Top 10 Atheist Myths

[Proud_Democratt]

Myth 1 : "Atheists are all the same"
Myth 2 : "Atheists have no morals, since they don't believe in God"
Myth 3 : "Atheists believe in evolution, but that doesn't answer as many
questions as creationism"
Myth 4 : "Atheists cannot know there is no God, since you cannot prove he doesn't exist"
Myth 5 : "Atheists seek to remove religion from society, and to force all
people to be atheists"
Myth 6 : "Atheists are so closed-minded, they can't see that miracles
happen every day!"
Myth 7 : "Atheists are pushing a negative sentiment, and have a dreary
life"
Myth 8 : " If atheists are right, then religious people are wasting their time, but at least they're happy. No harm in that! If religious people are right, then atheists are going to hell. It seems logical that atheists should become religious just to be safe."
Myth 9 : "There are no such things as atheists" a.k.a. "There are no
atheists in foxholes"
Myth 10 : "This country was founded by Christians, on Christian values,
and should therefore be a Christian country".


The details of these myths are in the source:
http://humanists.net/avijit/article/top_10_atheist_myths.htm

[meg]

1. Quote from my great, great grandfather

who put the following on his tombstone in Lyndonville, Vermont.

"Beyond the universe there is nothing, and within the universe, the supernatural does not and cannot exist. Of all deceivers who have plagued mankind, none are so deeply ruinous to human happiness as those impostors who pretend to lead by a light above nature. Science has never killed or persecuted a single person for doubting or denying its teachings, and most of these teachings have been true; but religion has murdered millions for doubting or denying her dogmas, and most of these dogmas have been false."

Gratis P. Spencer 1908

On edit: Christians periodically vandalize his grave.

[Proud_Democratt]

2. He and I could have been good friends!!!!!!

Logic is the enemy of irrationality.

[meg]

4. He was an interesting fellow

from what I've heard.

[Maven]

5. Ooh, I like

Great quotation. :thumbsup:

[trotsky]

7. If I ever find myself in Lyndonville, VT...

I'll make a point of putting flowers on your great great grandfather's grave. A wise and caring man, it sounds like.

[meg]

9. thanks! (eom)

[politrix]

19. Damn...

"none are so deeply ruinous to human happiness as those impostors who pretend to lead by a light above nature..."

Nature is the ONLY 'GOD' that doesn't hide from us. We see it everyday. It feeds us. The grass grows and babies are born and we can SEE Nature.

But, we live amongst those whose believe in Zeus or whatever passed for him. Some kind of Sky-God that will make everything OKAY whilst we suffer and Nature is always there, feeding us, showing itself with no mystery.


People dont like Nature because Nature feeds EVERYTHING and ALL are equal.

We can eat the plants and animals - but, they can eat us. WHATEVER put us all here made us EQUAL.

We can eat something or it can eat us. Mosquitoes, microbes, bacteria, ants, rats, wolves, etc. - we are FOOD.

EVERYTHING HERE is to feed everything else.

But, religious people are arrogant enough to believe they are special. No, humans ARE NOT special and if you get caught in the forrest at night, you are FOOD, just like chicken.

The GRASS will cover you if you lie down long enough...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

67. not all religious people think people are special

in that all things are sacred "o wakhan alay, wakhan aloe" as is sone in a Lakota pipe honoring song. I think it far more interesting and stimulating to see ourselves as a PART of everything, with our place, just as everything else has a place, and is also sacred. Go out and commune with nature spirits, and your concept of yourself is forever altered.....

[muryan]

47. thats an incredible quote

and im not surprised that his grave is vandalized. Ive grown up around the biggest christian hippocrits imaginable and that is something they would probably do as well. Regardless, thats a great quote and your great great gpa was a very intelligent man.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

56. Delete

Lured once again into an old thread....

[BrokenBeyondRepair]

65. i like that ;-)

[TallahasseeGrannie]

3. Okay I don't understand

how number four is a myth. Wouldn't the opposite of it be: Atheists know there is no God since they can prove He doesn't exist?

Now, be gentle. Coming up with the opposite of a statement is a big stretch for my dominant right brain. The rest of the 10 seem clear enough to me.

[Proud_Democratt]

6. #4 would be debatable for me as well..

No one could possibly know for sure. Most dictionary definitions will tell you that Atheists lack the belief in a higher power.

