Great, what is wrong with anarchy?
Anarchy is unstable.
There are those among us who would use force of arms to establish their own self-serving standards as universals. They usually attribute these standards to some kind of higher authority to make them appear a bit less arbitrary. They lie and kill and pray. All for the greater good, of course.
Then there are those who recognize that if they do not sacrifice some of the freedoms of anarchy they will lose all of their freedoms to the apostles of power. They, more or less willingly, join together in a common cause. They, more or less, accept that the greater good can most readily be achieved through cooperation and fair play. It's not perfect, but it's better then the alternative.
there is nothing in atheism that would make it wrong for a person to do harm.
You're right, there isn't. There is nothing in basket weaving that would make it wrong for a person to do harm either. Are you going to call them on it? Atheism is not a moral stance. It's a recognition that gods are a delusion.
Are you really unable to grasp that morals are not best handed down from on high? Would you
rape Suzy? You don't have much of a choice if your morals are set by the OT God. If your force is not the greater force why should you not submit?
Recognizing that I must be responsible for what I believe, I have a choice. Do my part to make the would a better, kinder place, where me and mine can find peace and comfort; or, grab what I can when I can in a raucous, unending struggle wherein my survival is incumbent on how well I oppress my fellows.
There will probably be someone on the planet who thinks it would be "neat" if the world destroyed itself in a nuclear war tomorrow.
Most likely for religious reasons.
Because it is "nice"?
Yes. Because it's nice.
Please note that I'm not suggesting that all atheists are anarchists or that if you are an atheist that you should consider becoming an anarchist, I'm just stating that there is nothing in atheism that would make it wrong for a person to do harm.
And I'm not suggesting that you have an inordinate eye for little boys. Pretty big of me, ain't it? You can thank me later.
So what is wrong with an atheist choosing a rule that lying is ok if you don't get caught and it benefits you?
Character.
Is it hypocritcal?
No; smart.
If you have some influence or power over a weaker opponent, you can become quite successful.
When did we change the topic to fundamentalism?
I don't think it is possible to make the claim that atheists are "restricted" to telling the truth.
Neither are basket weavers. Go get 'em, Tiger opps! Lion. Hum‽
It's not the man that knows the most that has the most to say.
Anon