[quote=So Boerd]Magic. Address my point that those who lack religion have killed more in both absolute and proportional terms than those who do.[/quote]

I did, several times. You keep coming back with the same arguments though, so it'd be a waste of breath to keep the cycle going.

[quote=Protagonist]
1. Fair enough. But then, wouldn't it not be the fault of religion, but rather gnosticism?As for statement 

2. though, I would say that completely dismissing the bible would make you more or less non-Christian. Depending on what you mean by dismissing the bible. While it's not quite the core of Christian beliefs, a Christian can more or less be considered someone who basically accepts the bible as (in some fashion) true. If somebody were to believe that the bible should be completely ignored, then they are not Christians by definition. It's not so much that I think you can't be a Communist Christian, but a Christian wouldn't be a Marxist.
[/quote]

1. Gnosticism is definitely a role in it as far as things such as no science in schools, violence, child molesting etc. is concerned. But it's also an activity that you only see a spike in with Gnostic Theists, not Gnostic Atheists. Gnostic Atheists such as say Richard Dawkins might be seen as very cold and pessimistic people by much of the population mind you (I'm not one of them, but I'm aware that it's a common opinion about him), but are by no means responsible for such barbaric crimes.

But in regards to Agnostic Theism then? Yes, they are pretty much innocent of most of the bigger crimes and accusations of religion. Unless if they start taking stances such as "You can criticize someone's religion", which is what a lot of them have been doing. They use the reasoning that "Most of us aren't murderers, so stop attacking people for their religion and allow religious freedom without criticism" which is a fine idea in theory. But it comes with three main problems:

a) Those Gnostic's are doing it largely because of religion. So by expecting people to stop criticizing the religion they essentially give such extremists a shield/scapegoat. All they need to do is go "We kill these children in the name of God!", and now that they're pulling the religion card they become untouchable as a direct result of the actions done by Agnostic Theists.

b) It makes it so believing something without any evidence is now acceptable. It is essentially no different than someone going "I believe we are all created by a floating teapot owned by a Spaghetti Monster and was born from a virgin invisible pink unicorn" and legally no one would be allowed to step up and say "I find that wrong, and the idea rather silly", which leads me to the third point:

c) It removes freedom of speech/criticism. As soon as you make anything immune to criticism, freedom of speech is lost. Ideas and practices are allowed to spread unchallenged, and the results of such can be disastrous. And I will note, science and atheism is not immune to criticism. It is allowed to critique, questioning, doubt etc. In fact in regards to science students are encouraged to question and doubt things, and to go out and seek more answers and evidence.

2. Personally I do agree, you shouldn't be calling yourself a Christian if you are willing to dismiss the bible. It's contradictory to the religion entirely. However, there are many cases like this (My Mom as an example). They call themselves Christian they hold a belief in Jesus and the Christian God, but will discount the entirety of the Bible for being written by desert people over 2000 years ago. And as long as the only real requirement of being under _______ religion is claiming to be part of it, there are going to be many cases like this.