[Goblinmonger]

8. That's OK grannie,

that's why we're here to help you :P I believe that is there because:
1. it is a fallacy to ask someone to prove a negative, and
2. most atheists that I know feel that atheism is the null hypothesis and the burden falls on those making the POSITIVE claim to have the burden of proof (you can think of a courtroom analogy if it helps: the state has to prove guilt, the defense doesn't have to prove jack unless they are making an affirmative defense like insanity, self-defense, etc.)

[Igel]

10. It's not a fallacy to ask somebody to prove a negative.

In calculus we proved a negative every now and again perfectly well. We'd show that some solution is unique by proving that every other solution is false, proving, in other words, that there was no other solution. If that's not 'proving a negative' enough, for some things I remember proving that no solution was possible, and that therefore they had no solution. It's just damned difficult to prove a negative. It either involves exceptionless premises, which is what you get in math and some other fields; or you have to show that something doesn't hold true for each and every token of X, the problem being making sure you've looked at each and every token.

In science, the null hypothesis is indeed the lack of a creator. Even if it's not correct, it's still a damned useful hypothesis. But every hypothesis rests upon assumptions, and a different set of assumptions yields a different null hypothesis. (I've gone round and round in discussions with psychologists about language, linguists and psychologists make different assumptions and therefore sometimes have different null hypotheses, leading to proposing different assumptions and interpreting results differently.)

[Goblinmonger]

11. But the proof of a negative

in those instances is pretty specific to mathematical theory. I would argue that by showing every other solution but one doesn't work is not PROVING a negative but proving the positive by eliminating all other variables (which is the same, plus one, for proving there is not solution). Prove there are no unicorns. Well, I could gather up every life form on the planet and one by one toss them out of my fence and document what each animal was. When there were no unicorns I would have proved there are no unicorns. But I have done that, in essence, by proving what exactly there IS in the world which is proving the positive.

I have a masters in communication and teach high school English, so I know ALL the problems that occur when you get all of those people involved in discussions of reality. But if we break down the existence of a creator/god to the bare, logical minimum, atheism is the null hypothesis.

Thanks for the math examples. I like hearing different perspectives.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

13. Okay, so then it would go something like this:

Using the current standards of science as the framework, there has been no scientific proof of the existence of God..or the supernatural, or however it would be worded?

And then, of course, the concept of faith comes into play, which is not based on the standards of science.

I think I get it.

[Dorian Gray]

24. I hear what you are saying here...

But I do have to wonder if you and I were in a discussion, and you came out of the blue and said "There is no God!," wouldn't I have the right to ask you to prove that to me? If I didn't make ANY claims in said discussion, wouldn't the onus be upon the one making claims to prove his position?

Otherwise, I see your point, and in the general state of the world, where we are all just existing, it's not up to you to prove there is no God. And, if approached by Christians, particularly those who might want to convert you, the onus DEFINITELY would be on them to prove that there is a God.

(Does that make sense?)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

68. Of course a lot of this is based upon your definition of God

One thing that I have often seen in discussions of this nature is a tacit assumtion that by "God" one means a supernatural being seperate from onesself, often having powers to reward or condemn rather capriciously. The problem with that is not all religious people have this concept of God. Even as a young child, I remember my Methodist preacher saying "God is a spirit, and we should worship Him in spirit and in truth." I understood from this that God was of a different essence than the flesh and bones of humanity-and yet if we were to worship Him in spirit, then that meant whatever spirit was, we were that too. That we were to worship Him in truth meant all misperceptions must be swept away. So for me, even when I was a Christian, there was no seperation.

In later life, my God concept changed to realize that there is nothing BUT God-God being all things, all thoughts, all seeds of thoughts, even the emptiness between atoms. Recent scientific studies have indicated that subatomic particles can somehow communicate instantaneously, even when they are seperated; that the thoughts of scientists seem to have an effect on particles; that there are forces and fields of energy that mystics have talked about for years and that scientists (Valerie Hunt, UCLA) have shown to exist. If nothing else, these studies show that there is more to be discovered;it could also be argued that such studies hint that at least one God concept might be yet proven scientifically.

[JerseygirlCT]

28. And to whom would that claim need to be made?

I don't have to prove my beliefs to anyone. They are mine; that's all that's needed. I don't seek to persuade you to my way of thinking, so I don't feel any burden at all to "prove" something that cannot be proven anyway.

And I do think the reverse is in effect as well. Unless you are seeking to persuade me to atheism, then I don't need you to prove you are correct. You couldn't do that, either.

