Is narcissistic, rude, violent and irrational now the norm?

Religious celebration of violence

The dangerous content of the "inspired word" of god.

Three months...

Three months, we are only three months away from this cruelty resurfacing after a crash or a theological takeover.

The Malleus Maleficarum was not a mistake

If you doubt the dangers, the direct dangers, presented by the texts of the religionists then I suggest you do a little reading on the manual of operations called the Malleus Maleficarum.

Between 1487 and 1520, twenty editions of the Malleus were published, and another sixteen editions were published between 1574 and 1669. Popular accounts suggest that the extensive publishing of the Malleus Maleficarum in 1487 launched centuries of witch-hunts in Europe. Estimations of deaths have varied widely. According to MacCulloch, the Malleus was one of several key causes of the witch craze, along with popular superstition, jealousy of witches' knowledge from humanist scholars, and tensions created by the Reformation.

Deaths caused and torture directed by religious mandate...

Tens of thousands of people were executed for witchcraft in Europe and the American colonies. Although it is not possible to ascertain the exact number, modern scholars estimate around 40–50,000. Common methods of execution for convicted witches were hanging, drowning and burning. Burning was often favored, particularly in Europe, as it was considered a more painful way to die. Prosecutors in the American colonies generally preferred hanging in cases of witchcraft.

I think I'm going to be sick

What kind of sick piece of garbage would make a video game like this? (Warning: *not* safe for work.)

Killing sprees: signs of a sick society?

Ft. Hood shooting one day, engineering firm the next.

Maybe it has something to do with our society being fucked up?

The nutty right: making the anti-state movement look bad

The left-wing has developed a tendency to lump any critics of the state in with conspiracy theorists, anti-Semites, survivalists, and right-wing extremists--a group I would label the "nutty right." The nutty right is full of extreme social conservatives and bigots who are willing to use violence to achieve their goals. While they are often labeled as being "anti-government," that's hardly the case. Most of them are more than happy to use the state to oppress the groups and activities they don't like. To lump fascists and National Socialists in with libertarians clearly does not make any sense.

The nutty right opposes the Federal Reserve, not for economic reasons or because it's an arm of the corporate state, but because they think it's run by some kind of evil Jewish conspiracy. The nutty right criticizes Israel, not for its war crimes or statism, but because they hate Jews (why Jews are responsible for what the Israeli state does remains a mystery). They deny the holocaust because they hate Jews and don't want to admit the brutal history of statism. They blow up gay bars, burn crosses on other people's property, and do all kinds of batshit crazy (and extremely unlibertarian) things.

It is best for libertarians to completely disassociate ourselves from these whackos. They may take some of the same positions, but they do so for completely different, kooky reasons, and end up making the positions themselves look kooky. They're not anti-statists; they're just morons.

Tu quoque

One of the lamest arguments (actually a fallacy) of religious apologists when confronted with atrocities done in the name of religion is to throw back the accusation at the opponent. It usually takes the form of bringing up supposedly atheistic regimes such as Stalin's Soviet Union or Nazi Germany (ignoring for the moment that the Nazi State wasn't "atheist"). The problem is, even if atheism is the cause of atrocities or worse atrocities, this doesn't address the point in the slightest.

The point being, of course, that religion has seemingly motivated violence, persecutions and killing (even though we are repeatedly informed by theologians and other religious apologists that religion is a necessary source of morality and that the god/gods of these religions is "good").  There is nothing in this particular charge against religion that says it is the sole cause of violence or persecution, but simply that it is a cause of such things, and that therefore it may be that its elimination would be all to the good. That is what the believer must address.

As to atheism, it is not in any way a worldview in and of itself, but just lack of belief in something (gods). Atheists as a group don't generally agree on much outside of that lack of belief, not even on the subject of materialism, which many wrongly assume is part of atheism. An officially atheist government, like the totalitarian Stalin regime, must therefore have something else behind its motivation to cruel actions than simple non-belief in a god (I know some will say that's all you need, following Dostoevsky, but the opposite is actually the case, i.e., if God exists and you are His follower, anything is permitted, including burning heretics at the stake or flying planes into the skyscrapers of the infidels). 

No, what you need is a collectivist faith, such as Marxism-Leninism (which even has its own holy scriptures) to commit such horrendous acts.