Atheism and cowardice
As far as Christianity vs. atheism public debates, in recent years there have been a number of notable instances of atheists being reluctant to debate and doing poorly in debates (see: Atheism vs. Christianity debates).
The cowardice associated with atheism has become so obvious that it is making newspaper headlines. For example, on May 2011, the UK's The Daily Telegraph alluded to the cowardice of Richard Dawkins who flip-flops between being an agnostic and an atheist as far as his public persona (see: Richard Dawkins and agnosticism).
- 1 Atheism and death anxiety: Additional information
- 2 Atheist community is lacking in confidence
- 3 Brain study: Religious belief vs. non-belief - Anxiety/stress reduction
- 4 Richard Dawkins
- 5 2010 Global Atheist Convention
- 6 British Humanist Association
- 7 Dr. Michael Martin backing out of his scheduled debate with Dr. Greg Bahnsen
- 8 Closet atheism
- 9 PZ Myers refusal to debate Vox Day
- 10 Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates
- 11 New Atheists and Islamophobia accusations
- 12 Atheist Penn Jillette's ducking debates with Christians
- 13 Vox Day on secular leftists reluctance to debate and on their historical revisionism
- 14 Atheists, debates and critical thinking
- 15 Reddit atheists and cowardice
- 16 New Atheism and hypocritical cowardice
- 17 Kyle Kulinski's refusal to engage in an atheism vs. Christianity debate
- 18 Atheism and a lack of art/music around heroic figures
- 19 Secular leftist Swedes and the Muslim rapists epidemic in their country
- 20 See also
- 21 External links
- 22 References
Atheism and death anxiety: Additional information
As noted above, on April 2, 2012, Science Daily reported that Death anxiety increases atheists' unconscious belief in God. In a 2012 Psychology Today article, Dr. Nathan A. Heflick reported similar results in other studies.
A United States study indicated that very religious people fear death the least
According to a study performed in the United States by researchers Wink and Scott, it was found that very religious people feared death the least. In addition, the researcher Wen found that the more religious you are, the less you will fear death.
King Solomon declared in the Book Of Proverbs: "The wicked flee when no one is pursuing, But the righteous are bold as a lion." (Proverbs 28:1).
The Apostle Paul wrote: ""O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting? The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 15:55-56).
Irreligion's effect on death anxiety
The Bible teaches that "There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death." (Proverbs 14:12). Furthermore, the Bible teaches "Trust in the Lord with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding." (Proverbs 3:5). Also, Scripture teaches that The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding." (Proverbs 9:10). The psalmist David declared: "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." — Psalms 14:1 (KJV) See: Atheism and arrogance and Atheism and morality and Atheism and moral intelligence
Wink and Scott study: Irreligious and death anxiety
According to the researchers Wink and Scott, the irreligious fear death more than the very religious, but fear it less than the lukewarm/moderately religious. Atheists lack the God given courage of Christians with a strong faith, but many are too foolish and arrogant to have enough sense to fear hell. See: Atheism and arrogance and Atheism and moral intelligence
Atheist community is lacking in confidence
In 2010, agnostic professor Eric Kaufmann, who specializes in religion/irreligion/demographics/politics, wrote:
|“||Worldwide, the march of religion can probably only be reversed by a renewed, self-aware secularism. Today, it appears exhausted and lacking in confidence... Secularism's greatest triumphs owe less to science than to popular social movements like nationalism, socialism and 1960s anarchist-liberalism. Ironically, secularism's demographic deficit means that it will probably only succeed in the twenty-first century if it can create a secular form of 'religious' enthusiasm."||”|
The atheist movement saw a number of setbacks during the latter portion of the 20th century and beyond. As a result, it has lost a considerable amount of confidence Atheists and the endurance of religion).
For more information, please see: Rebuttals to atheist arguments
Brain study: Religious belief vs. non-belief - Anxiety/stress reduction
See also: Atheism and brain function
According to the leading science news website Phys.org:
|“|| Believing in God can help block anxiety and minimize stress, according to new University of Toronto research that shows distinct brain differences between believers and non-believers.
