@Nobodyyouknow
Except every claim made in the OP is NOT correct. You simply agree with it, and that's not the same thing.
Theists think that they can impose their ways of life on others because of a belief that is completely un-provable to the rest of us.
Broad, overreaching generalization. The broad majority of theists couldn't care less about imposing their way of life on others.
You have a history of fascism
A criticism that, much like the others in this list, is better laid at the feet of humanity itself rather than solely placed upon the shoulders of theists. This charge usually arises from a lack of understanding regarding the philosophical underpinnings of fascism. Fascism developed as a futurist reaction to the failings of communism, largely by former communists. Mussolini, along with many of the fascists in his movement, was an atheist. Rather than rooted in Christian beliefs, fascists were, in fact, strongly opposed to Christianity in early years as it was viewed as a religion for sheep. Fascists only warmed in their views later on when they discovered that doing so was somewhat necessary if they were to maintain power.
As far as the fascist is concerned, God and church are useful only insofar as they serve the purposes of the State, as the State is the only "god" that truly matters. Placing the blame for fascism in the laps of theists is just plain wrong and ignorant.
genocide
Genocide has less to do with theism than it does with the human tendency towards tribalism. We're prone to identifying with a "team", so to speak, with which we share common beliefs and a common identity. There is the "tribe", which is "good", and there is the "other", which is "dangerous" and treated with attitudes ranging from caution to hostility. Sometimes that hostility manifests itself in the form of genocide. There is nothing rational about tribalism, but you cannot escape it any more than you can escape the urge to eat when you are hungry or for "fight or flight" when you are in danger. Most genocides have been cultural -- religion and theistic views have been incidental. The holocaust wasn't carried out against the Jews because they weren't Christians, but rather because they were viewed as a foreign threat to German culture.
I caution you very strongly from reacting too swiftly against this point or thinking that you somehow rise above the tendencies to which I'm referring. Your own atheism, your quick reaction to jump to the defence of a fellow atheist, as well as your personal attitudes towards those with views incompatible with it, are themselves manifestations of the tribalist tendencies of which I'm speaking.
and the opposite of human progress (see middle east for very clear reference)
The Middle East is only a "clear reference" to those who are completely ignorant of the various historical and socio-economic forces at play. The region is still reeling from the power vacuum caused by the collapse of the Ottoman Empire as well as the lingering effects of western colonialism. Much of what we see is actually a native attempt to find and assert a non-Western cultural identity in a Western dominated world that they have strong reason to resent. Much of that involves rejection of Western culture, Western mores, Western education and, yes, the Western science that goes with it. Much of this demonstrates itself through Islam, as Islam is a powerful force that underlies their native cultural identity, but when we examine deeper we see that Islam is actually incidental rather than the cause. To ignore that the factors at play go well beyond Islam itself is deeply Eurocentric, to say the least.
The "Dark Ages" are often cited as another example of a time when religion supposedly turned back the clock on human progress. This ignores, of course, the fact that Western Europe was, much like Muslims today, also reeling from the collapse of a long existent social order in the form of the Roman Empire after its fall at the hands of barbarian tribes! Strong expressions of religion in such "unenlightened" periods are less a matter of cause than of attempts to reassert identity in a cultural vacuum.
Don't confuse cause with effect.
You stand behind this view because we can't disprove fairies, unicorns, and other transcendent beings?
I offer that this statement is every bit as extreme and narrow-minded as the statement by the Christian fundie that claims non-Christians only refuse to accept Christ because they don't want to do so even though, in their heart of hearts, they know he is true. It is a gross oversimplification that speaks more to the bigotries of the one stating it than it does about the one to whom it is written.
Theists will never garner respect unless they can convey to other groups why others must suffer at their stupidity.
It's amusing that you seem to expect the majority to be so concerned with earning the respect of a minority it tends to view with disdain. Even more curious, however, is the fact that you don't understand, when you blatantly advocate such attitudes, why the majority refuses to change that stance.
I see plenty of reason why we ought to suffer the "stupidity" of theists. Here's a hint -- it is the exact same reason the majority ought to suffer yours.
Atheists never hurt in the name of atheism.
Hasan Prishtina has refuted this numerous times, as have I. I'll reiterate. Persecution of religion in Communist countries was not merely political. Communism itself is rooted in the atheist philosophy of dialectical materialism. Religion was viewed as something worthy of only contempt and ridicule, something indefensible and contrary to the best interests of the proletariat. Communists saw the stomping out of religious views as necessary to prevent them from infecting "reasonable society."
In short, Communists merely embraced the attitudes being expressed by the OP and those that agree with him and took them a step further. Atheists were hurting people in the name of atheism and if you refuse to see this you are playing the same game of "No True Scotsman" beloved by many a Christian fundie. If you're going to offer the, "atheism was only used as a political weapon," defense, keep in mind that in doing so you forgo any and all claims of intellectual honesty if you reject the, "religion was only used as a political weapon," defense when theists use it. The logic is exactly the same. At any rate, the overall argument is undercut either way.
Do you show respect for racists and misogynists? No, you show contempt and ridicule. This is the only response appropriate for theists.
If you agree with this statement, I have to ask -- do you come to FSTDT to satire and mock bullies who insist on forcing society to embrace their beliefs or do you come here to laugh at and ridicule people who are "wrong" (i.e. simply don't believe the same thing you do)? If it's the former, you ought to have no problem seeing why this statement is being viewed so critically by some of us. If it's the latter, do you really not see how you are exactly the same as those featured here on a daily basis? Do you truly not understand how it is the epitome of hypocrisy to criticize certain behavior and then turn around and defend it when your own side does it? Oh, but I forget -- it's alright when you do it because you're so certain you're right! (hint: the people featured on these pages are every bit as certain they are right as well and are every bit as certain your views are the ones harming society. That attitude is what earns people the label "fundie". Oh, but I forget -- you're really right.)
More importantly, are you really so naive as to imagine the rest of us, even the atheists, share your ideological baggage and attitudes?
TL; DR: Most of the criticisms levied against theism are better blamed on tribalism, which exists independent of religion, is the product of evolution and thus unavoidable, and involves tendencies even atheists exhibit on a regular basis.