It's a choice. I'm quite content with mine, and quite content for you to have your own.

[pnwmom]

63. But can atheists PROVE that the null hypothesis is the more applicable?

No.

Perhaps that's why you said "most atheists that I know FEEL."

Also, it may be a fallacy to think that someone can prove a negative.
But that doesn't mean that it is a fallacy to ASK SOMEONE to prove a negative.

It's a request that cannot be fulfilled, or an unreasonable request, or it may be a trick question.

But it's not a fallacy.

It's a request.

:P

[Quantess]

18. good call.

No one can prove "god" (whatever that means) exists or does not exist, given our current technology.

The spiritual inkling I call "god" may or may not be what anyone else calls "god". I label myself an atheist/agnostic, because I don't ascribe to any religion, although I sometimes have a spiritual inclination.

[NMMNG]

12. My best friend pulled # 8 and #10 on me recently

"It's better to believe and have it not be true than not believe and go to hell."

So I'm supposed to pretend I believe--to lie--just to appease god? It wouldn't work anyway. Once you no longer believe you can't go back to believing unless some proof comes along to change your mind, and that hasn't happened yet.


And #10 is easily refuted. I quoted George Washington and John Adams (from the Treaty of Tripoli)for one:

"The United States is in no way founded upon the Christian religion"

[CrispyQ]

14. Regarding Myth #2 & #8

Myth #2: "Atheists have no morals, since they don't believe in God"

This one really burns me, cuz here's the thing. I don't need my ethics spelled out for me by a 'supreme' being, a priest, or any other being for that matter. I know what is right & what is wrong. Even if a person chooses a pre-defined ethical code, if you believe in free will, it comes down to each moment & will you follow the code you have chosen or not?



Myth #8: "If atheists are right, then religious people are wasting their time, but at least they're happy. No harm in that! If religious people are right, then atheists are going to hell. It seems logical that atheists should become religious just to be safe."

I don't need the motivation of reward or the fear of punishment to do what's right. I choose to do what's right because it's the right thing to do. If I choose not to do what's right it's because I sold out my ethics; I lowered my standards. Only I can deal with that.

[Proud_Democratt]

15. You said...

"It seems logical that atheists should become religious just to be safe."


Then Atheists wouldn't be Atheistic, would they? It seems to me, this is the doctrine that many people cling to...."playing it safe", "just in case of......".

[CrispyQ]

16. ???

I didn't say that. It was listed in your original post.

But I agree that people tend to play it safe. I also think they fear insignificance. The thought that there is no meaning to life, that there is no grand creator who cares for them personally, that this life is it, is very depressing to many people. So what do they do? They spend the time they do have, their here-&-now time, thinking about some fantasy afterlife. :crazy:

[Proud_Democratt]

17. My bad..that was myth #8..

I need glasses.:wtf:

[politrix]

20. Yup.

"The thought that there is no meaning to life, that there is no grand creator who cares for them personally, that this life is it, is very depressing to many people."

To Human BEINGS.


But, to SPIRITS being as human as they can be, there is no fear.

[Klapaucius]

21. Had my ex use that one....

This, of course was without her realizing that what was important in my life was her first, then my son, and then me. She put god above all of us. She came from a small ward in a small backwoods town in Oregon. They had their own twisted version of what comprised proper beliefs in the faith. It took me several years to get her to the point where she would think for herself and evaluate for herself. She finally realized how poorly she had treated me because of her faith, but it really didn't change her that much. Up to her if she chooses to continue to wallow in ignorance.

Thankfully, a friend introduced me to someone several months ago, and it's a breath of fresh air. She's beautiful, talented, and doesn't have that sort of hang up. She's what is most important in my world these days. We believe in doing good by doing what is right, it doesn't have to be motivated by a fear of hellfire or something like that. I take joy in every day that I get to spend with her, in every moment that she's with me. She inspires me to be a better person, and I'm happier than I've been in years. Oddly enough, I've never had anyone treat me as kindly as she does, it took me a little time to get used to that. She doesn't need a religious motivation or duty to do that. It's what she feels moved to do, and it's people like her that make me feel like there is some hope in the world.