In two studies led by Assistant Psychology Professor Michael Inzlicht, participants performed a Stroop task - a well-known test of cognitive control - while hooked up to electrodes that measured their brain activity.
Compared to non-believers, the religious participants showed significantly less activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a portion of the brain that helps modify behavior by signaling when attention and control are needed, usually as a result of some anxiety-producing event like making a mistake. The stronger their religious zeal and the more they believed in God, the less their ACC fired in response to their own errors, and the fewer errors they made...
Their findings show religious belief has a calming effect on its devotees, which makes them less likely to feel anxious about making errors or facing the unknown.
Richard Dawkins has established a reputation for avoiding debates with his strongest opponents. On May 14, 2011, the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph published a news story entitled Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God.
In The Daily Telegraph article Dr. Daniel Came, a member of the Faculty of Philosophy at Oxford University, was quoted as writing to fellow atheist Richard Dawkins concerning his refusal to debate Dr. William Lane Craig: "The absence of a debate with the foremost apologist for Christian theism is a glaring omission on your CV and is of course apt to be interpreted as cowardice on your part."
In October 2011, Dr. Craig went to England and the Daily Telegraph declared that Dawkins is either a fool or a coward for his refusal to debate William Lane Craig plus declared that Dawkins is a "proud man" and a "coward" who puts on an "illiterate, angry schtick" for the public. In addition, Christian apologist Mariano Grinbank called Dawkins a "cowardly clown" because Dawkins and other prominent atheists refused to debate Creation Ministries International at the 2010 Global Atheist Convention.
Below are some resources relating to Dawkins refusal to debate various debate opponents:
- Richard Dawkins and Rabbi Shmuley Boteach (Denied debating him after losing video taped debate, refuses to debate another time)
In addition, respected biochemist and intelligent design researcher Dr Michael Behe has openly challenged prominent evolutionists and proponents of Darwinism to debate him regarding the many failings of evolutionism, yet Richard Dawkins - one of the most outspoken Darwinists today - has declined all such invitations. Dawkins has also refused to debate prominent creationist and evangelist Ray Comfort.
Richard Dawkins' former fear of criticizing Islam
On February 24, 2013, the Jewish Chronicle Online wrote:
|“|| In a recent Al-Jazeerah interview, Richard Dawkins was asked his views on God. He argued that the god of "the Old Testament" is "hideous" and "a monster", and reiterated his claim from The God Delusion that the God of the Torah is the most unpleasant character "in fiction". Asked if he thought the same of the God of the Koran, Dawkins ducked the question, saying: "Well, um, the God of the Koran I don't know so much about."
How can it be that the world's most fearless atheist, celebrated for his strident opinions on the Christian and Jewish Gods, could profess to know so little about the God of the Koran? Has he not had the time? Or is Professor Dawkins simply demonstrating that most crucial trait of his species: survival instinct.
In recent times, Richard Dawkins is an outspoken critic of Islam (see: Richard Dawkins and Islam).
2010 Global Atheist Convention
See also: Atheist conferences
In 2010, the prominent atheists who attended the 2010 global atheist conference, which included Richard Dawkins, were challenged to a debate by Creation Ministries International. Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers and other prominent atheists/agnostics refused to debate the creation scientists at Creation Ministries International. Generally speaking, creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates.
British Humanist Association
See also: Atheism and Debate
In August 19, 2011, Fox News reported:
|“|| American Evangelical theologian William Lane Craig is ready to debate the rationality of faith during his U.K tour this fall, but it appears that some atheist philosophers are running shy of the challenge.
This month president of the British Humanist Association, Polly Toynbee, pulled out of an agreed debate at London’s Westminster Central Hall in October, saying she “hadn’t realized the nature of Mr. Lane Craig’s debating style.”
