| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jason Spaceman" |
| Date: |
29 Aug 2005 03:19:22 AM |
| Object: |
Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
From the article:
------------------------------------------------------------
So we have situations where we have people profaning the name of God
or failing to apply the necessary diligence to their stated worldview,
which has resulted in abuses. On the other hand, we have people
believing in a materialistic and evolutionary paradigm that is
consistent with such abuses. The difference is that as a Christian I
can join the humanist in criticizing the atrocities committed in God's
name, whereas they are consistent with the metaphysical position
embraced by the humanist. In fact, I can correct them by a proper
application of the Christian worldview.
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges, Hitler's
concentration camps, Mao's red death, Pol-Pot's killing fields, and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism. For
example, when Stalin talks of breaking a few eggs to get an omelet, he
is applying a standard of "survival of the fittest" to justify his
ruthless purges. We might note that animals out in the forest or
jungle appeal to the sharpest teeth and fastest legs in deciding who
survives. What did Hitler do but give a militaristic interpretation to
the philosophy of Nietzsche?
If man is merely another animal, albeit more advanced, why should he
not merely develop more cunning devices to ensure his survival, rather
than a moral system that is sometimes self sacrificial? Humanists
believe that man is on an ever upward progressive journey. But if he
is a merely a by-product of a cosmic accident, why should we expect a
continuous flow in a progressive direction? Could he not easily go in
the opposite direction by chance? Indeed, the beginning of the 20th
century was crowned with optimism, as a new gilded age of human
"enlightenment" which would end all armed conflict. Then came WWI and
the most violent century humanity has ever known followed along.
The person claiming the Christian world and life view has created the
worst atrocities of history, is not merely wrong, but has a vested
interest in his disregard of the obvious.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/meyer/050828
J. Spaceman
.
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
29 Aug 2005 08:37:16 PM |
|
|
In article <86h5h1tih3fh6veikgmgedeh68qecke5vp@4ax.com>,
notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org says...
From the article:
------------------------------------------------------------
So we have situations where we have people profaning the name of God
or failing to apply the necessary diligence to their stated worldview,
which has resulted in abuses. On the other hand, we have people
believing in a materialistic and evolutionary paradigm that is
consistent with such abuses.
Neither evolution, the modified descent of species, nor materialism, the
notion that all things are made of matter, say anything whatsoever about
atrocity or genocide. That would be like saying that chemistry endorses
genocide because chemical weapons can be using knowledge from that field.
The difference is that as a Christian I
can join the humanist in criticizing the atrocities committed in God's
name, whereas they are consistent with the metaphysical position
embraced by the humanist.
Absolutely false. The humanist is wholly committed to respecting human
rights and freedoms. None of the Humanist Manifestos endorse abuses of
human rights and they certainly reject genocide, torture and acts of
violent aggression against other human persons.
In fact, I can correct them by a proper
application of the Christian worldview.
That's doubtful, since xianity actually endorses violence, slavery,
torture, sexism, child abuse and even acts of outright murder or genocide
as I will demonstrate below.
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest
Since the believer has already been intellectually dishonest about the
principles of humanism, materialism and evolution, he or she is certainly
in no position to excoriate others as "intellectually dishonest".
without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges,
Even the soviets disowned the criminal acts of stalin and it is a guilt
by association fallacy to say that stalin's actions were due to atheism,
materialism or evolution. In point of fact, Lysenkoisms of the Stalinist
era rejected evolution as too capitalistic and it's pretty clear that
Stalin was neither a committed communist, nor a committed atheist. He
was only committed to his radical nationalism and the cult of his own
totalitarian ego, which has nothing to do with materialism, evolution,
atheism, etc.
Hitler's
concentration camps,
Hitler was certainly religious and carried out the same sort of
persecution and massacre of jews which had been practices by xians for
well over a millennia in Europe. Popes like Leo VII began the process of
forcible deportation or ghettoization of jews which continued on with his
predecessors. It was the catholic church which first forced Jews to wear
distinctive markings, like stars of david, many hundres of years before
hitler. The Holocaust of WWII was a long time in the making and only
differed from previous xian massacres of jews in terms of the scope.
Furthermore, if Hitler was an atheist, then how is it that his highly
religious allies like Mussolini and Franco never objected?
Mao's red death,
That had essentially nothing to do with religion. It was again about
nationalism, consolidation of dictatorial powers and the dueling economic
systems of communism versus capitalism. BTW, the teachings of Jesus were
highly communistic at many points. Therefore, using your fallacious
guilt by association logic, Jesus is responsible for communist
atrocities, since his words served as the inspiration for later communist
doctrines.
