Yes. The Problem Of Christianity, Its Fellow Monotheistic Faiths Is That Too Many Of Its Adherents Act Like Materialists

It is objected to that I pointed out in the update to my short post of yesterday that materialists who view humans and other living beings as mere objects, will, when desired, treat people and other living beings as objects to whom they have no binding moral obligations.  The objection is that those who profess religious belief will often do the same in violation of what their religions teach as moral obligations.  That so many religious believers act as if they believe what materialism holds would, I think, show more the seductions of a materialist attitude towards other people and living beings and why that is a problem.  The members of religions that teach that those binding moral obligations to treat people and our fellow creatures well, who violate that are violating nothing about materialism.  That they can knock over a hurdle into depravity, at times, proves that anything that encourages them to do so is dangerous and evil.  And materialism encourages them to believe that those hurdles that religion and even any "ethical" system that atheists have proposed replace real morals are merely delusions, social conventions, things that, if they can get away with if and when they want to do so, they are under no moral obligation to observe or practice.  They are also told that, if they can get away with it, they need fear no kind of ultimate consequence for themselves.

That you atheists can claim the fact that some religious people act as if they believe materialism is true shows that religion is bad but that atheist-materialism is superior shows that your thinking is muddled.  The biggest problem with Christianity is that too many Christians act like materialists, not that they act too much in accord with the teachings of Jesus, the Law and the Prophets.

That's not the only large discrepancy between various claims rampant among atheists. For example, there are those most cluelessly self-declared "free thinkers" who, due to the requirements of their materialist ideology, must eventually deny the possibility of  free thought -since all things, including thought must be due to physical  causation and determined - will deny that free thought is real AND THEY DO SO IN THE NAME OF "FREE THOUGHT".

And those discrepancies and hypocrisies are on, perhaps, fullest display when materialism is expressed politically and socially.

I have mentioned how absurd it gets when such as the old-line Stalinists howled that their rights to promote Stalinism here were violated, how their First and Fifth amendment rights to promote Stalinism were violated - as they sometimes were - the man they championed not only violated those rights, he violated all of the rights of almost everyone during his reign of terror, racking up what might actually stand as a record of mass murder, terror and oppression.  If you think that kind of thing is in the past, as mentioned before, you can find their like all over the lefty magazines, letter columns, blog and other comment threads right now.  I had some dumb bell going on and on about how "class struggle" was the only way to gain rights and equality when "class struggle" aka Marxism has been given the test of time in reality instead of sociological-economic theorizing and speculation.  Marxism leads, not to freedom, equality and a decent life, it leads to mass murder and terror, it leads to the enslavement of almost all except the elites (though those elites must often live in fear of their fellow members of the elite) it leads, in the fullness of time, to the abandonment of the pantomime of state socialism for the most vicious forms of oligarchic, plutocratic capitalism on steroids.  It leads to the withering of the state as Marx predicted but only the state as  any kind of guarantor of equality, freedom, civil comity and decency but not as a ruthless machine of extraction on behalf of the elites.

Marx, for whatever feelings he claimed to have had, was a materialist whose materialist system can't escape the inescapable logical end of materialism.  Even with the best of intentions - intentions that are generally in short supply among those who can achieve power especially through revolution - Marxism is bound to devolve into an amoral horror show just as Nazism is.  In the Putin generation of post-Marxist former-Marxists, we see that Marxists will be quite capable of promoting Nazism in the West to destroy democracy which is the only real enemy of that kind of depravity.  Marxism turns out to be not only compatible with Nazism - as, perhaps, presaged in the Hitler-Stalin pact - it is its equivalent.  All materialism will be, it's definitely not what will prevent depravity because it has nothing in it to do that and everything in it which encourages depravity.  That is especially true when a belief in natural selection and its descendant ideologies are mixed in and sold as having the immovable reliability of science.  Calling Marxism "science" was one of its big selling points, As I've pointed out before, Rudolph Hess said that Nazism was merely "applied biology".

Liberalism will never get anywhere until the Marxists and other materialists are dumped because they will always end up doing things and insisting on things that are not only counterproductive, they are incompatible with the belief that we are all equally endowed with rights and the moral obligation to practice the respect for those rights and the promotion of the welfare of everyone.  Liberalism will only work if materialism is seen for the enemy of liberalism that it is.