Lane Craig, who is a professor of philosophy at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, Calif., and author of 30 books and hundreds of scholarly articles, is no stranger to the art of debate and has taken on some of the great orators, such as famous atheists Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris. Harris once described Craig as “the one Christian apologist who has put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists”.
Responding to Toynbee’s cancellation, Lane Craig commented: "These folks (atheists) can be very brave when they are alone at the podium and there's no one there to challenge them. But one of the great things about these debates is that, it allows both sides to be heard on a level playing field, and for the students in the audience to make up their own minds about where they think the truth lies."
On August 19, 2011, the leading British Anglican weekly newspaper the Church Times wrote:
|“||The director of Professor Craig’s tour, Peter May, said: “If Craig is ‘wrong about everything else in the universe’ and his arguments for the existence of God are so easy to refute, it is hard to see why the leading atheist voices in the country are running shy of having a debate with him.||”|
Dr. Michael Martin backing out of his scheduled debate with Dr. Greg Bahnsen
John Frame wrote regarding the debate in which Dr. Bahnsen used the transcendental argument for the existence of God that "In the end, Stein walked and talked like a broken man." The Greg Bahnsen-Gordon Stein debate was recorded and transcribed and was dubbed "The Great Debate". See also: Greg Bahnsen and debate
Greg Bahnsen and Michael Martin
Dr. Greg Bahnsen became known as the "man atheists fear most". This is because Harvard-educated Dr. Michael Martin was scheduled to debate Bahnsen in 1994 but pulled out of the debate at the "eleventh hour" according to a press release at the time. The press release at the time said that Dr. Martin offered ruses on why he pulled out and didn't want the scheduled debate recorded but the real reason was that "...Michael Martin is afraid that he will be publicly humiliated just as his friend and fellow atheist, Dr. Gordon Stein, was...".
Martin later released his transcendental argument for the non-existence of God (TANG) in 1996 which was rebutted by Christian apologists.
Martin released his TANG argument to the public after Bahnsen died.
For more information please see:
Michael Martin on the state of atheist apologetics
In 1990, Michael Martin indicated there was a general absence of an atheistic response to contemporary work in the philosophy of religion and in jest he indicated that it was his "cross to bear" to respond to theistic arguments.
Today, there is a growth of Christian apologetics in the world, while the atheist apologetic community is in a state of stagnation. See: Growth of Christian apologetics
See also: Closet atheist
Many Christian are bold about letting others know about their faith even in areas of the world where Christians are in the minority and face potential persecution. On the other hand, even in countries where hate crimes against atheists are rare many atheists are fearful of letting others know about their atheism (see also: Closet atheist).
PZ Myers refusal to debate Vox Day
- See also: Atheism and Debate
|“|| I have heard from numerous atheists who find his intellectual cowardice to be more than a little troubling given his usual tendency to create conflict rather than to avoid it. And he has handed an out to every single individual he ever hopes to challenge in the future. Why should they debate a nobody like him, a clown who isn't even a bigshot in his own field?
As for the PZ Myers Memorial Debate, we are still in search of an atheist to champion the argument that the logic and evidence for the nonexistence of gods is stronger than the logic and evidence for the existence of gods. It is certainly informative to see how many atheists do not appear to believe they are able to effectively make this case; in light of this, many Christians may find this to be a useful tactical approach when confronted by aggressive atheists in the future. This tends to confirm my previous observations that while atheists like to challenge the beliefs of others, they are very ill-prepared, and in many cases downright unwilling, to defend their own. So, if you want to shut them up, simply go on the attack. They'll run away with alacrity.
When the criticism of my WND columns on Pharyngula was first brought to my attention, I referred to Paul Zachary as Pharyngurl because I genuinely thought he was a woman on the basis of the arguments he was presenting. Years later, it is highly amusing indeed to see that he still runs like a girl. 
