The Atheist Hall of Shame.

"Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." Mao Tse-tung (1893 – 1976). Kampf um Mao's Erbe (1977.)

 

Some of the famous atheists in the atheist Hall of Shame.

Stalin, Marx, Lenin, Kim Jong IL, Mao, Kim Jong Un, Pol Pot, Kruschev, Brezhnev, Honecker, Ceaușescu

 

Atheism proved itself, in the 20th century, to be the most horrendous, barbaric, murderous and criminal ideology the world has ever experienced. Countless millions suffered and died at the hands of this hideous ideology, they must never be forgotten.

 

The promised atheist/socialist utopia ... the idea of an atheist Heaven on Earth resulted in a diabolical Hell on Earth.

 

Who, but a complete idiot would want to resurrect such a monstrous, no-hope philosophy?

 

Present day, so-called 'new' (improved?) atheists (and communists) try to disassociate themselves from the disastrous record of the world's, first ever, official, atheist states, established in the great, atheist experiment of the 20th century.

But all the examples we have of official, atheist rule are horrendous. And, the tyranny still continues, wherever atheism is the dominant, ruling ideology, as in North Korea.

 

The ‘new’ atheists try to blame the 20th century’s persecution and brutality completely on communism. They claim it had nothing to do with atheism.

But, although communism is a disastrous economic system, there is no intrinsic reason why it should be brutal, or why it should hate religion, or why it should destroy churches and persecute and murder millions of Christians and people of other faiths.

That is the hallmark of atheist ideology, not of an economic system.

 

Communism is fatally flawed as an economic system. And, as it thrives on envy, class hatred and division, it is a an anathema to Christianity, and any other religion which preaches love for everyone. Consequently, it is the ideal bedfellow for atheism, but that is different from requiring an intrinsic hatred of God and religion as a matter of state, endorsed policy. That is essentially an atheist ideal.

If communists weren't atheists, why would they outlaw and attack all religion? Karl Marx, the founder of communism, hated religion, because he was also an atheist. He understood that communist, dialectic materialism, class war etc. is incompatible with most religions, so, it could be argued, that to be a bona fide communist, he also had be an atheist.

 

Lenin was a self-declared atheist who, together with his Soviet Bloc, atheist successors, tried to eliminate religion with brutal repression and wholesale murder.

 

Thus, history tells us that the atheist experiment has been tried and, from beginning to end, was a brutal and diabolical failure. The new atheists may say: “it's nothing to do with us gov.”

But who wants to risk such devastation again, by giving the atheist ideology another chance? Only a complete idiot would want to take that gamble.

 

However, it was only to be expected and it could easily have been predicted beforehand, that the inevitable result of atheism's lack of an absolute ethical or moral yardstick would be to wreak havoc on the world - and that is exactly what it did. .

 

Atheism hasn't changed at all in that respect, because it can't.

Atheism and secular humanism categorically reject the concept of intrinsic right and wrong. Therefore, the ephemeral values, moral relativism and situational ethics of atheism are the ideal recipe for abuse.

 

We can see from the belligerent, intolerant, rabble rousing rhetoric and anti-religious ranting of today's militant, new atheist zealots, that the leopard hasn't really changed its spots. Let no one doubt it - atheism has an horrendous and hideously, barbaric record... we must never let it happen again.

 

Moreover, it is a singularly perverse ideology that motivates its adherents to waste so much time of the only life they believe they have, trying to convince everyone else that they are doomed to eternal oblivion. The ultimate reward for atheists is to never know if they got it right, only if they got it wrong.

 

There is certainly no moral or rational defence for the atheist cult, past or present.

 

But what do atheists themselves say about their ethical and moral values?

 

They claim that they DO have an ethical and moral yardstick, and cite the Humanist Manifesto as representing the ethics and moral code of atheism.

 

So is it really true?

 

The Humanist Manifesto looks good at first glance, but like most proposals atheists have come up with, when examined closely, it is full of holes.

 

Problems, problems ....

