Atheist countries are more benevolent

Pope Benedict clearly stated that states need religion and religious values and that he is worried that Britain is falling into the same style of aggressive atheism that created the Nazis. However today might it not be argued that it is the secular societies that are the most benevolent? They are almost certain to be the most liberal and are less discriminatory. It is often argued that religion in various parts of the world hold back countries development, especially in terms of tolerance, whether that religion is Christianity or any other religion. Islam especially in Afghanistan and Somalia provides some of the starkest examples.

Atheist countries are more benevolent
Yes because...

What is an Atheist country? Sweden has 23%,Norway has 17% and Switzerland has 9% non-creationists respectively

The countries with the highest reported Atheist populations have creationist majorities.-[[]]

While Adolf Hitler was not Christian nor arguably famously atheist.

The religion of the Nazis did not really accommodate God therefore in that sense was Atheist. And of-course wasn't monotheist (Judaism,Christianity & Islam) therefore was Atheist in that sense also. It did not include any deities and so was not poly theist either. (is there any other sense in which an idea or a person can be Atheist?)

"Hitler and his henchmen brought forth a new telling of Nordic and Germanic mythology coupled with extravagant pageantry, in an attempt to both unite the people of Germany under a new faith and to replace the peaceful social conventions of Christianity. This new Nazi faith was indoctrinated into both men and women at a very young age, delineating separate rolls for each as the progenitors of this master race.Let's take a look at some of the characteristics of this Nazi faith:
A belief in racial superiority, as expressed in the blonde-haired, blue-eyed Aryan race.
A belief in the state as superior to the individual.
A belief in Hitler as a messianic leader.
A belief in military service and military endeavors as the most noble of human undertakings."-

counterargument to counterargument:
Actually Buddhism is considered to be atheist by a large number of scholars. [[]]
While Hinduism is not a theistic religion it does include deities/gods and is not Atheist in the first sense.

Having a religion does not exempt atheism. [[]]
No because...
The point on the right is a 'no point' or else a call for the revision of the debate topic and definition to say 'secular' where it says 'Atheist'. As there is no such thing as an 'Atheist' Country.

Or maybe 'atheist-friendly' for example the Czech republic or Switzerland or Norway or Sweden or Estonia where most people believe in a life force that they do not call God; while not being strictly against the concept,idea or existence of God.

Switzerland is the neutral country of neutral countries and her tolerance of different faiths/non-faiths, people,cultures and so forth as well as the tolerance evident in other countries that accommodate and boast of high Atheist populations; can account for both high reported atheist factions and for a general sense of peace.

That is to say, neutrality and tolerance can be a common cause for peace and reported Atheism(people are not afraid to voice uncommon views). While the two effects though correlated do not necessarily pose a causal relationship.

The fact that they had a 'religion' so to speak made them non-Atheist. Just as Hindus and Buddhists are not atheists.

Atheist countries are more benevolent
Yes because...

Atheists are more likely to respect female rights

By looking at many religions we can see how women are not treated as equal. We have Islam, where women are made to walk behind men and are not allowed to be in the same room as men that are not related to them. We then have Catholics who do not allow the ordination of females. The most tolerant religion to women and their rights is protestantism; but that is the most secular religion of the three. From this we can infer that the more secular, the more respect for women and their rights, therefore the more benevolent the people.
No because...
Ireland is a staunchly Catholic country in which the church has had a central position within it's society. It has nonetheless had a female premier for the past twenty years. Which challenges the notion that religious societies necessarily hold back women.

Atheist countries are more benevolent
Yes because...

Countries that lean towards atheism rank highly on prosperity index

If we are taking atheist simply to mean not believing in god then there are countries that are majority atheist. And as Nick Cohen says in his article many of them are countries considered to be more tolerent. The countries in Europe where less than 50% answered yes to believing that there is a god were Estonia 16%, Czech Republic 19%, Sweden 23%, Denmark 31%, Norway 32%, France and Netherlands 34%, Latvia and Slovenia 37%, UK and Iceland 38%, Bulgaria 40%, Finland 41%, Belgium 43%, Luxemburg and Hungary 44%, Germany 47%, Switzerland 48% and Lithuania 49%.[[]] These countries are ranked 31, 25, 3, 4, 5, 17, 8, 37, 20, 12, (Iceland not listed), 46, 1, 13, 27 (Luxemburg not listed), 14, 2, (Lithuania not listed), overall an impressive average of 16.5 for 16 countries on the Legatum Prosperity Index[[]] as this includes areas such as saftey and security, democratic governance, personal freedom and social capital it includes a broad base of areas that might be considered benevolent among the factors taken into account.

By comparison the countries that have over 50% believing there is a god in that poll and are in the EU (so as to be fair) have an average rank of 25.5 (excluding Cyprus and Malta).
No because...

Atheist countries are more benevolent
Yes because...

Norway still the world's best place to live (With 70% atheists)

For the fourth year in a row, the United Nations has ranked Norway as having the highest standard of living in the world. Sweden, Australia and Canada are next in line, while the United States is further down the scale.

Also one of the happiest people in the world.
Norwegians have the second-highest level of satisfaction with their standards of living: 95 percent say they are satisfied with the freedom to choose the direction of their lives; an unparalleled 74 percent say other people can be trusted.
No because...

Atheist countries are more benevolent
No because...

The history of atheist countries is not good.

Yes we should not use broad brush strokes to paint all atheist countries as the same but many of historys worst regimes have been atheist. Revolutionary France was probably the first officially atheist country, and it is best known for guillotining those not considered revolutionary enough. Then there are the big bad regimes of the twentieth century. Nazi Germany and Communism. Neither are known for their tolerance. Communism did of course have some good points such as education for all and (towards) equality between men and women as well as supposedly little racism.

Often these atheist regimes espouse some progressive and modern principles but they go too far and become extreemist. What this really shows is that it is not extreemists of any sort that we want. It does not matter if the extreemists are atheists or religious extreemism is bad in all its forms.
Yes because...
The Nazi's were Christians, Hitler himself was a Catholic. The Nordic countries have the highest ratio of atheists and they are still the most peaceful countries in the world. United States of America have been in war in every single decades and they are always on a crusade against another country. 34000 Afghan civilians have been killed since the beginning of the US-led war, And US have been several wars before this one...

Atheist countries are more benevolent
No because...

Atheist countries have higher suicide.

Studies have shown that athism and atheist countries have higher suicide rate...
RESULTS: Religiously unaffiliated subjects had significantly more lifetime suicide attempts and more first-degree relatives who committed suicide than subjects who endorsed a religious affiliation. Unaffiliated subjects were younger, less often married, less often had children, and had less contact with family members. Furthermore, subjects with no religious affiliation perceived fewer reasons for living, particularly fewer moral objections to suicide. In terms of clinical characteristics, religiously unaffiliated subjects had more lifetime impulsivity, aggression, and past substance use disorder. No differences in the level of subjective and objective depression, hopelessness, or stressful life events were found.

This in my mind indicates that Athist countries are worse off than religoius countries as this indicates that their lives are worth less to them and living their lives causes additional stresses that religious people do not have to deal with.
Yes because...
It could be down to other factors. From your link it looks like it was studied between countries rather than within countries. It also happens that the countries with the highest suicide rates tend to be far north - so meaning little sunlight during the winter which can create depression[[]] - and cold.

Atheist countries are more benevolent

What do you think?
(75%) (25%)

Continue the Debate - Leave a Comment

2 Comments on "Atheist countries are more benevolent"

Yeah, the Nazis were Christian / Catholic, not Atheist. I hate when people bring up ‘Atheist regimes’ and start naming religious ones.