On August 28, 2011, Vox Day declared concerning Myers:
|“||What you clearly do not understand is that, by his own admission, PZ relies heavily upon emotional arguments rather than logical ones when he cannot simply appeal to an established scientific consensus. "I'll also cop to the obvious fact that, knowing that reason will not get through their skills, I'm happy to use emotional arguments as well. Passion is persuasive." His tendency to rely upon emotional rhetoric and passion rather than reason is precisely why he is afraid to debate people who rely primarily upon logic, because his ability to present reason-based arguments is relatively low. His ability to utilize reason is simply not equal to the skill of others who make use of it more effectively. PZ is without question an effective preacher to the godless choir of science fetishists, but he is remarkably unskilled at presenting convincing arguments, let alone conclusive ones, to those who do not already agree with him. Unlike you, he knows he is not an effective evangelist.||”|
Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates
Since World War II a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists. In 2007, "Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution."
Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates and many have been held since the 1970s particularly in the United States. Given the lack of evidence for the evolutionary paradigm and the abundant evidence for biblical creation, this is not surprising.
In August 1979, Dr. Henry Morris reported in an Institute for Creation Research letter the following: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution." Morris also said regarding the creation scientist Duane Gish (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”Generally speaking, leading evolutionists no longer debate creation scientists because creation scientists tend to win the debates. In addition, the atheist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins has shown inconsistent and deceptive behavior concerning his refusal creation scientists. Evolutionists and atheists inconsistency concerning debating creationists was commented on by the Christian apologetic website True Free Thinker which declared: "Interestingly enough, having noted that since some atheists refuse to debate “creationists” but then go on to debate some of those people but not others, it is clear that they are, in reality, being selective and making excuses for absconding from difficulties..."
In an article entitled Are Kansas Evolutionists Afraid of a Fair Debate? the Discovery Institute declares:
|“||Defenders of Darwin's theory of evolution typically proclaim that evidence for their theory is simply overwhelming. If they really believe that, you would think they would jump at a chance to publicly explain some of that overwhelming evidence to the public. Apparently not.||”|
In 1994, the arch-evolutionist Dr. Eugenie Scott made this confession concerning creation vs. evolution debates:
|“|| During the last six or eight months, I have received more calls about debates between creationists and evolutionists than I have encountered for a couple of years, it seems. I do not know what has inspired this latest outbreak, but I am not sure it is doing much to improve science education.
Why do I say this? Sure, there are examples of "good" debates where a well-prepared evolution supporter got the best of a creationist, but I can tell you after many years in this business that they are few and far between. Most of the time a well-meaning evolutionist accepts a debate challenge (usually "to defend good science" or for some other worthy goal), reads a bunch of creationist literature, makes up a lecture explaining Darwinian gradualism, and can't figure out why at the end of the debate so many individuals are clustered around his opponent, congratulating him on having done such a good job of routing evolution -- and why his friends are too busy to go out for a beer after the debate.
New Atheists and Islamophobia accusations
The New Atheists Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and the late Christopher Hitchens have received multiple accusations of engaging in Islamophobic behavior. Dawkins is dismissive of the concept of Islamophobia and declared: "I’m always being accused of Islamophobia, that’s a non-word."
Salon declared in an article entitled Richard Dawkins does it again: New Atheism’s Islamophobia problem:
|“|| When it comes to making claims about religions, especially Islam, Dawkins is quick to grab the biggest brush he can find and paint “the Muslims,” or “Muslims,” or even “Islam” with one broad stroke.
“I think Islam is the greatest force for evil in the world today. I’ve said so, often and loudly. What are you talking about?” he Tweeted to one follower in March.
The greatest force for evil? How is that even quantifiable and what constitutes evil? For a scientist, Dawkins rarely provides any qualification, context or evidence for his hypotheses. He doesn’t often give names or reveal identities that could help us better understand exactly whom it is that he targets. But that’s beside the point because to Dawkins, they are just “Muslims,” not fathers, sons, daughters, mothers, bankers, lawyers or doctors. They’re not informed by any other identity that makes them complex human beings; it’s “Islam” that always animates these faceless people.
