3 Muslims gunned down in home by Athiest

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/chapel-hill-shooting-craig-stephen-hicks-condemned-all-religions-on-facebook-prior-to-muslim-massmurder-arrest-10038126.html

This is about 30 mins from me...anyways what a disgusting thing to do. Although based on the reports it sounds like it was over a parking dispute more than anything and the whole "athiest kills muslims" thing is just typical media sensationalism.

Find it weird that so many articles refer to this as an atheist killing. I guess we should start instead of referring to Muslim bombings it should be theist killings, and so it includes all those who believe in God?

It's just sensationalism...according to police this was actually over a long standing parking dispute. While the article mentions that briefly (almost as a side comment), it then goes on to play up the fact he was an Athiest and that the victims were Muslim and at no point ever indicated how any of that was a contributor for the crime.

Well, those parking tickets sure can be a hassle.

I think they are trying to use the fact that he announced himself as an "anti-theist" to say that anything he'd do against religious people would stem from that and that he would not have reacted the same way if the dispute happened with other atheists. Might be true, who knows?

For those keeping score at home

Kill count:
Atheists - 3
Theists - 100,000,000

Could be true, but according to police it was over a parking dispute, and what he would/wouldn't do is basically unsubstantiated conjecture. Honestly they didn't even do that, as there is at this point entirely zip indicating this had anything to do with the fact they were muslim or that he was an athiest.

@Renevent42: Yep, I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying that sadly "man kills 3 people over parking dispute" would not be 'interesting' anymore in today's news.

Or for forum thread titles :P

The sad part is it's already being parroted by people who don't read the actual article and parse out what the actual facts (at this point) are. Just take a look at the comment section on the news article and it's pretty sad. Then there's the extremists on both sides on twitter making this into some political argument...it's just sad to see how the news doing this kind of sensationalism actually does have real consequences.

Mmhmm... *gives you the evil eye*

And yeah, some people will always cherry pick the "facts" that support their beliefs and shove the ones that contradict them under the rug.

Atheists kill people all the time the difference is that atheists never kill people because they're atheists while theists often use their religion as a reason for the killing.

The fact that he was an atheist is irrelevant. What the story really is "Islam hating man kills Muslim man over parking ticket dispute" How relevant the fact that he hated Islam is yet unknown.

If we're talking strictly about the amount of people killed by atheists vs theists, I think atheists got the theists beat in that one. Stalin alone killed some 40 million people.

Pretty much.

@deeliman: Stalin killed people in the name of Atheism? I don't think so, Tim.

This is a bad day for atheism. First the Big Bang Theory gets disproved and now this.

Atheist doing what atheists do.

Why is this news bad for atheism? Is it also bad for men? Or mammals? People with the same hair colour? Having something in common with someone doesn't automatically associate you with them. Besides, atheism is such a broad term...now if you're anti-theist, maybe you'll get a bit of heat over this but most anti-theists won't murder people either.

(Also, I realise you are probably joking)

maybe you've never heard of the soviet union and other communist regimes

Communism ---> another religion

You should reread what I said, buddy.

So now atheists are fighting a 'holy' war too ?

LOL

@Storm_Marine said:

@korvus said:

Why is this news bad for atheism? Is it also bad for men? Or mammals? People with the same hair colour?

I have thoroughly analysed your brilliant argument and can offer no rebuttal.

So this is anti terrorism. Someone needs to burn down their atheist church i.e. Starbucks.

he shot them in the head, which means it was personal so i doubt this was over a parking lot dispute.

@themajormayor said:

Atheist doing what atheists do.

Yes, the Atheist North Korean regime which deifies the Kim family. All hail Kim.

lol.

media is to blame for this. when you turn on your tv news channel and all you see is gun toten isis muslims (who apparently kill americans for no reason) what do you think some people are going to want to do when they see muslims staying next to them in their burqa.

They didn't do it in the name of religion.

The vast majority of KILLINGS aren't done in the name of religion or atheism. DespiDespite most of the world being religious, the world has (for the most part) become more preagmatic and interconnected. Which means that generally speaking, if you have incentive to kill a dude, it's not gonna be because of religion. Might be because of money or property or lovers or anger management issues. But most people aren't going around killing people because of religion.

Or look at it this way. You know how many atheists like to criticize christians for being too lazy to actually read the bible?Okay, let's rubn with that. If you're a follower of a religion and you're too damn lazy to bother reading your own religion's holy book, you're PROBABLY not gonna kill someone over religion. If you do kill another dude, it's probably gonna be because of money or property or women.

you give these lives numbers?

is that how insignificant a human life is now?

atheist can be a bigot too... just look at those comments in gamespot.

It's so frustrating to see so many people arguing "see: atheist's can be dicks too"... no shit Sherlock; the difference is the man wasn't screaming "god is non-existent" or whatever the corresponding response is to god is great. If he had shot a white family this would barely even be news.

@SapSacPrime: Good Comment

lolwut

Oh goodness gracious
You need to be quiet

While it is blindingly clear that the article is largely sensationalist cherry-picking, the hypocrisy in this topic is not blinding at all. Why exactly does this guy's religious belief, or lack of one for the sticklers among you, get a special exclusion from condemnation as a motive of unruly and destructive behavior? Specially that the guy apparently felt strong enough about it for it to be a notable theme of his life and psyche. Because "atheism" just cannot be an incentive to kill people? And why is that exactly? people killed and continue to kill each other for ideological reasons, regardless whether such motives are of a spiritual or temporal nature or any other distinction. Let me issue a preemptive interjection and save us all some time in response to the platitude of "but religions tell people to kill" by saying that unless one can prove that a significant majority of religious people are out to kill others, this argument is as substantive as the argument that all atheists are "militant" or anti religious people.

Are you insinuating that watching CSI is not a perfectly viable method of learning about murderer behaviour and motivations?

Well that's depressing.

The guy killed 3 innocent folks. I hope he fries.

There is a fairly big difference from this and religious killings if you ask me. Atheism is the lack of a belief in god...that is it. He didn't kill people because he doesn't have a believe in god, he (possibly) killed them because he was anti-Islam. Whether he believes in a deity or not has no real bearing in this case. Even if he was a "militant atheist" - nothing about the lack of belief in a god supports anything about hatred towards those that do - this was simply his own personal view - there is no book, or teachings or ideology associated with atheism that one could say caused him to so Compared to something like the Paris shootings where the murders were directly linked to the shooters religious beliefs and their interpretation of its doctrine - which could in fact be skewed to justify killing.

I don't know, you might count Stalin's murders as Atheist killings too (coming from an atheist/agnostic)

so what's more fucked up? killing 3 people because they're muslims and you are strongly anti-religious, or killing 3 people over a parking spot?

Atheists are becoming bolder every day. Give them an inch and they'll take a yard.

@thegerg: Aww, thank you =D

Ugh... Modern journalism. Not like it ever was perfect or even anywhere near having any sort of integrity but damn, did that story fucking suck. I'd like to clap sarcastically in the face of that writer. Great job Adam Withnall....

Again though, absolutely nothing inherent in the lack of a belief in god that causes those killings. If Stalin's personal belief was that those who believed in god should die then his actions are his own - where as in the Crusades, it was the actual religious beliefs and their ideologies that were used to support mass killings. Not that there is anything inherently violent about theism...but there is within many of the religions and teachings based on that. If the killer in this case had been a part of an organized group with a doctrine based on their atheistic views, then maybe him being an atheist would matter...but even then it would be the group, not the lack of belief in a god, that would be blamed - just like people blame Islam, and not theism, for the Paris killings.