 

1. You don’t have to sign up to the Humanist Manifesto to be an atheist.

 

2. Even if you do sign up to it, there is no incentive to follow it. No reward for following it, and no penalty for not following it. You are not going to be barred from being an atheist because you reject or break the rules of the Humanist Manifesto. It is not enforced in any way.

 

3. It borrows any desirable ethics, it may have, from Judeo-Christian values, there is no atheist, moral code per se.

 

Atheism is the ideology of naturalism. Genuine, naturalist, ethical values are basically the Darwinian, ‘law of the jungle’. Progressive evolution and improvement through the survival of the fittest/strongest, and the elimination of any who are weaker or unable to adapt - nature red in tooth and claw, In societal terms - the most powerful, wealthiest, most influential, most cunning, dominate and rule for their own benefit. Anything else in the Humanist Manifesto is actually a contradiction of social Darwinism and naturalism. Any socially desirable or compassionate ethics, which may be included in the H.M, are wholly inconsistent with atheist, materialist, naturalist, and evolutionist ideology.

 

4. By far the biggest flaw in the Humanist Manifesto is the fact that it is entirely ephemeral. It advocates 'situational ethics' and 'moral relativism'. And that major flaw makes it a worthless scrap of paper.

 

Why?

Because .....

Situational ethics is based on what people want or find desirable, not on any adherence to what is intrinsically right or wrong.

 

A good, example of humanist style, situational ethics in practice, is the gender selection abortions now being blatantly carried out in abortion clinics in Britain. It primarily discriminates against female babies, who are especially targeted for killing, because most of the parents who want it, prefer to have boys for cultural reasons.

 

The abortion clinics openly admit to it happening, and claim it is legal.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pro-choice-aborti...

The abortion act of 1967 certainly did not intend that, and the Government admits it was not intended.

 

So we have a Government that knows it is going on, it also knows it is not what the abortion law intended, yet it is still reluctant to do anything about it.

Why?

Because it is wedded to the secularist concept of situational ethics, i.e. whatever people want, people get. Any concept of intrinsic right and wrong has to take a back seat, to whatever is the spirit of the times. And that is an example happening right now, in a so-called democracy.

 

The Nazi persecution of the Jews and other races they considered ‘inferior’ became popular through brainwashing of the public, and was eventually supported by a good proportion of the public.

Hitler cleverly used situational ethics to do what he had persuaded people was right and good.

 

So, all in all, the Humanist Manifesto and its purported ethical values, is a very dangerous document.

 

It gives carte blanche to any so-called ethical values, as long they become the fashionable or consensus opinion. Whatever people want, people get, or what a government can claim people want, they are justified in giving to them.

 

And for that reason it would not stop; a Lenin, a Stalin, a Hitler, a Mao, or a Pol Pot, even if they had signed up 100% to abide by the Humanist Manifesto.

 

In fact, the 20th century, atheist tyrants even called their regimes ... Democratic People's Republics. They claimed they were representing people's wishes, and thus carried out their 'situational ethics' on behalf of the people.

 

What about the common, atheist tactic of highlighting alleged crimes and wrongdoing committed by Christians?

 

The point is ....

Christians who do wrong, go against the teachings of Christianity. It is recognised as ‘sin’. If they blatantly and deliberately go against the intrinsic moral values and teaching of Christianity, they forfeit the right to continue to call themselves Christian. And they can even be excommunicated by the Church, if they fail to admit their actions are wrong.

And, without sincere sorrow and repentance, they don't get to go to the Christian Heaven.

End of story!

 

Atheists who do wrong, go against nothing, unless it is against the law of the land.

You cannot be chucked out of atheism for doing wrong, you cannot even be censored by atheism for doing wrong, it is a complete free for all, you can simply act with impunity according to your own desires and opinion. Atheists don’t recognise sin, right and wrong is not intrinsic or absolute. Atheism has no, unchanging, moral code. Right and wrong is, ultimately, just a matter of opinion

 

The atheist 'heaven' is right here on earth, and far from being a 'heaven' it is an horrendous nightmare. Anyone with any sense would call it a hell.