The Guardian's article Richard Dawkins, 'Islamophobia' and the atheist movement declared:
|“||Meanwhile, Dawkins – a man for whom Twitter does not seem to be a good medium – has taken to spouting the sort of rhetoric that wouldn't seem out of place at a BNP meeting. I'll be charitable, and suggest that his swiftly-deleted retweet of a link to a website that exposes the 'secret Islamist infiltration of the Obama administration' was a slip of the mouse. I'll also leave to one side his bizarre vendetta against Mehdi Hasan, whose platform at New Statesman seems to be a source of great offense to the atheist.||”|
Atheist Penn Jillette's ducking debates with Christians
Refusal to debate popular YouTube video creator Shockofgod
The Brights Movement was started in 2003 by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in 2003 in order to assist in the advocacy of a naturalistic worldview. The Brights movement had a media campaign and was announced in Wired magazine (by Richard Dawkins), Free Inquiry (by Richard Dawkins), and on the New York Times op-ed page (by the philosopher and atheist Daniel Dennett).
Well known skeptics and atheists are listed as "Enthusiastic Brights" at the Brights Movement website. Examples of individuals listed as Brights are notable skeptics/atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Penn Jillette, Daniel Dennett, Margaret Downy, James Randi, Mel Lipman, Bobbie Kirkhart, Herb Silverman, Michael Shermer, Matt Cherry, and Babu Gogineni.
On September 26, 2011, the popular Christian YouTube video maker Shockofgod, who has over 18,000 subscribers, challenged atheist Penn Jillette to a debate.VIDEO. The debate challenge focuses on the 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer.
Shockofgod points out that although Penn Jillette is an "enthusiastic bright", the website of the Brights Movement has plunging web traffic according to Compete.com. Shockofgod quipped that it appears as if his prediction that atheism will go from "a squeak to half a squeak in American society" due to the Question evolution! campaign is being fullfilled faster than he expected. The video with the prediction is located on YouTube HERE.
Shockofgod fans taunt to Penn Jillette
Penn Jillette has been contacted about the debate challenge via Twitter, YouTube and email.
Shockofgod fan: "He's watching. trust me. Most Atheists are obsessed with the TRUTH, they just don't like it."
Shockofgod fan: "Come on Penn, you even WANT people to debate because our opinions on the existence of God are too important to keep private!"
Debate challenge from Christian apologist Sye Ten Bruggencate
|“|| Sye Ten Bruggencate, of the website Proof That God Exists, has challenged Penn Jillette to a Christian versus atheist debate on God’s existence.
Penn Jillette is not merely a Las Vegas legend, as an illusionist, but also adheres to (and proselytizes for) the positive affirmation of God’s non-existence sect of atheism having stated, “I know there’s no God,” for example.
One would think that an illusionist who has made a name and a career intelligently designing shows that have dazzled audiences for decades would know that life, the universe and everything do not just happen. Yet, rebellion knows no boundaries and every atheist concocts consoling delusions—or, consoling illusions.
You may recall Sye from a previous article, Atheism’s debategate: on the Sye Ten Bruggencate vs. Justin Schieber debate and you may be aware that on occasion Penn Jillette has some positive things to say about Christians (such as in Penn Jillette Lays it Down). However, just as often he uses compliments as an open door to challenge Christians, in a good way, yet the goal is always the same: open the door just enough to squeeze in and preach the pseudo-gospel of atheism.
We will just to just wait and see how Penn Jillette responds, for now let us spread the word about this challenge. 
Vox Day on secular leftists reluctance to debate and on their historical revisionism
|“|| Regardless of whether it is...Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, or the vast and corpulent mass of feminists, the Left has an observable tendency to shun debate. They assert many different reasons for doing so, but the truth is always revealed by their seemingly contradictory willingness to debate the incompetent and the overmatched....
One of the things that has been interesting to observe over time is the way that the heated attacks on me, both in public and via email, have all but disappeared even though my overall readership has never been larger. Why is this? My theory is this is because most of my critics, be they atheists, feminists, evolutionists, or free traders, have learned they simply cannot win in a direct confrontation. They can't openly criticize my ideas because they have learned, much to their surprise, that they cannot adequately defend their own.
