Dear runner,

I doubt that you really read the secular humanist principles. Secular humanists are for democracy. Stalin and Mao were no more secular humanists than Jesus Christ was a Christian. Jesus was a Jew, and Stalin and Mao were against democracy.

Please cite what atrocities secular humanists are guilty of. I know of none.

I find it interesting that Jesus told a parable about something that does not exist (i.e. a 'mustard tree').

Oh wait...

I think my favourite line in the article is this one:

"Sure, some massacres took place, but this in an age when such activities were commonplace. "

Well, that's all right then.

david f you ask

'Please cite what atrocities secular humanists are guilty of. I know of none.'

Abortion for a start. More unborn have been murdered than all wars put together.

It is easy to have a mantra that your religion does not believe in killing. I would imagine though given that secularist are so quick to dispose of their unborn that they would be as quick as anyone else to defend their family or country.

As I said before to try and pretend that the heart of the secular humanist is exempt from the corrupt nature is plain self righteousness that has no science to back it.

David f, you make the claim that Christianity has mostly been spread by violence. Following a line that many secular humanists are fond of, those who abide by the view you so admire, may I ask: Where is your evidence for that assertion?

Speaking of secular humanism, it matters not to me whether secular humanists have been responsible for any crimes. Secular humanism is a new philosophy and will soon be cast away, remaining but a mere memory, a flittering breeze that once passed through in the sands of time. Christianity on the other hand, has existed for two millenia and is showing no signs of slowing down across the globe.

What follows from whether Christians do bad things or good things? or whether Atheists do good things or bad things? The existence of God is not impacted by such. The truth of Christianity stands entirely on the physical resurrection of the man named Jesus.

In any case, such discussions about 'good' and 'bad' people and the numbers of each tend to make mass generalisations about people's behaviour across the board.

To continue to make such claims despite the logical absurdity of them is ridiculous, and arguably intellectually dishonest. The irony is that they continue to be made by people who preach their own strict adherence to logical thinking 24/7. Sorry, you're human, you're not a robot.