I believe that's a form of Deism, but I'd have to do some digging. . .

IMHO you don't "believe" in things like the Big Bang or evolution. You accept them based on the evidence for their existence.

There is no evidence that a supreme being created physics and then stepped aside, so that is something that you could "believe" in if you wanted to.

Stalin specifically killed people of faith because of their faith, I can't see any other reason than that was due to him being a atheist.

I don't know of any doctrine of communism that directs the killing of Christians. As a matter of fact there are many Christian communes.

You guys want to have it both ways, when a Christian does something wrong it is because they are a Christian but when a atheist does something wrong it's because of their political beliefs.

Well, it sort of has to be. You can't pin it on a non-existent thing. An atheist (by definition) has no religious belief. As such, it's a bit difficult to blame any action of theirs on such a belief (since it doesn't exist). Maybe academic, but I'd say the argument that Stalin killed religious people as a matter of political gain is probably more likely than "because" he happened to be an atheist. There's a distinction.

Evidence of their existence? Come on man, we just don't have the knowledge to do that. There are still parts of the way the world works we don't know, and we can only calculate back to a certain point of "what if". Its sheer belief.

Google "God of the Gaps". It's a phenomenon inherent to the limits of scientific understanding.

There is so much evidence for evolution that there is no question as to whether it has occurred or not. There is also a lot of evidence for the Big Bang. It is far from "sheer belief". Unless you are essentially ignorant of the evidence. And I'm not saying you are.

If you'd like to review the evidence for evolution or the Big Bang, I will be glad to point you in the right direction.

If you want to see evidence that a supreme being created physics, you're on your own. I'm not aware of any.

Well, since you asked, its called abortion clinics. How? The lack of a divine deity with an absolute measurement of right or wrong creates "situational ethics" which justify whatever you feel like doing. Hence, a civilized form of anarchy arrives in the mind of modern man and he decides its OK to kill if....
Oh BTW, Communism justified killing God-believing people to rid the world of the "defect". Sorta like when Muslim extremists kill innocent people because they are infidels.

Communism in that case, was just a tool to rest supreme control. It then failed to be communism. Although many of the followers of the foundations of many "communist" countries where communist, what it evolved into was lost.

My understanding of communism, is everyone working together for the good of the whole. The early Christian church at Jerusalem would be a good example of communism. Also the Puritan settlers in Boston.(Who where from all I know where very harsh, but you had the option of leaving their society, they didn't force you).

When you combine atheism, humanism, and communism, you get a big mess.

The difference between Communism and the early Christian Church is that in the early church many voluntarily sold their property and donated the proceeds for the good of their fellow Christians. Communism force everyone to give up their rights to ownership.

sorry but wrong
read acts about the man and wife who withheld
some of their cash from the sale of their property
voluntarily it was not the church expected and demanded all they had

so much so that a man, Ananias along with his wife, who withheld some of the money he gained from selling a material possession is condemned by Peter, Acts Acts 5:3-4:

“But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? And after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? Thou has not lied unto men, but unto God.”

The failure to give all to the Commune was a lie, not to men but to God. Ananias’ reaction was to fall dead on the spot!

I'm not here to argue who is better. My statement is there is nothing wrong with atheism. Just as there is nothing wrong with religion. There are plenty of good in both kinds. I don't understand why people start attacking atheists by saying we have communistic ideas. As an atheist, I just don't practice anything remotely religious. That's all. No organization. Now, when religion tries to roadblock me from my own choices that's where we have problems. I don't roadblock or care to roadblock a religious persons choice so tell me why do you want to impose your beliefs on to me?

+1!

Reading the whole story (starting with 4:32 and continuing through 5:11) suggests a more nuanced interpretation.

1) None of the believers was required to sell their property and donate it for the common good. There is no suggestion of coercion or of the members being obligated to stay in the group. The donations were free-will.

2) Acts 4:32 specifically says "All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had".

3) Now we come to Ananias and Sapphira who apparently counted themselves among the believers. Verse 2 says: "With his (Ananias's) wifes full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brough the rest and put it at the apostles' feet". So they counted themselves among the believers, and outwardly acted as if they were fully and willfully donating their possessions as the others had -- when in fact they were doing otherwise.

4) Peter sums up their sins this way: "Didn't it belong to you before it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men, but to God." So the sin was not the fact that he kept back his possession. Peter clearly points out that they were his possessions - "At (Ananias's) disposal" and there was no sin in that. But rather that he made a display of donating his goods as the rest had, when in fact they had done less. Their sin was the lie, not the failure to donate.

I like to consider myself more agnostic than atheist, but I am as right wing as the day is long. I couldn't be more anti-communist. I am a heartless capitalist!

I see your point but respectfully have to disagree with the assertion that "there is nothing wrong with religion". There's EVERYTHING wrong with religion. It's an outdated convention relied upon by those that are typically either indiscriminate or desperate for some meaning and purpose in their lives. Maybe you're talking about what I call "sprituality" (personally-held supernatural/metaphysical beliefs), but since you called it "religion", I have to respond to that. FWIW I've got no problem with people believing what they want (spirituality), but I've got every problem in the world with religion. It's outlived its usefulness, it creates far more problems than it solves and it divides and destroys far more than it unites and creates. I have little use for it.

I'm not a communist either (quite the opposite) but I also think the idea Stalin had to get rid of religion as an organized institution maybe wasn't such a bad one.

Stalin's reasons for wanting to get rid of religion were quite different than yours, Jeff.