As Aristotle pointed out more than two thousand years ago, even at the rhetorical level, the side more closely approximates the truth will tend to win out, because it is easier to argue when your arguments are based on truth rather than falsehood. Events will always ultimately prove the arguments of the global warmers, the godless, the female supremacists, the socialists, the Keynesians, and the monetarists to be false because their ideas are false. This is why a good memory is one of the most lethal weapons against them and why it is so easy to win debates against them, as given enough time, they are going to contradict themselves.
Why? Because they have no choice. Being false, their positions have to be dynamic, which means they can never hope for any significant degree of consistency. This is why ex post facto revision and double-talk are the hallmarks of the Left, and is why the first thing Leftists do when they are in a position of power is to erase history and attempt to silence any voices capable of calling attention to their fictions and contradictions.
- See also: Atheism and historical revisionism
Atheists, debates and critical thinking
See also: Atheism and critical thinking
Well-structured debates have cross-examination by the participants which often can stimulate critical thinking by participants and audience members. And many debates have an audience questioning period where audience members pose questions to the debaters.
In addition, ideologues who engage in uncritical thinking often are unaware of opposing arguments and actively avoid intellectually engaging with their opponents arguments.
Fear and avoidance is often the root of denialism. The poor debate performances of contemporary atheists and prominent atheists dodging debates is indicative of many atheists engaging in denialism and also a lack of rigorous critical thinking on the part of many atheists (see: Atheism and critical thinking).
Reddit atheists and cowardice
See also: Reddit atheism
In May 2013, Policymic published an article on Reddit atheism entitled Reddit Users: Why Atheist Redditors Are Stuck On the Internet which declared that Reddit atheists are reluctant to proclaim their atheism offline.
The Policymic article declared:
|“||Are we to make cowards out of Reddit’s atheists for the discrepancy between the prevalence of real life and internet proclamations of godlessness? Maybe, as the world’s loudest atheist, Richard Dawkins, first bemoaned in his TED talk, “Atheists do not want to be impolite … Can we stop being so damned polite?” Or, as R/atheist stalwart with the username “blackstar9000” explained in a very thoughtful post on the state of the atheist subreddit, “Many of the users are just recently converted, who fear being ostracized by people the religious people who make up their support system.”||”|
Beginning in the 1980s and accelerating in 2011 and beyond, atheism, agnosticism and Darwinism have developed a reputation of cowardice. See: and Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates and Instances of Richard Dawkins ducking debates
New Atheism and hypocritical cowardice
|“|| The New Atheists have expressed that the proverbial straw-that-broke-the-Atheist-camel's-back was the group of attacks on the United States of America on September 11, 2001 AD. That is not to say that some of them were not Atheist activists before then, but 9/11 fanned the flames of their activism.
The attacks on 9/11 where primarily caused by Islamic extremism (with a long list of other causes such as maintenance or gaining of power, wealth, popularity, etc.). The question is: what have the New Atheists done in response to this particular event, this particular threat? Surely, they would focus their efforts primarily, if not exclusively, upon confronting this threat, this cause, head on.
Yet, what have the New Atheists done? What they have and have not done makes one wonder if their appeal to 9/11 is a reason or an excuse. After all, why 9/11? Are they not aware of similar atrocities throughout history? Are they not aware of the recent chronicles of the most secular century in human history also being the bloodiest-with millions upon millions being murdered not only during war, but also by their own regimes? (see here).
Have any of the New Atheists toured Islamic countries giving lectures in which they condemn Allah, Muhammad, Islam, or Muslims? Have any of them debated Muslims in Islamic countries? Have any of them been interviewed on Al Jazeera? Have any of them written entire books in which they condemn Allah, Muhammad, Islam, or Muslims? Have they done anything of the sort at all? The answers to all of the above are: "No." Rather, what they have done is sit within the comfort and safety of countries based on Christian principles and conveniently launched condemnations which are roughly quantifiable as being 90% anti-Christian and 10% anti-other religions (and this may be being too generous an estimation).