I also think that there may be an unintended consequence of this administration, that perhaps will show in time. By wrapping themselves in the flag and wearing a cross while committing the most hypocritical acts I've ever personally been witness to, I think that not only will the Republicans lose their power, but they will have tarnished the Christian faith by its association with them. I think we'll see a greater increase in the number of people who may be considered secular. It may take a while, but seeing the utter insanity and thirst for power, being driven by folks claiming to be Christians, is going to turn people away from their faith. The only way, I think, for that not to happen, will be for those in the center to reign in the extremists. So far, I don't see it happening, and I think it's liable to get worse before it gets any better. I think that people are not going to see it until it smacks them right in the face. I hope it doesn't take that long for the realization to occur, but I don't hold out any hope for it happening during my lifetime. Frankly, the sheer and utter glee that seems to animate these folks when talking about using nukes scares the ever-loving crap outta me. I really think that some of these folks are trying to bring about the biblical Armageddon. Since people tend to paint broad swaths of people with the same brush, those of you in the Christian faith ( in particular ) need to ask yourselves this..... How are we going to be painted, if these end-times believers do something rash in the belief that it will hasten Armageddon? I don't think you'll be looked kindly upon by history, or possibly, by the survivors ( if something untoward happens ). Now is the time for you to reign in your brothers or disavow them publically, because if there's a backlash, it will be huge.



K.

[CrispyQ]

22. I think you are spot on about the backlash

this is going to have on both the Chrisitian religion and the Republican party.

And as for this statement, "Frankly, the sheer and utter glee that seems to animate these folks when talking about using nukes scares the ever-loving crap outta me." I couldn't agree more! My granfather worked in the county courthouse & I can remember when they posted signs telling people where the areas were that could be used as shelters. In school we had drills where we crouched under our desks. I remember being really scared back then. I am more fearful now than I was then. And it's not just the zealots & their desire for Armageddon that fuels this. I think Cheney & Rumsfeld would love to test one of their new bunker busters on a live population. These guys are full of hubris & drunk on power.


Cool about you & you're new lady. And welcome to DU! :hi:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

69. yes

which is why the goal of the Sufi is to die before death.....

[Scribe]

32. How do I play?

How do I convince myself to believe impossible things? I'd like to be safe too. It makes sense but how do I play? Every time I try to pretend, I break out in laughter.

[JerseygirlCT]

29. You might be surprised

that many believers agree with you on both counts.

In fact, I was having just such a discussion the other night with my young child -- explaining that I do not believe in "hell" and that we ought to do what's right because it's right, not from fear of God's punishment or to earn a reward. Doing good is its own reward. And we're believers.

[otherlander]

39. The second one is probably the most idiotic

myth I have ever heard. Fundie values kind of remind me of Wal-Mart values, but instead of getting three gallons of milk for the cost of one, you get three wars for the cause of one.

[hedgehog]

23. Regarding myth 8,

I happen to believe that atheists are not going to hell but are in for a big surprise none-the-less. Don't worry about it though, it'll be a nice surprise.

As for being a Christian out of fear of hell, I'd say anyone who does that doesn't understand the nature of Christianity or hell.

[Proud_Democratt]

25. Coming back from death as a cow or dog would be a

surprise also!

[hedgehog]

26. Check with me on the other side.

I can wait.

[Proud_Democratt]

49. We've been waiting...but nothing ever comes back to tell

us about it.

[Goblinmonger]

30. That's kind of unfair

I mean, if you are right, I'll be the first one to say "You got me. I was wrong about this whole god thing." But if I'm right, you'll never have to say that to me. :P

[JerseygirlCT]

27. I don't see why #4 would be classified as myth

You cannot either prove or disprove the existence of God.

You can choose to believe in God's existence or the belief that there is no God. Either way, there's no proof to be had. Either way, it's a choice.

[Proud_Democratt]

31. You do have a point there.

How can one prove the existance or non-existance?

[Random_Australian]

35. You are not actually allowed to.

Either way.

[Sam1]

33. Pascal's Wager

Myth #8 is nothing more then another form of Pascal's Wager.

[Random_Australian]

34. OoooOOoh! Pascal! Explain his wager, thanks!

:D:7

[Silent3]

36. Of course, now we know...

...that Pascal lost. :evilgrin:

[Sam1]

38. Two Forms of Pascal's Wager and a Comment

"If you believe, and God exists, you gain everything. If you disbelieve, and God exists, you lose everything."

