Atheism is Directly Responsible for an Atrocity

As Pro has accepted the rules, definitions, and the burden of proof, I await his specific arguments related to the Holodomor and why Atheism was directly responsible for it. Pro could come up with ANY historical event that occurred, and even if he were to come up with some historical event where a person said clearly they were an atheist and then stated clearly they committed some atrocity directly because of their lack of belief that god(s) exists, this can easily be demonstrated to not have actually been the direct cause because we do not act based on what we don't believe, we act on what we DO believe. ==========================Main Argument======================In every historical atrocity scenario I've come across, it is always extremely clear that even if the perpetrator was an atheist, there were other beliefs that lead them to commit those actions, whether it was fascism, racism, nationalism, totalitarianism, national socialism, etc, and at most their being an atheist was a piece of their overall worldview/ideology, and at least is as inconsequently as them also being male or having a mustache. In the case of Stalin, the guy that most people consider responsible for the Holodomor, he may very well have been an atheist, he may very well have believed that removing religion from society was a good thing, but you simply cannot logically say that the simple fact that he did not hold the belief that god(s) exist, in other words he was not a theist, is the reason WHY he did or believed those things, or that not being a theist was directly responsible for them. You might be able to demonstrate that his atheism was a necessary condition in his belief that religion should be removed from society, but you couldn't demonstrate that it was a sufficient condition. In order to demonstrate causality, which you agreed in the beginning of the debate, you MUST demonstrate that atheism is BOTH a necessary and sufficient condition under which the Holodomor happened. My argument is easily demonstrated with the following analogy: Stalin was a murderer Buddhism is a religion that preaches nonviolence Being a Buddhist and believing its tenants are true, is directly responsible for preventing people from being violent Stalin was not a Buddhist If Stalin was a Buddhist that would have prevented him from murdering people. Therefore, not being a Buddhist is directly responsible for him being a murderer Put in this light, the claim that someone not being a theist is directly responsible for some action they've committed is simply absurd. Substitute theist above for Buddhist, and you'll see the fallacy. Using this logic necessarily entails that we accept all of the other things Stalin isn't (presumably) as directly responsible for his actions. (We can both agree the following are simply educated guesses. .. ) He isn't a flat earther, he isn't a vegetarian, he isn't a lesbian, he isn't a scientologist, he isn't an Olympic sprinter, and he isn't a chimney sweeper. NONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT HE ISN'T are responsible for any of his actions. Saying someone is an atheist is NOTHING MORE than saying they are not a theist. I think I've made a pretty straightforward case that not being something cannot be directly responsible for an action. At most some actions or worldviews might require that you not be something, like being a lesbian requires you not be male, which demonstrates that it is a necessary condition, but you would need to demonstrate why not being a male is a sufficient condition for being a lesbian, which is obviously ridiculous. It is what we DO believe that causes us to act - and atheism, by the definitions we BOTH agreed upon, is NOT a belief, therefore it cannot cause us to act. In this light whatever Stalin isn't is not and cannot be directly responsible or the cause of his actions. The things that he DOES believe are true are the causes of those actions, not the infinite number of things he DOESN'T believe are true. In order to win this debate, Pro needs to demonstrate that not being a theist (atheism) was a NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT condition for the Holodomor. ============================================================== I look forward to your first arguments!