Thought Sparkk

Atheism is repeatedly assailed as being the driver of many of the atrocities of the 20th century as I'm sure you've heard a million times when names like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao are uttered in a religious debate.  While these are often touted as being the inevitable result of removing religion from society, it is very easy to spot that even if these regimes outwardly claimed no religious affiliation, they were by no means secular in their nature.  Many of these regimes had close ties to the Vatican, while others were based on blood worship, Nordic myth, and varied forms of mysticism, and others simply forego any established religions and appoint the head of the movement as a god incarnate.  These ideas are not the result of secular values, nor do they hold to any meaning of an atheistic society, nor does it lead to any meaningful conversation about those values. Usually after pointing these things out you can then find a bridge in the conversation in order to d...

I rediscovered a blurb that I had written back in 2014 as I was searching my computer today, and it seemed to resonate well with some of my thoughts recently.  The original piece was written in response to the Christopher Hitchens vs Al Sharpton debate from years before.  A question was asked by an audience member which implied that Christianity's "offer" of salvation vs torture was an optional thing.  Hitchens gave a great reply which resonated with me at the time, and after re-reading it today, that seems to still ring true.  So I wanted to share that in this medium as well.  Below is the response of Christopher Hitchens, followed by a few paragraphs of my own response to the question and his response. Hitchens' Response: "You're in the right church but the wrong pew. I mean, yes, of course I've emancipated myself from all that nonsense and I wish you would do too. I'm saying what is the belief, and when you say it's voluntary, it's up t...