"It makes more sense to believe in God than to not believe. If you believe, and God exists, you will be rewarded in the afterlife. If you do not believe, and He exists, you will be punished for your disbelief. If He does not exist, you have lost nothing either way. "

However, Which of the many gods is the one to believe in? This is especially vexing because respect for other gods or their believers is not an attitude that any god endorses.

[unschooler]

51. Welcome, Sam1! During Pascal's time, you were also likely to be

burned at the stake if you (publicly) disbelieved. Guess that would be a wager worth worrying about!

[Sam1]

54. While your chances of

getting burned at the stake in this day and age in america are not great you can still get your church burned out. Not only unbelief but also wrong belief could get you done in back then.

[Derailer]

37. I think Myth #7 is not entirely unfounded IMO

the concept of atheism has always struck me as retaliatory and more or less driven by spite. I mean really, what is the position "there is no God" doing other than generating the extremely predictable result of riling up the faithful?

Now you can't sit here and tell me its goverened by some conscientious ethic along the lines of "I can never yield in my disbelief because to do so would be compromising my integrity"

Where is the integrity in dedicating yourself to vehemently denying something that even the majority of "true believers" admit can't be directly, tangibly demonstrated to exist?

There are a billion+1 reasons that religion fucking sucks, but I don't see how getting drawn into an absurd battle of wits along the lines of "I'm intellectually superior because I don't believe that crap" amounts to more than smug self-congratualatory tripe

Its been said before and restated every which way possible but religion is analagous to modern medicine: it assuages the symptoms of our shitty lives but offers no cure. Your response is to begrude the victims their panacea and tell me how much better you are than they becuase you see through the bullshit???

If one considers this whole charade as an obvious Hegelian dialectic its sad commentary indeed, making atheists out to be no less dupes than the god-fearing troglodytes they look down on.

[charlie]

40. Whoa, there

The "concept" of atheism was foisted on me in my tender years when it became obvious that I wasn't like the other kids. I didn't embrace atheism, I was branded an atheist. There's nothing retaliatory or reactive about my position, in fact in my case, the opposite is true. I also know that I'm not blessed with a superior intellect or special protection against credulity by just being what I am.

You're confusing manners with a worldview.

[Proud_Democratt]

41. This is NOT a charade...it's life!.... Scared of change?

NOT all people are religious, heterosexual, caucasian, middle-class, SUV driving puppets.
There are a wide variety of beliefs out there outside your little box. Guess what America??? There are others, and there will be more of these "other" beliefs moving to your local neighborhood!!!

[Proud_Democratt]

42. You question why

My answer........

My Atheism is not by choice. A mixture of logic and common sense are my guides.
I will not bow down or kneel to something that is NOT tangible, nor will I PRETEND to do so, as a "show of respect" to the "religious majority". I expect no one to deny their faith....why should I hide mine???
What the majority does is their business.....just stay the fuck out of mine.

[beam me up scottie]

43. "the concept of atheism has always struck me as retaliatory and

more or less driven by spite."

Thank you, sir.

A brilliant example, even though apparently posted in ignorance, of just the kind of bigotry and stunning stupidity atheists have to contend with.

:applause:

Can a get a rAmen ?

[charlie]

44. Heeey!

I'm pleased to see you're back. Hope all is well with you :hi:

[beam me up scottie]

45. Glad to be here!

Rested, loaded for bear and full of piss and vinegar, as my mom used to say.

:hi:

[charlie]

46. Uh-oh

I'd better go replenish our stock of salve for chewed butts :D

[unschooler]

52. Welcome, Derailer. Are you speaking of atheism itself or of

atheist "proselytizing," so to speak? I would never dream of trying to rile up anybody. How about you?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

55. Adios, bigot.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

58. So those who don't believe in any deities do it out of spite?

Did the idea that they simply don't believe, and would continue to be nonbelievers even if it suddenly became "cool" to be atheist, occur to you?

:crazy:

[LiberalVoice]

59. ROFL

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? I mean seriously. Do you actually believe that bullshit?

"what is the position "there is no God" doing other than generating the extremely predictable result of riling up the faithful?"

Hmmm? Could it be that someone would say there is no god for reasons other then to rile up the faithful? Use your fucking head man.

"Where is the integrity in dedicating yourself to vehemently denying something that even the majority of "true believers" admit can't be directly, tangibly demonstrated to exist?"

Wow. Where do I start with this lovely little statement? I mean it doesn't even make sense. Look at the world around you. War, poverty, genocide, global warming. Atheists didn't do this. YOU DID. Religion is a disease on this planet. The sooner people realise what a farse religion truely is the sooner we can start fixing the only home we(and by we I mean every living thing on this planet) have.

