It's time for Chridtianity to become militant against Atheism

Con:"Justification post intellectual genocide is not a reasonable justification."No one said it was reasonable. It's just what has to be done. Bombing Japan wasn't reasonable, but if it hadn't been done, we'd all be Nazis right now. Extreme times call for extreme measures. Atheism has become a negative variable in this equation, thus it must be destroyed if we are to survive.In the UK,(who is becoming more and more Atheist), they have suppressed free speech? Why? To pander against hate speech against Muslims.So look at it. It was okay to attack Christianity. Anything went and still does. But if you say something negative about Islam, you go to jail for hate speech. Atheism has actually attacked Christianity while petting Islam. And this led to London now having a Muslim mayor in a now vastly Muslim-British city(Sadiq Kahn). "Let our extermination begin!" say the atheists. Seeing you wanna go down with the ship, at least let us jump off first. http://www.breitbart.com...http://www.spiked-online.com...*Con:"The decline of Christianity is not the fault of Atheists."I must have imagined the "New Atheist Movement". We don't call it "militant atheism because it is sitting peacefully and neutrally in the corner. We call it this because its objective is to kill Christianity.Here is a quote from an article written by an Atheist-"Dawkins and Dennett do not want to ally with liberal Christians; they want to convert them to atheism. They believe that continued criticism of religion will swell the ranks of atheists to create an eventual majority.""But it is up to moderate atheists like me, and hopefully you, to bring about the second wave of social change."http://thehumanist.com...When someone declares war on you, you have one option, eliminate them. Essentially it's us or them, so in order for us to continue, we must destroy the one who has declared war on us. We actually have no choice.*Con:"Killing people based on their beliefs is immoral."This is a false dichotomy. Why?1)Con is an atheist trying to define objective morality, which does not exist in a "lack of belief"2)We killed Nazis because of their beliefs. It wasn't immoral. It was survival. Atheists are trying to get us killed, thus they must be tossed in prisons where we will hold them until we destroy ISIS and radical Islam. We will feed you nicely and keep you warm and cool as is applicable.*Con:"and if my opponent believes his religion is a religion of peace.."We were very peaceful and polite to atheism overall. It in turn tried to destroy us from multiple fronts. We have the right to defend ourselves.*Con:"Western civilization has been on the upswing since the Enlightenment."Was. Now Europe is on the brink of civil war and chaos. America looks to be next. And the common variable in this "enlightenment" was Christianity. Atheists might not want to hear it, but that's reality.*Con:"If my opponent thinks reason and science were politely allowed to exist."Atheist biologist, David Berlinski, and others have referred to Darwinian theory as a pipedream being used to support atheism. He claims anyone opposed to any theory that supports atheism is ridiculed and usually fired, even if they have proof of their claims. He cites concepts like creatures that are hundreds of millions of years old trapped in amber that look exactly like they do today. He also cites the assumed traits of "intermediaries" that are put on the illustrations we see but are never on the actual skeleton or fossil finds. That's not reason. That's ideological politics.*Con:"where the church had political authority."It's either the church or militant atheistic priests. Darwinian thinking has caused the holocaust, the mass murders in China, and Stalin's genocide of tens of millions of people. It has also led inadvertantly to the scurge of Islam upon the West. *Con:"should be noted that atheists only make up 3.1% of the US population"And we need it to stay there. Why?1)In Sweden and Denmark, where they have turned to secularism, they are in complete chaos, have an immigration crisis gone mad, are about to become the minority in their own countries, and are labeled the "rape capitals of the world".https://www.rt.com...http://www.independent.co.uk...*Con:"Pro doesn't care about the Atheists and homosexuals slaughtered."As is demonstrated in this debate that I had, I can prove Con's attack as false. I cherrish life, thus see the strong need to eradicate beliefs that preach no hope, meaning, or purpose OR that preach to kill and dominate the rest of us. This isn't a decision based on hate, but common sense, survival, and love of America and its children.http://www.debate.org...*Con:"Terrorism...ban Christianity as well."http://www.mrctv.org...This is another false dichotomy by ommission. Con points out a terrorist in 1998. 18 years ago...In 2015, there were 452 suicide bombings. Guess how many were Islamic...Apparently no other demographic is ideologically steered towards this practice. Why?-Atheists and Christians have no Quran to give them the automatic reward of paradise if they kill infidels or are killed by infidels. There is a reason why if you hear bombing or shooting your brain automatically assumes it was the religion of special needs and jihad at work. The point? Atheism, which claims "reason" has forsaken it when picking enemies and allies. It has militantly attacked Christianity while giving Islam a plethera of excuses for their deadly and violent behavior. Without Christianity, Atheism would have no safe haven. It has bitten the hand that fed it and put that hand in danger, thus, it must logically be manhandled and subdued in order to keep America from becoming the next victim of European-like destruction, chaos, and submission to Islam. Atheists are hellbent on bowing to the ideology that will have female Atheists and Christians forced to wear hijabs and burkas, and the full implementation of Sharia Law. Sadly, for this cause, Atheism must be rounded up and subdued for our sake and theirs.