had historical examples of such regimes, perhaps we could see if they were benign or murderous.
My understanding is that most Communistic regimes were explicitly Atheist. I'm not a historian so I may not have my facts completely correct, but my understanding is that:
The Soviet Union more or less outlawed religion.
China is officially Atheistic but tolerates certain recognized religions. My understanding is that they outlaw/suppress certain things they view as "superstition" (such as supernatural and moral aspects of Qigong) in a way that would be considered questionable in the west.
On a more positive side, I wonder if there are any of the Scandinavian countries that could be considered to more or less implement Humanism. I say that because it seems like Humanism fills a lot of the same roles for Atheists (moral system, providing hope, providing meaning etc.) that religion does for theists.
> I wonder if there have been any explicitly Athiest regimes?
Some, but not all, regimes in the Leninist (and Stalinist, etc., derivatives) tradition were/are, and early the French Revolutionary regime briefly was during the period of the establishment of the Cult of Reason (which, while called a “cult” with good was, was atheistic and thus not a religion in the theistic sense), but that was soon replaced by the Cult of the Supreme Being (which was deistic, but not atheistic) during the Terror.
I think just because atheists don’t tend to care for the book. But yeah we’re typically less in to banning books than religious people so it is an odd comment.
I'm really not trying to start a tit for tat who is worse argument as all religions, including mine (Christian/Catholic) has their fair share of atrocities, but certainly many people were murdered and otherwise oppressed under state atheist regimes in Communist countries. It's worth calling out and remembering.
Atheists have a reputation for being anti-religion. This certainly isn't inherent to Atheism or reflective of all Atheists. However, I have met many Atheists who were highly intolerant or disrespectful of religion.
The religious people of all monotheisic religions don’t believe in almost all the same gods as the atheists. The atheists just don’t believe in one more.
I agree that we shouldn't ban something just because we dislike/disrespect it; instead I meant that, unfortunately, many people (on both sides) don't see things that way. Sorry if that's not what it sounded like I was saying in my original post.
I understood what you're saying; what I'm saying is that we should be careful not to assume someone want to ban something just because they're being disrespectful to it.
