The question is who killed more based on the tenants of their religion? If someone kills a lot of people who has to be a Christian, that goes against the tenants of Christianity. While with Islam, many times it is done in the name of and following the tenants of their religion.
The answer is that having this argument with liberals is playing into their hands.
BTW, Hitler wasn’t an atheist, he was an occultist.
It’s hard to judge as Muslim countries aren’t very open about their activities. Only after Saddam fell did we find the hundreds of mass graves in Iraq, for example.
Their argument is a canard.
Keep them focused on “in modern times”
Since the radio was invented, nations can converse/ communicate with each other and their populace in near real time.
There is no current excuse for the barbarism of fanatical Islam in this day and age. Period.
Al Gore invented the internet last century. Islamic terrorists use it ALL the time.
Barbarism *IS* the MO of Islam. Barbarism *IS NOT* the MO of Christianity or western civilisations. Period.
Instead of focusing on pure numbers of who killed more. Look at the reasons for the killing. Christians will kill in order to protect themselves and others who need defending. Muslims agressively kill for domination. Christians respond to defeat evil.
Atheists. Add up Mao's, Lenin's, Stalin's, Pol Pot's, and Uncle Ho's numbers. Not even close.
Why don’t you simply put this stipulation into the argument:
Who is killing more TODAY?
Or,
IN THE LAST 100 YEARS who has killed more?
Isn’t that what this is all about? What are we going to do about the problem in MODERN TIMES? No need to dust off the history books to solve this riddle.
I’ve given up arguing with insane people.
The Spanish Inquisition lasted over a century, and -- in total -- killed about 5000 people. Compare that with 9/11 in which Moslems killed 3000 people in one morning.
Aside from the Inquisition and the Crusades, I cannot think of any other events which were specifically inspired by the Christian faith and which resulted in any significant deaths.
Liberals may mention Christians coming to the New World and the massive Indian die-off that followed, but no diseases were spread deliberately, and deaths were not caused specifically by religious zeal.
On the other hand, Islamic jihad has been going on for 15 centuries and has killed millions. Just look at the history of India -- conquerors like Tamerlane did nasty work there. It's all documented.
1. If they’re referring to the Crusades (they usually are), this never would have happened at all except for Muslim killings in present-day Israel and the region.
2. Beyond the Crusades, it’s pretty clear that Christians aren’t involved in killings for the sake of Christ — but as a rule or the Koran, Muslims are STILL involved in killings for the sake of Mohammed. Just yesterday: news of a Pakistani woman sentenced to hang under Sharia law — allegedly for blaspheming Mohammed. I frankly don’t understand how you blaspheme anyone except God in the first place, but this should reveal all anyone needs to know.
Considering that in the allegedly “Christian nation” of the U.S. since 1973 politically-sanctioned abortions have murdered 50 million unborn children (when does the number qualify as genocide?), the debate on the “winner” could be close.
“One of my more liberal friends made the usual statement that Christians have killed more people than Muslims”
When I get this SAME statement from many lefties,I ask them:
Where would you rather live, a mostly Islamic Nation or a mostly Christian Nation???
The lefties just start mumbling about multiculturalism and begin to change the subject.
Seems to me that time framing would have precedence. Worrying about ancient history is silly. Worrying about present dangers would be more imporant.
Ask your liberal friend if they believe there is any difference living in a predominantly Christian, post-Enlightenment, Western liberal democracy and living in a predominantly Muslim, Middle Eastern, Sharia based society. Ask your liberal friend to answer the question which of the two societies he or she would rather live in. Ask you liberal friend if Islam is compatible with the Enlightenment. Ask you liberal friend if Islam has had one or more reformations similar to reformed Judaism, Protestantism, and post-Vatican 2 Catholicism. Ask your liberal friend to compare Islam today to Christianity today, not to compare Islam today to Christianity during the Middle Ages.
Oh, and don't forget to ask your liberal friend if they "tolerate" stoning women, killing those who practice other religions, killing homosexuals, etc.
Ask your friend if they prefer to live in a nation of laws or a nation of men.
Simply put, this is not a comparison to Islam vs. Christianity. This is a comparison of Barbarism to post-Enlightenment Western Civilization, period.
bump for later