Tags
atheism, BBC, Christian, Christmas, Christmas tree, communist, Kaesong, North Korea, Seoul, South Korea
Atheist North Korea has threatened to shoot out the lights of a giant Christmas tree-shaped tower that South Korea plans to illuminate near the tense border.
This is the first line of an article I recently read chronicling the tensions between North and South Korea over the South’s plans to illuminate a 100 ft. tower with lights designed to make it look like a Christmas tree. Apparently, this has been a South Korean tradition until 2003 when they agreed to stop as part of an agreement with the North during a period of relative calm. But tensions have escalated again, so last year they decided to resurrect the tradition. This Christmas they have agreed to let Christian groups erect two more trees.
The North calls the Christmas tree “propaganda” and is upset because it can be seen with the naked eye from the major city of Kaesong. According to a BBC article “[The North Korean capital] Pyongyang has previously accused Seoul of using the tree to spread the Christian message to people inside the atheist state.”
A South Korean Defence
Ministry official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, says the decision [to light the tree and allow two more] is meant to help guarantee freedom of expression and religion.
“The Communist North warned its southern enemy of ‘unexpected consequences’ if it went ahead to turn on the lights, saying Seoul would bear the ‘entire responsibilities’. “
This is what atheism looks like. We see it in our own nation all the time. An atheist or atheist group is offended by the public display of a Christian symbol, so they use the courts to bully someone into removing it. There is never any mention that the right they are using to complain, freedom of speech, is the direct result of a Christian worldview and not an atheistic one. North Korea cannot use the courts to demand removal of the tree, so it uses the threat of violence. This whole situation makes it painfully clear that atheism, when lived out consistently, results in a lot of things – but freedom and tolerance are not among them.
“This is what atheism looks like. North Korea is so threatened by any belief system other than its own that it will threaten violence to have it removed.”
And the last time an American atheist threatened you with violence was…when…exactly?
I personally haven’t been threatened with violence, but I can speak only for myself. I probably should have been clearer in the article, so let me do it now. I am not saying all atheists react violently when their beliefs are threatened. I know that is not the case. I’m simply pointing out that atheism as a belief system, lived out consistently, results naturally in this kind of situation.
“I’m simply pointing out that atheism as a belief system, lived out consistently, results naturally in this kind of situation.”
I’m sorry, but you’re wrong on multiple levels.
Firstly that atheism is a belief system. It isn’t.
Secondly, that atheism leads to violence. It does not.
A totalitarian regime lead by a psychopath who thinks his father is a god-like figure? That can lead to violence. But that’s not anything I’d recognize as being atheism or coming from atheism.
I’m not really sure, given these statistics, how you can defend the claim that atheism doesn’t lead to violence: China under Mao Tse Tung, 26.3 million Chinese dead. According to the Walker Report, 63.7 million over the whole period of time of the Communist revolution in China. Solzhenitsyn says the Soviet Union put to death 66.7 million people. Kampuchea destroyed one third of their entire population of eight million Cambodians. The Chinese at two different times in medieval history, somewhere in the vicinity of 35 million and 40 million people. Make note that these deaths were the result of organizations or points of view or ideologies that had left God out of the equation. None of these involve religion. And all but the very last actually assert atheism.
Also, in what way is atheism not a belief system?
“Make note that these deaths were the result of organizations or points of view or ideologies that had left God out of the equation.”
Yes, they left god out of the equation.
And they added to the equation ‘killing people who are against us is a good idea’.
That addition doesn’t come from atheism. A simple look at the history of Christianity shows us that.
Nothing in atheism tells me that killing someone is a good idea.
“Also, in what way is atheism not a belief system?”
Atheism is a single position on a single question. A system is made up of more than one thing.
There are many belief systems that include atheism as part of them. But atheism itself isn’t a belief system.
I think I see your point. I should have said “atheism as a foundational belief” rather than a “belief system.” Despite that correction, I think my point still stands. Atheism was the foundational belief in these systems that murdered millions upon millions of people, and the end result is not inconsistent with the foundational belief that there is no God to whom we are accountable. “Killing people who are against us is a good idea” is perfectly at home in a system that leaves God out of the equation, but it is not an idea consistent with theism. Of course, this doesn’t speak to the truthfulness of atheism or theism. I was simply making an observation about what atheism, lived out consistently, can and does lead to.
BTW, I really appreciate your comments.
“Atheism was the foundational belief”
I do not see that as being the case. Unless you’re using the word ‘foundational’ in a unique way.
“but it is not an idea consistent with theism.”
Particular types of theism can lead directly to killing. How else do you read (and yes, I’m paraphrasing) ‘homosexuality is an abomination, and the blood shall be on their heads’ or ‘suffer not a witch to live’?
Atheism is just a lack of belief in a god or gods. Nothing about it inspires or makes someone want to kill people. You need additional beliefs to get there. Beliefs that I do not have, and that don’t come from atheism.
I don’t like to take up too much space with back and forth in the comments section, so I’ll leave you with the last word here. Thank you for commenting, NotAScientist! You can find my e-mail on the About the Author page if you’d like to continue the discussion. I enjoyed talking with you.
Pingback: Christmas and the Civil War: Part II | Lint In My Pocket – Artillery On The Ridge