 

And even the law of the land need not stop atheists .....

 

Whenever, atheists get into a position of power they change the law to suit their situational ethics. Then they can do whatever they want.

 

That is what Stalin and all the other atheist tyrants did in their people's DEMOCRATIC republics.

 

And the atheist thirst for blood does not cease when they live in the so-called 'real' democracies, it is simply sanitised by atheist inspired, situational ethics.

 

They use their 'humanist' ethics to change the law, accompanied by 'newspeak' and propaganda.

 

So that what was once considered evil, is not only made legal, it is actually turned around so it is considered a virtue.

 

The wholesale and brutal slaughter, of the most vulnerable in society ... millions of unborn babies, is callously shrugged off as necessary, for 'free choice'.

 

Of course murder is always a free choice for the killer, only the dangerous, warped, atheist style, situational ethics could value a killer's free choice to kill, above the victim's right not to be killed, and make murder legal.

 

The callous slaughter of the unborn, which in most cases, was not even put to the people democratically (it was imposed on them by a handful of secularist politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats), is accompanied by the usual atheist lies and devious propaganda.

 

Doctors acting illegally over abortions get off scot-free ....

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2609950/Scandal-doctors-...

 

So the secularists simply laugh off democracy, it doesn't stop them, if it gets in the way of their ideology, they just ignore it, like they do with science.

 

"Democratic societies" how do they impact on situational ethics?

We see, in practice, that democracy is treated with utter contempt .....

Why ask the people? They are apparently not qualified to consider such difficult matters of right and wrong, like whether babies should live or die? You can't give those ignorant peasants, plebs and rednecks a vote on it, ... leave it to the secularist EXPERTS and their wonderful, situational ethics based on 'reason' and 'science'.

 

We are told by atheist moralists that the unborn baby is not fully human, it is only a blob of jelly, which has, and deserves, NO rights. As usual, they deliberately ignore, or twist, the scientific facts.

 

And we are also told, anyone who supports the rights of the unborn babies not to be brutally ripped limb from limb is evil and a ‘far right’ fanatic, because they are interfering with free CHOICE.

 

So the atheist leopard certainly hasn't changed its deceitful, devious, brutal and murderous spots, even in so-called 'real' democratic societies. It simply legalises and sanitises evil and murder and makes it appear good.

 

Then it can claim atheism is extremely ethical and virtuous, with its own, beautiful, humanist code of morals and conduct .... Yeah Right!

 

Remind you of anyone?

 

Always remember ....

Atheist/humanist so-called ethics and morals depend entirely on OPINION, and that is why they are so extremely dangerous.

Atheism has no moral or ethical yardstick, no concept of God-given, human rights ... only OPINION.

But WHOSE opinion?

My opinion?

Your opinion?

Or maybe Richard Dawkins opinion?

Or Sam Harris's opinion?

Or how about Barrack Obama's opinion?

Or why not STALIN'S or POL POT'S opinion?

So don't be fooled by the relentless chorus from the 'new' atheists and humanists, that atheism has its own code of ethics and morals, their code of ethics is based on the OPINION of one or more of the following ... whoever is: the most vociferous, the most charismatic, the most cunning, the most influential, the most powerful, the wealthiest, the most successful propagandist, the most persuasive, the most repressive, or the most brutal.

www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/14797003191

_________________________________.

 

Unjust laws/evil laws (such as legalised abortion) are effectively null and void. They should not be accepted by any right-thinking person. In any just society, the legalisation of abortion has to be regarded as a crime against humanity, and those guilty will surely be held to account by a more enlightened society.

“civil law cannot contradict right reason without losing its binding force on conscience. Every humanly-created law is legitimate insofar as it is consistent with the natural moral law, recognized by right reason, and insofar as it respects the inalienable rights of every person”. —St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 95, a. 2.w

 

Why satanism is now on the center stage in the culture war.

www.crisismagazine.com/2019/why-satanism-is-now-on-the-ce...

 

EUbabel. The shocking occult symbolism of the European Union.

peuplesobservateursblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/23/togo-all...

Done