Morgan Freeman Good Luck

Yes, and killing one person for being religious is also one too many. Also, how do you know how many people the Spanish Inquisition killed specifically for heresy. There were people on trial in secular courts for other crimes, who would say something blasphemous in the court room so the Spanish Inquisition would try them instead - they blasphemed to get a fairer trial.

Communist dictators and the people who worked under them, they had henchmen, soldiers and employees - some of whom would've shared their views. Look up "The League of Militant Atheists." That was thing in Soviet Russia. It's a fact that the atrocities people like you love to hold over the heads of us religious people are also found just as much - if not moreso - among the non-religious. You give us too little credit, or give yourselves too much. Not every atheist is a communist, but practically every communist is atheist, and even then some didn't stoop to these violent levels. From this and previous statements of yours, you come across as the "tar all Christians with the same brush" type person. I hope I'm wrong, but if I'm right, it would be hypocritical for you to get bothered when you think I'm tarring all atheists with the same brush - though I'm not.

Stalin was atheist, Pol Pot was atheist (he made religious affiliation in Cambodia a capital offence), as was Mao Zedong. Remember when I did my "No True Atheists/Scotsman" post with Richard Dawkins?

I'm glad you don't paint us all with the same brush. I disagree with atheism and don't paint all atheists with the same brush. I will say as wonderful as some atheists are (including two of my relatives), if they truly became Christian they would be even better. I thought that you were the one who disagreed when I accused Sam Harris of the no true scotsman fallacy in a meme on this site. Then when I couldn't find anything of Sam saying that, I deleted it in case I was wrong and made one of Dawkins, who did say that. I now regret deleting that Sam Harris meme, because that had the discussion record.

Leave out the 20th century? That's quite the cherry-picking. There haven't been atheists in large numbers before then or few - if any - in positions of authority. If I allow this cherry-picking, I'll give you two examples - The French Revolution and the actions of author Marquis de Sade. Due to separation from God resulting from sin, for many atheism is the natural state of a person in fallen human nature - just like a shoddy immune system is part of the natural state in a person who has inherited HIV from their parents.

Well I'll leave the Dawkins and Harris thing at that then.

As for Marquis De Sade, the man was violent (including to six children) and a sexual predator. He sexually abused numerous people in accordance with his outlook on life and to try and encourage it - which through appealing to desire and gratification in his actions and writings that are considered obscene even today - there are people in the porn industry that would call him horrifically perverse. This included prostitutes (what did he do to prostitutes that got him prosecuted in the 18th century when prostitutes didn't enjoy the legal protections that have now?) More information on that can be found here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquis_de_Sade#Scandals_and_imprisonment

So you can tar all Christians and Christianity with the same brush because of the Spanish Inquisition, but I couldn't tar all atheists and atheism with the same brush because of Soviet Russia if I wanted to? That would be a double standard, and this sort of argument is ad hominem anyway.