How Dawkins made me a better person

And nobody but churches can do charitable work because? {ABE}: Also, "believing" in evolution has nothing to do with athesim. There are atheists who reject in evolution, you know. Why? If everybody became atheist, but nothing else changed in their views, why would they not simply turn their churches charity into a non-christian charity? Since atheism has nothing to do with whether or not you want to help other people. Have the people that are doing it now do it as well. Remember, nothing about these people changed, except their belief in gods. So they are just going to continue doing what they did, they just won;t believe in god anymore. Indeed, because we all know atheists don't do any of this stuff, they'd much rather watch people suffer and laugh in their faces, right?Edited by Huntard, : Added {ABE} bit

And it's not. The thread The God Delusion, how it converted an evangalist is still open. It was suggested to get closed though, since these two threads are basically about the same thing.

What about the works atheists do in order to help the needy? Curiously though, these "attacks" are never aimed towards the charity organizations, unless they have some stupid prereq for helping people, like requiring them to accept the lord first. Why would it be turned off if these people become atheists? Are you saying the only reason they help people is because they believe in a god? So they don't help people because they want to help people? That makes them pretty big assholes in my book. The "atheist movement" is not trying to turn off the tap. It is trying to make people think more rationally, or at least try to stop them from pushing their religious views on others. Bullshit. Atheists donate plenty of money to charities. It would perhaps not go to christian charities, but it would go to secular ones instead. Ergo, there's just as much money. Why is this unlikely? They can start work at the secular organisations. Of course, atheism doesn't say anything at all about charity. Now, atheists however, do participate in charity, and quite often organize things for a charitable cause as well. Athesits, for they help people because they want to help people, not because they believe in a god. Since atheism isn't an institution, I don;t see anything to compare here.

Meaning 70% doesn't. Now, who does more for charity, religious organizations, or non-religious organisations? So, wouldn;t all atheists converting to religion do much more harm, for all non-religious organisations would cease to exist, as per your own logic?

And you'd be wrong. According to you they can. From one moment to another, you say, when people become atheists, they stop caring about charity. I in fact claim they won't change much at all, apart from their belief in gods. Then why did you bring them up? What timing and logistics, the infrastructure is already there. The money used to run the church, you mean? So, all the atheists giving money to charity (which accounts for 70%, according to your numbers) are just blindly throwing their money about? I think the person going to church gives money to charity regardless of him giving money to help run the church.

But why would this happen, instead of simply becoming non-religious charity organisations? Also, what if it was the other way around, 70% of the people, that's more then two thirds, would be without help if all those non-religious organisations would suddenly vanish when everybody became religious, as you assert. Yet I don't see you railing against the need of religious people to convert others to their religion.