That would depend if those resources that the Catholics have to object to hold any water or if it is merely propaganda. But I'm not here to defend the Catholic church either; I'm just considering their version of what the Inquisition was.They have the same right to their view and to object as I have. We are both exercising that right. Except they have considerably bigger resources to do it with.
I am not familiar with those organizations or publications or whatever you consider "mainstream". So, for all I know, you may be right about them. However, they don't include myself or any of the atheists (notice small a: we never capitalize atheist) of my acquaintance. And if we're not "mainstream", maybe we're not sheep.
It's not just a matter of being mainstream or not to be sheep; it's whether or not you have the mentality of sheep, and whether or not you have adequate reasoning or evidence and not some teaching that you've unquestionably taken from someone. Now of course, most people in the mainstream are sheep, but we should also see if what they say is true, as well as of course seeing if they are earnest and not fame seekers.
Much of the stuff that you listed (Exorcism, Torture, Disenfranchisement, Forced Conversion, Slavery/Serfdom, Rape) are things that may have been committed by religions, particularly Christianity, but are not really religious values. There are people who are religious who condemn these practices, depending on their beliefs. There are those who say that the religious practices found in the Bible that you've listed (stoning, whipping children, discrimination against women, against abortion and homosexuality), were in varying degrees harmful, but do acknowledge that it's part of the history of the Bible although they look more to the spiritual teachings of it, which is the essence of the Bible. Also, there are things that should be considered valid values, and that is on life (regarding Abortion). People who favor abortion are generally selfish, as their arguments are "it's my body, so it's my right". They do have the will to do so, but it does not take into account that they are indeed killing life, and so promoting abortion would be the equivalent of promoting a culture of nihilism and death. Homosexuality is anti life as well; in my opinion, it is socially constructed through the promoting of erotic images of men and women, and it is also anti life as well because men + men and women + women do not produce life (as noted in biology).Legal rape by husbands. Legal killing of daughters by fathers. Stoning of blasphemers. Whipping of children. Denial of education to girls. Persecution of homosexuals. Exorcism of "demons". Denial of reproductive choice. Torture and execution of people accused of witchcraft. Disenfranchisement of whoever happened to be on the wrong side of the Catholic-Protestant wars. Forced conversion of and genocide against native peoples on other continents. Serfdom and slavery.
That event, which can be further searched and read via articles, had showed overly emotional people being immature for the sake of insulting the religious people who were singing. They had no valid reasons, other than the selfish "it's my body, so it's my choice" argument, which they repeated in a very profane way.That video shows a bunch of people standing around, singing, some other shouting, and one girl yelling - none of their words are comprehensible, and I have only the headline above it to identify who the people were or what they're supposedly chanting. I saw nobody attacking anybody. But maybe they did, later on.
All that means is, you opt out of some aspects of your culture. As many people do. But that doesn't stop you making assumptions about others. As many people also do. If you stop labelling us, I'll stop labelling you.
I am not generalizing or labeling the Atheist community; I am making observations about it and drawing my conclusions from my observations, research, and reasoning.
Those texts about the portrayal of God can be elaborated and interpreted via theological discussion. There are indeed those who believe in the literalist interpretation of sacred texts, but there are those who try to make sense of how "God" in the Bible can be so caring and yet so cruel, although it is one challenge that I would say myself would be difficult unless if you were to accept that the Bible is merely another book talking of the same story of divinity.That was a rumour spread by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and.... oh especially Paul.
But outside theology, there are philosophical and esoteric discussions of what this "God" is. Many of them say that "God" is merely impersonal; that "God" is actually a representation of the entire Universe, which that itself if the representation of our minds. There's emanationism that's found in Neoplatonic, Gnostic, Sufi and Kabbalist ideas, which talks of varying degrees about the emanation from the One to Existence. This is the type of divinity that I am talking of; the literalist interpretation of scriptures and religion is just one of many interpretations.