Sorry runner, but atheism doesn’t have a set of tenets and nor is it a claim to truth, so there cannot possibly be a dogma.

<<AJ is blinded to the dogmas of atheism that has led to millions of deaths.>>

But a pretty bold statement to make after we’d just finished discussing the immorality of Christianity nonetheless.

<<Pseudo science is used as justifcation to murder the unborn as much so as people use the name of God.>>

Could you point me to an example of abortion being justified with "pseudo science"?

<<No wonder he gets tired of the 'dopey'lines.>>

No. I get tired of it because, despite having been through that debate many times over on OLO, you theists have never once provided a reason to blame the communist regimes of the 20th century on atheism (nor why being able to would have any significance) and yet we still get some random idiot pop their head in occasionally to make a daft comment along these lines as if the suggestion hadn’t been discredited multiple times already on this forum.

You guys are like robots sometimes, just repeating whatever nonsense you’ve been programmed to.

Similar to the concept of "GIGO”, I guess.

AJ you do play dumb

'Could you point me to an example of abortion being justified with "pseudo science"? '

Refusing to acknowledge a child until you have an acceptable period to determine whether you want to terminate it or not.

@GrahamY: But once the invasion was mooted by the US you had to be on board because it couldn't be allowed to fail.

I don't understand this. They failed in Vietnam, and world continued on. Why would Iraq be any different? And does the same logic apply to Afghanistan?

I recall you saying elsewhere you supported Australia's because it made sense to be in the same tent. Much as I disliked the war myself, that was my position. But I can not see any harm in exiting from Iraq, beyond losing all the brownie points we had won from being in the tent.

GrahamY,
I was alluding to how the Coalition forces (mostly US forces) were so overwhelmingly arrogant that the local quickly turned from receptive to very hostile. What factors contributed to that?

McReal

You conveniently overlook the fact that both Stalin and Chairman Mao committed the atrocities as committed Communists, who opposed any form of religion in accordance with undertaking their objectives of godlessness. Therefore, they qualify eminently as atheists in that context.

Judging from what I have read of Hitchens, the man appeared to have a -quite reasonable- contempt for sycophants and toadies.
If there were such a mode of existence allowing consciousness after biological death, (and the existence of such a mode did not require the existence of a deity) and the entities existing in such a mode were capable of spying on our existence (horrible thought) I suspect the former Hitchens would be thinking of this piece, “what a load of crap”.
Would he appreciate being run up someone else's flagpole? (even if, as in this conjecture, death was not an intensely 'life changing' experience...)
I suspect the coming troubles will not be so much from the religious or the non-religious or even the anti-religious, but rather from the zealots on both sides; just as it has ever been.
Unlike the wry Squeers, I don't “look forward” to the Atheist Manifesto... But I don't doubt it's coming.