Atheism is Directly Responsible for an Atrocity

===================Response #1====================="It seems to me that Con has fundamentally misunderstood what "atheism" means. His original definition does not fully state his position on this, so I should tell him where he is goofing up in his statement of the beliefs of atheists."How Can you accept the rules of a debate, one of which being that you must accept the definitions provided so a clear and concise discussion can be had, and have your first response be that I've misunderstood the definition of terms. My definition EXACTLY states my position on this - which is exactly why I made it EXTREMELY clear to define all important terms here without ambiguity, and REQUIRE the acceptance of these definitions in order to accept the debate.You then refer to "the beliefs of atheists" which is nonsensical in this discussion. As explained in my very clear and simple second round argument, saying something as fatuous as "the beliefs of atheists" is akin to saying "the beliefs of women" or "the beliefs of blondes." Atheism is not a worldview, it's not a knowledge claim, its not a dogma, it has no tenants, it says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about a person other than they are not a theist.=====================================================================Response #2====================== "When you say you are an atheist, you are making a statement about God. Now that statement has a burden of proof (equal to the theist's statement "there is a God") which I do not believe that anyone can fulfil. Just because there is no evidence of God existingin the Universe, doesn't mean one can affirm a non-belief in God. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Therefore, atheism is a knowedge claim. It's not just not believing, but a leap of faith without evidence. Atheism is a positive belief statement, this cannot be denied considering how little we know about the universe."You have blatantly disregarded the rules set forth in this debate:'The following definitions were chosen/found/created in order to facility a clear discussion, and MUST BE adhered to. Any attempt to redefine, alter, or otherwise refuse these definitions will result in the forfeiture of the debate'The reason why I defined atheism as I did, is there are varying types/definitions of atheism that people use, and these discussions become muddled and impossible because people argue about different concepts but use the same terms. I made the definitions as they are and made this debate contingent upon them in order to prevent exactly this issue. There's 'strong atheism', 'weak atheism', 'anti-theism', 'gnostic atheism', 'agnostic atheism', 'non theism', and the list goes on. The ONLY common denominator is the fact that ALL types of atheists are without the belief that god exists. That is the broadest sense of atheism, which I want to discuss. (1)The following video explains exactly the reason why I used the definitions as I did, and demonstrates the problems that arise when people don't agree on terms when having these discussions: Atheism/theism are positions regarding BELIEF, agnosticism/gnosticism are positions regarding KNOWLEDGE. Saying that atheism is a knowledge claim demonstrates a fundamental epistemological misunderstanding.=====================================================================Response #3====================== "Now there are many signs that religious leaders were targeted in various Communist atrocities in the latter-half of the 20th century in Soviet lands. Ordinary people with a strong faith in religion were targeted too. This was, I believe, due to the fact they believed in a power higher than the Soviet leaders who ruled over them at that time. There are many historical documents that suggest this, even though some were destroyed by the Communists when they were losing their empire. Without militant atheism large sections of society would not have been exterminated. Atheism is responsible for many of the atrocities in the Holodomor."Aside from breaking the rules set forth in this debate, that you agreed to, you just made a handful of assertions without any references or justification. If you don't accept the terms of the debate, you have subsequently forfeited. Unfortunately, you haven't even presenting anything for me to argue against, other than misunderstanding and unsubstantiated assertions. If you want to change your mind and accept the terms of this debate, you MUST demonstrate that atheism, as defined, is a necessary and sufficient condition for the Holodomor.================================================== (1) http://atheism.about.com...