Really? How many wars have been started because one side is blindly called to actions through atheism? How many people have been tortured in the name of atheism? How many scientific discoveries have been blocked because of atheism?
This is not a logically sound analogy, because atheism is not a positively defined category of belief. It's negatively defined -- the only thing that all atheists have in common is something they all lack, not something they all have. So the question then becomes, are people who lack a belief in a higher power a separate population from people who have a belief in a higher power, with regards to willingness to use violent and exploitative means to achieve their aims? I think a sociological or psychological study able to demonstrate this unequivocally would be very methodologically hard to design. For example, high socioeconomic status would be a confounding factor, because it's causally related to both low degrees of religiosity and low propensity to violent crime, joining the army, joining a gang, or most other measurable indicators you could use for 'permissive stance toward the use of brute force'. This wouldn't prove that losing one's religion makes one a less violent person.
I'll even forgive these actions of mass malfeasance for a second. How much time has been wasted contemplating the nature of an invisible friend? How many countless hours have been squandered while one ponders what arbitrary and vague notion of an afterlife best suits their emotional needs? At best, these supernatural thoughts waste time and energy. At worst, they result in the loss of human life and retardation of human intellect.
See, here's the thing that kills me about these sorts of impassioned arguments from physicalists (formerly known as materialists): By choosing to be a physicalist and accepting all that this philosophically implies, you've undermined the basis for really valuing anything above anything. After all, if physicalism is true, then we're all just random, quite possibly one-time, fleeting, unbelievably insignificant accidents in a cold, indifferent, impersonal universe, that itself is ultimately bound for heat death and disappearance forever. I dunno dude, with that prospect, it's pretty hard to put on a pedestal such things as human intellect, the life of the mind, reason, advanced technology, history, peace and prosperity, or even art. It's hard to really say that anything has intrinsic value, in a world where nothing and no one has intrinsic meaning or any intrinsic purpose. If this is the case, why NOT just while away your life wallowing in your warm liquid goo of choice with your pink drink in one hand, a needle in your arm, and your hand on your genitals? Why not just off yourself right now? Or, if it's not going to ultimately matter at all if I'm wrong, and I won't even be there to see that I guessed wrong, why NOT just give in to my yearnings for a higher power and/or a transcendent reality? Under physicalism, there's really no reason why not to. Atheism has no AntiGod, who'll damn me to an eternity in a nether-realm without a single book or Internet connection, if I stray from the path of unwavering reason.
The above paragraph is my standard spiel on why I don't buy secular humanism.
So yes, one can logically deduce that some belief systems are better than others.
'Better' is relative, and implies a purpose. Better at doing what? Better at accomplishing what? (I'm aware you've already answered this implicitly, so I'll save you having to repeat yourself, and confirm that I'm indeed asking this rhetorically.) It's clear that having no belief in a higher power or anything supernatural serves your personal purposes well. That much is clear. And I won't begrudge you this metaphysical stance -- it's your life to live, it's your choices to make. If you're happy and healthy and your life is in balance, who am I to gripe?
But please understand that your worldview does not serve anyone and everyone's needs and purposes well. Not by a long shot. In fact, for some people, it's the last thing they need.
And so, that said, I'm going to politely remind everyone here one more time that no one posting in P&S is welcome to antagonize another poster for their stated beliefs, if they clearly weren't looking for debate. This rule is in the P&S guidelines now, because this forum serves a broader range of people, and is a more enjoyable experience for all, filled with more light than heat, when it's followed. If anyone feels this is unreasonable, I'm happy to ask the Senior Moderators to hear both sides, and make a judgement as to whether this is a fair rule. If they deem it unfair, I'll not only take down the rule, but turn in my modstick too -- I'll not mod a forum where this rule isn't upheld or wanted.
I get that you don't like confrontation and you would rather say all is equal instead of making someone feel uncomfortable, but life isn't always about making others feel as good as possible.
Life may not always be about it, but this forum is. We're not a bunch of scientists or academic philosophers. We're not a professional union or a paid think tank. We don't publish a peer-reviewed journal. We don't claim to be an authoritative source on anything besides minimally harmful psychoactive drug use. P&S is here to serve the needs of all people for whom drug use is connected to philosophical and spiritual pursuits, so that they may use the right drugs in the right dosages whilst taking the right precautions, so as to achieve THEIR PERSONAL philosophical and spiritual aims with minimal risk of harm to themselves. This includes many people who believe deeply in things supernatural. To greet such people here with "Turn pirate or walk the plank!" would not be serving our mission as part of BL.
Sometimes reality makes some people unhappy, and I think that you are being disingenuous with your comments.
Sorry you feel that way. My stance on this matter is actually something I've given quite a lot of thought to, and discussed at length with other moderators here. I'll make sure next time I live up to Enlitx's standards of ingenuity.
Of course no one can prove 100% that one belief is right, but nothing is ever proven 100%, and to start going around treating everything as equal just because something cannot be shown to be absolutely proven is ridiculous. Furthermore, just because some people lead peaceful lives and embrace science while believing in supernatural powers does not mean the belief in the supernatural is a harmless thing. On the whole, it has been shown as a primitive and antiquated belief system.
Thanks for your opinion, man.
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
That's my point! Don't lump all spirituality together! 