I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your stupid ass statement. :puke:

[Random_Australian]

60. Aw! I missed the troll! I am an atheist just to spite believers all right!

[martymar64]

61. I don't hate Christians, they scare me!

Why? Ask Madeline Murray O'Hare and her family. That's what christians do to atheists in this country. When the ovens in the camps get fired up, guess who's going in first? That's right! Atheists! Ask most christians, they'll tell you the same, even otherwise progressive ones.

[SPKrazy]

62. My Oven Doesn't Cook Anyone

and I will fight for anyone who tries to kill others in our country because of their beliefs or non beliefs

[Brentos]

48. Pretty cool!

Myth 1 : "Atheists are all the same"
--Totally a myth, along with "Christians are all the same"

Myth 2 : "Atheists have no morals, since they don't believe in God"
--Totally a myth, along with "Christians are immoral because they don't follow their own beliefs!"

Myth 3 : "Atheists believe in evolution, but that doesn't answer as many
questions as creationism"
--Total myth, especially from a Christian evolutionist (punctuated equilibrium branch)

Myth 4 : "Atheists cannot know there is no God, since you cannot prove he doesn't exist"
--I don't buy this one. Just as "Christians cannot know there is a God, since you cannot prove he does exist". I would see it as rationalization (not in the negative sense, but in the "rational mind" sense) vs faith. Neither has all the facts.

Myth 5 : "Atheists seek to remove religion from society, and to force all
people to be atheists"
--Only some do, as some Christians strive to do the opposite. Bad on both extremes.

Myth 6 : "Atheists are so closed-minded, they can't see that miracles
happen every day!"
--I don't believe that for a second...but they probably do not use the word "miracle", I would imagine.

Myth 7 : "Atheists are pushing a negative sentiment, and have a dreary
life"
--Only some, but I've seen worse Christians.

Myth 8 : " If atheists are right, then religious people are wasting their time, but at least they're happy. No harm in that! If religious people are right, then atheists are going to hell. It seems logical that atheists should become religious just to be safe."
--No, an atheist should only study religion if they are truly interested/curious, etc. Just as a Christian should listen to what the atheist has to say if they are truly interested/curious, etc.

Myth 9 : "There are no such things as atheists" a.k.a. "There are no
atheists in foxholes"
--It is sad if anyone truly believes this.

Myth 10 : "This country was founded by Christians, on Christian values,
and should therefore be a Christian country".
--Well, it wasn't founded on atheist principals either. But, it was set to allow for tolerance of religious expression and lack thereof, no elimination of(mainly the Christian sort, as that what they mainly were).

Great post! I could see A-Moses getting off his lounge chair at the base of the mountain, beer in one hand, stone tablets in the other! :-)

[Proud_Democratt]

50. Great reply!

Love the replies to each myth!

[Brentos]

53. Thanks!

Thanks proud! I truly think we are all more alike then we are different, and that's what I hope we can all learn more about here. I've sure learned a lot!

[SPKrazy]

57. For A Second I Thought You Were Back Proud

but alas, just someone kicking up this old thread to show us a dead person.

these myths are just that, I've not heard several of these before.

interesting

[pnwmom]

64. Myth 4 is not a myth.

Atheists cannot prove that existence is limited to what we perceive through our senses or machines or deduce through our logic.
Theists cannot prove the opposite.

God, by definition, is beyond the perceived world and beyond logic.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

66. Well, 3, 4 & 6 are correct, and 10 has one small element of truth.

3 and 6 are perfectly true.

4 is too, arguably, but given the absence of any evidence for a God, that one doesn't exist does not seem like an unreasonable working hypothesis.

5 also has an element of truth to it, albeit a small one. Many atheists would *like* to see all religion removed from society. However, I've never met one who advocates doing that coercively

10 is right inasmuch as virtually all the first settlers from Europe to America were Christians of one variety or another (albeit slightly odd varieties by modern standards in many cases), but wrong in all the other particulars

1,2,6,7,8 and 9 are all completely wrong, as far as I can see.

8 in particular deserves to be singled out for the error of assuming that the only two possibilities are "atheists right" and "Christians/Muslims/Jews right", and not e.g. a malignant God.

[Exiled in America]

70. #4 is not a myth. Other than that, pretty good