Kyle Kulinski's refusal to engage in an atheism vs. Christianity debate
Atheism and a lack of art/music around heroic figures
While Christianity has many heroic figures/martyrs who led exemplary lives to create works of art/music around (see: Christian art), the atheist community is filled with rogues and cowards (see also: Atheism and moral intelligence) and has few, if any, such works.
For more information please see: Atheism and art
Secular leftist Swedes and the Muslim rapists epidemic in their country
Sweden is one of the most atheistic countries in the world and the website adherents.com reported that in 2005 46 - 85% of Swedes were agnostics/atheists/non-believers in God. Sweden also has the 3rd highest rate of belief in evolution as far as Western World nations.
The International Business Times reported in 2014:
|“|| Sweden has the highest rate of rape in Europe, with the UN reporting 69 rape cases per 100,000 inhabitants in 2011, according to author and advocate of power feminism Naomi Wolf on opinion website Project Syndicate.
In 2010, Swedish police recorded the highest number of offences - about 63 per 100,000 inhabitants - of any force in Europe. That was the second highest in the world after Lesotho.
"According to rape crisis advocates in Sweden, one-third of Swedish women have been sexually assaulted by the time they leave their teens. According to a study published in 2003, and other later studies through 2009, Sweden has the highest sexual assault rate in Europe, and among the lowest conviction rates," Wolf wrote.
A 2010 Amnesty report said: "In Sweden, according to official crime statistics, the number of reported rapes has quadrupled during the past 20 years. In 2008, there were just over 4,000 rapes of people over 15, the great majority of them girls and women."
India's Maneka Gandhi, who is the Indian Union Cabinet Minister for Women and Child Development, said when comparing India's rape rate to Sweden's: “We have four rapes per 100,000 women, while Sweden has more than 130."
Swedes not standing up to the Muslim community about the Muslim rapists epidemic in Sweden
James Lewis wrote in The American Thinker:
|“|| Sweden's coat of arms shows two fierce, roaring lions. But a few years ago, Swedish feminists successfully campaigned to castrate the rampant lions (on a local version of the royal coat of arms), because their penises were too obviously ready for business.
Swedish politicians obligingly removed the offending members. They have done much the same thing to themselves.
And thereby hangs a tale of feminized Sweden and the Muslim rape epidemic...
In tribal cultures, war-making males commonly commit rapes while raiding enemy clans. Even chimp gangs do it. Chicago gangs do it, too – unless they are restrained by their own, or fear deadly retaliation...
No human culture promotes rape against in-group women; it is usually committed against out-group women. In-group rape is taboo, because many tribes have strict rules of exogamy (having to marry and have children outside the clan to prevent inbreeding).
In Muslim tribal cultures, rape is sanctioned outside the family, the clan, and the faith, the umma.
However, rape and the worst kinds of violence are religiously authorized in jihad war against declared out-groups. Punishment for rape can be severe if the victim is a protected family member. But infidel women are free for all. That is what ISIS is telling the world, in Iraq and Syria...
Now, next door to Sweden, Norway recently expelled almost a thousand Muslim immigrants for serious crimes, and behold! The violent crime rate dropped by 30% in Norway. Amazing but true.
Secular leftists Swedes have been too cowardly to confront the Muslim community in their country and put an end to the rape epidemic.