Pol-Pot's killing fields,
Pol Pot was a highly superstitious buddhist idiot, who symbolized his
movement with the Angar or "Eye of God". He deposed the despot Sihanouk
who was guilty of atrocities similar to those later attributed to pol
pot. BTW, the US aided the Khmer Rouge on numerous occasions, especially
since they were fighting against the vietnamese who had given us a black
eye earlier. How could the great xian US do such a thing?
and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism. For
example, when Stalin talks of breaking a few eggs to get an omelet
Really? He was certainly not the first to use the metaphor. Jesus said
in Luke 19:27, "But these mine enemies, that would not that I should
reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me"
, he
is applying a standard of "survival of the fittest"
That would be a phrase coined by Spencer that had nothing to do with
evolution. Furthermore, you have not made it clear why breaking eggs
would constitute "survival of the fittest". Stalin executed people the
thought were a threat to him. Often these people were very fit. He
likely wanted the opposite, which was survival of the least fit and least
likely to oppose his will.
to justify his
ruthless purges.
Show where stalin justified such purges upon the "survival of the
fittest" doctrine. Your above allegation doesn't follow at all.
We might note that animals out in the forest or
jungle appeal to the sharpest teeth and fastest legs in deciding who
survives.
That has nothing to do with it either. Stalin was not particularly fit.
He simply had control of government. The apparatus of government is not
necessarily more fit than individual citizens. It simply has strength in
numbers. Individually, the soldiers in his army could be absolute
cretins, but they would still probably be able to hunt down and kill
individuals.
What did Hitler do but give a militaristic interpretation to
the philosophy of Nietzsche?
That's completely discredited garbage as well. Nietzsche was not the
basis of modern naziism, despite superficial pseudo-scholarship alleging
such. Some of Nietzsche's work was grossly distorted, as was the work of
many philosophers. However, Nietzsche's "superman" had nothing to do
with the fiction of the Aryan master race.
If man is merely another animal, albeit more advanced, why should he
not merely develop more cunning devices to ensure his survival, rather
than a moral system that is sometimes self sacrificial?
Self-sacrifice often has a survival value and can easily be selected for
evolutionarily. Bees sacrifice their lives for the hive. It's nothing
special and certainly nothing xian. Surely you aren't going to tell me
that you believe bees are xians?
Humanists
believe that man is on an ever upward progressive journey.
No, not really. They believe that technology and the application of
human reason can produce future successes similar to those which man has
enjoyed in the past. That's simple, inductive logic.
But if he
is a merely a by-product of a cosmic accident, why should we expect a
continuous flow in a progressive direction?
That's a genetic fallacy. It's like saying, how could a low bred,
***** child ever amount to anything? Where one comes from does not
invariably determine our destiny.
Could he not easily go in
the opposite direction by chance?
It's not a matter of chance. Present technology is governed by many
variables that are decidedly non-random. Do you honestly think that
scienctists produce all their breakthroughs by sheer, random chance?
Indeed, the beginning of the 20th
century was crowned with optimism, as a new gilded age of human
"enlightenment" which would end all armed conflict.
Not so. The tensions between european nations, vying for supremacy made
conflict a virtual certainty. People might have fantasized about peace,
but few thinking people really believed that it was guaranteed, simply
because some might wish it so.
Then came WWI and
the most violent century humanity has ever known followed along.
The person claiming the Christian world and life view has created the
worst atrocities of history, is not merely wrong, but has a vested
interest in his disregard of the obvious.
Religious holy wars waged by xian leaders and xian armies killed far more
people than WWII. Xian invaders killed perhaps 100 million American
Indians in their invasion of the American Continents alone, not to
mention all those they enslaved and killed in Africa, India, China and
elsewhere in their missionary zeal.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rick" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
30 Aug 2005 12:29:27 PM |
|
|
quibbler wrote in message ...
[snip]
Religious holy wars waged by xian leaders and xian armies killed far more
people than WWII. Xian invaders killed perhaps 100 million American
Indians in their invasion of the American Continents alone, not to
mention all those they enslaved and killed in Africa, India, China and
elsewhere in their missionary zeal.
Maybe I'll regret responding since I don't have all my cites lined up, but
this is just a bunch of bunk. 100 million sounds like an extreme
exaggeration too. The population of North American First Nations had been in
significant decline. There were also accidents like the smallpox outbreaks,
which were *not* deliberately caused by Army blankets as is widely believed.
I'm not excusing some of the atrocities which were deliberately caused, but
your ilk is extremely fond of employing the same sort of illogic you
condemn. Most of what happened in the exploration of the New World would not
have been any different had the explorers been something other than
Christian. Do you honestly think non-Christians or non-theists would not
have gone exploring? Most of these sort of conflicts throughout history have
been some sort of tribal conflicts where religion is simply a marker. You
cannot prove that they would not have occurred without Christianity. The
real problem is humans. If you remove them from the equation, all these
things wouldn't occurr.
- Rick
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
29 Aug 2005 06:09:45 AM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
------------------------------------------------------------
So we have situations where we have people profaning the name of God
or failing to apply the necessary diligence to their stated worldview,
which has resulted in abuses. On the other hand, we have people
believing in a materialistic and evolutionary paradigm that is
consistent with such abuses. The difference is that as a Christian I
can join the humanist in criticizing the atrocities committed in God's
name, whereas they are consistent with the metaphysical position
embraced by the humanist. In fact, I can correct them by a proper
application of the Christian worldview.
This is *****. This asserts that humanists are tolerant of evil.
There is no evidence for that. Neither a humanist or a Christian
approves of having his goods stolen.
