Why is it that atheists are so often left wing, and religious people right wing ? Isnt that a paradox?

Social Darwinism is not the theory of evolution and actually contradicts it. It was a Nazi misuse of science. As for the rest of it...I can't explain why Evangelicals have wielded themselves to fascists instead of Liberation Theology or something, like a reading on the New Testament would suggest. Other than that they tend toward authoritarianism and aren't very bright. I think atheists tend left wing because the right wing (in the US) openly denies they're human beings/citizens/deserve human rights and courts the religious vote. It's like being a black gay female Republican. Yeah, it's possible, but wow you'd have to really hate yourself. I don't think the trend is the same in other countries.

In the face of chaos, we seek to build order in our world and restore balance to our being. In the face of cruelty, we realize our capacity for compassion. In the face of hopelessness, we discover courage. The way the universe is the reason why we have come to be the way we are. What anyone likes, prefers, or how one feels, does not change how the universe works. That is an irrefutable fact of reality. Your entire misapprehension about Darwin's theory of evolution stems from your inadequate understanding of Darwin's theory and your erroneous linking of Evolution by Natural Selection to Social Darwinism. The phasing out of individual weakness is part of the process of evolution, but it is NOT the objective of evolution. The end game of evolution is about change and positive adaptation across the overall genetic makeup of the species so that the species as a whole may survive. Human evolution is not about the elimination of individual persons. Rather, it is about the selective elimination of defunct values, antiquated ideas and ineffectual systems in favor of new outlooks and fresh approaches that would benefit society and further the human cause. Contrary to your assertions, there is no inherent conflict between Darwin's evolutionary theory and the progressive liberal values of the left. Charles Darwin based his studies entirely on observations in the natural world. At no point did he make any reference to human society with his research or its conclusions. Social Darwinism is, quite simply put, an invention of religious hardliners to demonise Darwin's theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. Communism is atheistic only as far as belief in mainstream religions and mainstream gods go. In fact, Communism is almost like a monotheistic religion. The Communist State -> their church. The Party -> their clergy. Party Rules -> their dogma. The Party Leader (ie see Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il) -> their god We can thereby see how Communism, as a political movement, is not atheistic at its core. The reason why christianity is compatible with Republican values is because christianity is NOT consistent with the values of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ - 'If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.' 'No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will hold to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon' Denominational christianity - 'god wants you to be prosperous, and it is permissible to pursue wealth as long as you do not pursue it more than you would god' Republican - Capitalistic Jesus Christ - 'If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic.' Denominational christianity - 'An eye for an eye', 'righteous war' Republican - Support offensive military action and US military presence all over the world. Only two examples in a long list of differences between the values of Jesus Christ the man and the teacher, and the fundamentalist values of denominational christianity that herald Jesus Christ the psuedo deity. Feel free to look up the rest on your own.

for the moment i am just praising your question, very good one. What is reality? you better ask what is the truth? Whom of these people hold the truth and only the truth? you have to start to break down one by one and see whom is lying or telling the truth, not so easy of course. you have to become some kind of sherlock holmes lol i don't have time to answer this question, i myself have spend many years trying to answer it, i am not far i believe, but my answer is yet to be put together in a book i believe, it is all in my mind need to find time and place and will to write it down. let me say this: we all live a big lie, and humans need stories to get by, by believing in a story humans survive. i don't buy the actual story, and believe me, it is real and almost truthfully that is why it is such a good story, the story of humanity in present day, but also it is a very wicked story and the majority believes is pure reality, but it ain't and you have figure that out already. there is something odd. to not leave you just like that, i leave you a hint of what i believe. Darwin believed in God and was a churchgoer but also he found something that changed his world and the world, that many have said: Darwin had killed God, i believe in the right time Darwin has also helped to prove the existence of God not in present day but in future, sounds like a paradox? lol i know it does...

You have some excellent questions, thoughts, and points here. I haven't read the other responses, because I want to keep my response unfiltered. Atheists/Humanists: Can we agree they are basically the same, at least regarding belief about God? If so, then their value system is one that is supposedly not influenced by religion or faith in a supreme being: but rather it is influenced only by "pure," or what is thought to be pure, science. When I say science, I mean the study of everything terrestrial: nature and its systems, as well as man and his systems/history, including psychology, sociology, anthropology, etc. Philosophy and science are the "faiths" of atheists and humanists. Philosophy represents the search for meaning (of existence and purpose), while science represents a search for understanding and discovery of man's environment. In these two "faiths," the humanist/atheist finds reasons to support his or her decisions about how to relate to the world and the people in it. I think that, based on this alone, you could say that, without any influence from believers in a supreme being, the atheist or humanist would value life, possessions, and relationships from a standpoint of self-preservation. Even in the family and other "meaningful" relationships, the bottom-line goal would be self-serving. The only function of society would be to provide background and support for oneself: one's life, happiness, wealth, and health. Left-wing enthusiasts are typically very concerned for: civil rights, personal dignity, personal health/rights to care, and economic support in the pursuit of those things. I think this reveals not that left-wingers are really all that concerned about others, but how deeply concerned they are about self; it just has the appearance of being about others. When left-wingers use terms like: community, social awareness, village, interdependence, etc., they are talking about a network of support. But, I claim that this network of support, while seemingly about "us," only, is really about society being there for oneself: to provide for the humanist/atheist well-being, ultimately. Very Darwin, very survival-oriented, but it is thought, erroneously, to be "communal." Just an aside before I talk about right-wingers: Both groups are not as single-minded and uninfluenced by each other as they'd like to believe. Humanists and atheists have a moral/ethical code, but where did that come from? Religion. (Read C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity). The "faithful," (those who believe in a supreme being) can be very worldly, and are frequently motivated by self-preservation, but where does that fit in with their faith? They are influenced by not only their own human nature, but the result of being part of a society that trains them to follow the rules of the "animal kingdom" and is actually a corruption of their faith. The only person that strikes me as a pure representative of her faith, within society, was Mother Teresa. She and Jesus are a lot alike in their approach to the "problem" of man, and his relationship to himself, God, and the world. So, yeah, a lot of Christians are professing faith as their motivator, without actually living that out. So are a lot of Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, Hindi, etc... Well; I actually think that's where I stop for now. Ball's in your court! Thanks for making me think! BTW: Bet you can't guess in which group I belong?

Religion is often affiliated with the right-wing because the right-wing is very conservative, upholding the laws of heterosexual marriage (which is the only marriage that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam support) and banning abortion (which is supported especially by Christians, who believe in the sanctity of life). Those are the two major factors in society that the left-wing is tolerant of, which is why those who are religious tend to be right-wingers. Atheists tend to believe that since there is no governing authority of morality, that homosexuality should be tolerated. And because humans, by their logic, have no actual purpose in living, it is perfectly fine to abort an unborn fetus. And these silly people that are being negative against my comment need to do some self-examination. God knows hardly anyone does these days... they're too busy judging others to judge themselves.