- Agnosticism and cowardice
- Rebuttals to atheist arguments
- Atheists doubting the validity of atheism
- Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian
- Atheism and truth
- Atheism vs. Christianity
- Decline of atheism
- Atheism and its retention rate in individuals
- Huxley Memorial Debate
Other atheism articles:
- Sports performance: Religious faith vs. atheism
- Atheism and leadership
- Atheism and deception
- Atheism and morality
- Moral failures of the atheist community
Comedy and satire concerning atheism:
- Does Richard Dawkins have machismo? - Comedy/satire
- Comedy and satires concerning atheism and evolution (large collection of comedy/satire concerning atheism and evolution)
- Oxford Atheist Calls Richard Dawkins "Coward" for Not Debating William Lane Craig - Video
- Cowardice of atheism so obvious it makes headlines - YouTube video
- 21st century atheism is well-known for its foolishness and cowardice
- Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God, The Daily Telegraph, May 14, 2011
- Christian Philosopher William Lane Craig Is Ready to Debate, but Finds Few Challengers
- Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God
- Fear of death: worst if you’re a little religious?, World of Science]
- J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2005, Jul;60(4):P207-14. Does religiousness buffer against the fear of death and dying in late adulthood? Findings from a longitudinal study. Wink P1, Scott J.
- Death anxiety increases atheists' unconscious belief in God, Science Daily, Date: April 2, 2012
- Atheists, Death and Belief in God The Effects of Death Reminders on Atheists' Supernatural Beliefs, Psychology Today, Published on May 25, 2012 by Nathan A. Heflick, Ph.D. in The Big Questions
- Fear of death: worst if you’re a little religious?, World of Science]
- J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2005, Jul;60(4):P207-14. Does religiousness buffer against the fear of death and dying in late adulthood? Findings from a longitudinal study. Wink P1, Scott J.
- Wen, Y. (2010). Religiosity and death anxiety. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 6(2), 31-37.
- Shall the religious inherit the earth? - Eric Kaufmann
- Researchers find brain differences between believers and non-believers, Phys.org, March 4, 2009
- Richard Dawkins is either a fool or a coward for refusing to debate William Lane Craig - October 21, 2011 - The Daily Telegraph
- Richard Dawkins, the Cowardly Clown
- Facing Uncomfortable Truths
- Speaking of Assiduous Absconders
- Bahsen at the Stein debate by John Frame
- The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein
- Bahnsen-Martin debate by John Frame
- Transcript of the Bahnsen-Stein debate
- Greg Bahnsen vs. Michael Martin: The Debate That Never Was (1/2)
- Open Questions: Diverse Thinkers Discuss God, Religion, and Faith By Luís F. Rodrigues, page 201
- Running, running by Vox Day
- Can one dodge a dodger?
- Reason or Rhetoric by Henry Morris, PhD
- Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website
- Richard Dawkins defends Ahmed Mohamed comments and dismisses Islamophobia as a 'non-word', Independent, 24 September 2015
- Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens: New Atheists flirt with Islamophobia by Nathan Lean, Salon, March 30, 2013
- Sam Harris, the New Atheists, and anti-Muslim animus by Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian, April 3, 2013
- Richard Dawkins does it again: New Atheism’s Islamophobia problem, Salon, 2013
- Richard Dawkins, 'Islamophobia' and the atheist movement, The Guardian, 2015
- New Atheism should be able to criticise Islam without being accused of Islamophobia by Andrew Zak Williams, New Statesman, Published 19 April 2013
- Christian turn Penn Jillette into a chicken
- Bright Movement website - Compete
- Will atheist Penn Jillette debate Christian Sye Ten Bruggencate?
- Penn Jillete's greatest disappearing act yet!
- The Commissar Vanishes
- The distaste for debate, Theodore Beale
- Reddit Users: Why Atheist Redditors Are Stuck On the Internet
- Atheism - The New (Emergent) Atheists, part 4 of 4 - Is The New Atheist Movement Dead?
- Top 5 Countries with the Highest Rates of Rape By Ludovica Iaccino, International Business Times, January 29, 2014 16:34 GMT
- Top 50 Countries With Highest Proportion of Atheists / Agnostics(Zuckerman, 2005)
- Photo: Evolution Less Accepted in U.S. Than Other Western Countries, Study Finds
- 'Rape worse in Sweden than India', says Gandhi, The Local SE, Published: 24 May 2015
- Muslim Sacralized rape and feminized Sweden