Excuses for bad behavior?

Scapegoats galore.

And people who desire power and dominance will find justification other than selfish desire.

But, what matters is also the action.

So, when the Chinese Government mandated a one child policy, with forced abortions for those who violated the policy, that mattered,

And when the same Government forces Uighurs to host what are in effect, Han Chinese spies who look for signs of "deviance", that matters.

The problem, as some seem unable to realize, is that people use many things to justify what they wish to do. Patriotism, power, religion, language, color, and ethnicity are all used by those who wish to divide for purposes of power.

So, if we wish to identify a problem, we need to identify the underlying motivation. And we need to realize that sometimes people have multiple motivations, but the need for dominance is a basic motivator.

Lord knows you’ve started enough about action and whenever someone brings up motivation you accuse them of deviancy, refuse to discuss it, and tell them to go fuck off and start their own thread. So it’s kind of a good time to point that out now.

Just sayin’

What motivated them to introduce forced abortion?

What motivates them to put people into concentration camps?

What motivates them to post spies in family homes?

What motivated Mao to kill millions as he attempted to create a brave new China?


What quality/qualities motivate totalitarians to behave as they do?

Are you interested in discussion, or religion bashing?

Just asking.

The last question is a false dichotomy as at times I’m interested in discussion that bashes religion. Within the religion group my interest is in the discussion of religious topics. As such the rest of your questions are off topic and I feel no obligation to answer them and will instead offer your own instructions.

Is it the desire, the need for dominance?

An extreme form of male dominance?

Your post is about motivation.

None of them relevant here. Remember your own instructions.

Because reasons.

Seems to be more of a defining feature.

and everyone else is wrong. That seems to give people the idea that they can tell others what to do and not to do.

It also lets you ignore all evidence that is to the contrary of your beliefs. You're right, after all. God says so.

The difference is with religion that behavior is often indoctrinated into them generally by the use of physical and emotional abuse. However, because that behavior isn't limited to religionists, some come to the conclusion that somehow excuses the method.

Ironically when secular totalitarians do the same thing, the method comes from the same playbook. They simply replace the imaginary divine entity with a real cult of personality and replace one big lie with another.

It's one of the reasons the RCC child rape scandal is so bad.

It would be one thing if this nonsense only came from the right, but you also have those on the left who conflate refusal to accept a bad idea with refusal to accept the people who subscribe to those bad ideas.

You had some on GD just the other day saying we should tolerate the torture of livestock because some superstitions demand it. I have no doubt those same people would soundly condemn that exact same behavior absent any religious motivation.

People who are totally opposed to it under every other circumstance were ok with it when done out of "religious tradition."

There is no atheist bible that contains any verses about any of that.

There is nothing in the statement "I don't believe in gods" that says one should have an abortion or put others into camps or anything.

But there IS this in the Koran:

Amazing insight.

They aren't motivated by atheism because there's nothing in atheism to mandate or suggest any of that.

Very telling that you have nothing to say about everything else in my post, which is about religion and therefore completely relevant to the subject of this thread AND the topic of this forum. Unlike your whataboutism.

And your ability to speak for theists as well.

But this I know: you are no Christian. Christians aren't supposed to follow "eye for an eye" justice, but you do. Christians aren't supposed to judge people, but you do.

It has no scriptures. Atheism is not a thing. It is the lack of belief in something. Atheism has no rules or recommendations regarding how to behave.

In China, to fight Catholicism and its fatal insistence on having unlimited children.

Among minorities, fighting terroristic religious divisive sects.

It is regrettable to use coercive methods. But in legal systems, when someone is bad, you are allowed to use an army and police force to stop them.

Modern western liberal atheists by the way, mostly use intellectual persuasion, rather than force.

And they label their opponents as "terrorists". A choice of totalitarians everywhere.

Calling this totalitarianism regrettable does not really respond to their use of concentration camps, and embedded spies in the houses of theists.


As to modern western atheists, and the intellectual persuasion, outlawing religious garments, outlawing the display of certain religious symbols in offices, outlawing minarets on buildings is not intellectual persuasion.

It is brute force and open intolerance.

Sounds like 1) you are biased against the Chinese; long a common racist bias in N. America.

Most 2) of the groups China calls terrorists, are the same groups called terrorist in the US. Especially?
Various Muslim groups.

Granted, China is rather intolerant. Though 3)
it is not absolutely inflexible or totalitarian; it changed its economy from a communist command economy, to a (qualified) capitalist one a few decades ago. And has enjoyed incredible growth as a result.

4) Surveiling suspect groups in itself is not always bad; that is done all over the world.

5) In any case, I am not going to absolutely defend China. But merely suggest that it is not characteristic of modern atheism today. Our more modern American and European atheists are better, more permissive.

After all, this very blog has allowed critics like yourself on this blog, for years.

In contrast, some even argue that Marxism is not true atheism.

But the things that I pointed out about minarets and wearing religious garments are issues in western democracies as well.

In my view, Marxism is class analysis. I know Christians who are Marxists.

would outlaw religious garments, minarets, or religious symbols in offices. The law forbids our government from promoting religion, or course, so atheists, along with many religious folk, protest against that. The other things, though, are generally opposed by religious people, not atheists.

Perhaps you misspoke.

Motivation was the topic.

If the choir members can only sing one note, I will provide the countermelody.

It's whataboutism.

And you are no Christian.

But it is often absent here, often leading to logical errors.

Using broad brush dehumanizing terms like "choir members" is known as intolerance to others.

But you don't, and can't. And you are no Christian either.

Perhaps your autocorrect featur inserted "nuance" when you misspelled the correct word.

Or the motivation they claim for themselves?

Because often for purposes of our own beliefs--our politics, our religion, our morals, what we think is our due or somebody else's due--we merrily say, "Oh, well, they may *say* that's the reason, but *we* know better and their *real* reason is ..." something that serves us.

For many things, the motivation is, "This is what's right and good." That can be taking away property for a higher goal, it can be putting people in jail, it can be destroying their lives in karmic retribution. Hitler didn't think himself bad. Neither did Stalin. Very few bad people consider themselves bad. So what's their motivation? Oppression? But that's not the motive they give themselves.

And if everybody thinks they're right, the condemnation comes in saying, "Well, they may *think* they're right, but by our set of moral values and how they're ranked, they are completely wrong."

Whether it's an angry mob assembling outside a women's clinic, or an angry mob assembling outside the office of a senator who may not vote the "righteous" way. (We don't call it righteous because that's associated with religion. "Just," "right", "moral," "progressive" or many other words have the same root meaning without the connotation "religious".)

But if they cite the takbir or a bible verse its not that hard to figure out.

You'll be able to tell us everyone's true motivation! This is awesome news!

Telling. And following a long pattern.

Oh yeah, that's right, you DO feel you can judge everyone.