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges, Hitler's
concentration camps, Mao's red death, Pol-Pot's killing fields, and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism.
There is no evidence for this. How does denying the existence of God
imply that bloodshed and cruelty is o.k.? An atheist see the problem of
evil lying on the doorstep of man along with its solution, if there is a
solution.
Men do evil and it is up to men to prevent it or punish it. We cannot
rely on some Spook to hurl thunderbolts at evildoers.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
29 Aug 2005 10:38:29 AM |
|
|
"Robert J. Kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
So we have situations where we have people profaning the name of God
or failing to apply the necessary diligence to their stated worldview,
which has resulted in abuses. On the other hand, we have people
believing in a materialistic and evolutionary paradigm that is
consistent with such abuses. The difference is that as a Christian I
can join the humanist in criticizing the atrocities committed in God's
name, whereas they are consistent with the metaphysical position
embraced by the humanist. In fact, I can correct them by a proper
application of the Christian worldview.
This is *****.
No kidding.
This asserts that humanists are tolerant of evil.
There is no evidence for that. Neither a humanist or a Christian
approves of having his goods stolen.
Nor of being physically abused or killed.
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges, Hitler's
concentration camps, Mao's red death, Pol-Pot's killing fields, and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism.
There is no evidence for this. How does denying the existence of God
imply that bloodshed and cruelty is o.k.? An atheist see the problem of
evil lying on the doorstep of man along with its solution, if there is a
solution.
Men do evil and it is up to men to prevent it or punish it. We cannot
rely on some Spook to hurl thunderbolts at evildoers.
As an atheist materialist, since I don't believe in an afterlife, I
think war and bloodshed is at the top of the list of horrible things.
All those lives gone forever... No heaven for the soldiers who died
in battle... I think if people quit believing in an afterlife, there
would be a lot less war and certainly a lot less suicide bombings and
willing martyrs going to meet their make-believe maker.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
29 Aug 2005 10:58:50 AM |
|
|
"Robert J. Kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:3ng8nsF19jm6U1@individual.net...
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
------------------------------------------------------------
So we have situations where we have people profaning the name of God
or failing to apply the necessary diligence to their stated worldview,
which has resulted in abuses. On the other hand, we have people
believing in a materialistic and evolutionary paradigm that is
consistent with such abuses. The difference is that as a Christian I
can join the humanist in criticizing the atrocities committed in God's
name, whereas they are consistent with the metaphysical position
embraced by the humanist. In fact, I can correct them by a proper
application of the Christian worldview.
This is *****. This asserts that humanists are tolerant of evil.
There is no evidence for that. Neither a humanist or a Christian
approves of having his goods stolen.
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges, Hitler's
concentration camps, Mao's red death, Pol-Pot's killing fields, and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism.
There is no evidence for this. How does denying the existence of God
imply that bloodshed and cruelty is o.k.? An atheist see the problem of
evil lying on the doorstep of man along with its solution, if there is a
solution.
Men do evil and it is up to men to prevent it or punish it. We cannot
rely on some Spook to hurl thunderbolts at evildoers.
Bob Kolker
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for "god" to punish men who do evil -
imagine society if we did
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "WCB" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
30 Aug 2005 11:29:18 AM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
------------------------------------------------------------
So we have situations where we have people profaning the name of God
or failing to apply the necessary diligence to their stated worldview,
which has resulted in abuses. On the other hand, we have people
believing in a materialistic and evolutionary paradigm that is
consistent with such abuses. The difference is that as a Christian I
can join the humanist in criticizing the atrocities committed in God's
name, whereas they are consistent with the metaphysical position
embraced by the humanist. In fact, I can correct them by a proper
application of the Christian worldview.
This is *****. This asserts that humanists are tolerant of evil.
There is no evidence for that. Neither a humanist or a Christian
approves of having his goods stolen.
***********************************************************
The Failure of Christianity in America
W. C . Barwell 3-8-05
***********************************************************
Since Nixon, this nation has rapidly moved to the far right,
taken there mainly by christian right wingers who have fully
supported the GOP as it has moved right to gain support of
christian zealots and conservatives. This started when Nixon
played the racist Southern Strategy card building on civil
rights era resentments by far right Southerners.
So we now have had a essentially a christian GOP government
for 30 years.
Under Nixon:
Christian Americans supported incompetent and corrupt
Vietnamese politicians. And a senseless war in Vietnam
that accomplished nothing.
Nixon lied about having a secret plan to end the war.
supported nixons having instigated awful and murderous
policies as the Phoenix program.
Supported the secret bombings in Cambodia that killed
hundreds of thousands of innocent Cambodians.
Winked at the invasion of East Timur and parts of New
Guinea by our allies, the Indonesions.
The Indonesioans killed 1/4 of the Timurese over several
decades, mass murder, genocide. 2 million dead.
Winked at the Greek far right Junta that overthrew the
Greek government.
Supported the murderous far right Brazilian generals who
overthrew that democratically elected government.
Supported the mass murdering Argentinian government and
their terroristic "Dirty War" of torture, mass murder
and disappearances.
Supported the murderous Pinochet of Chile and overthrow
of yet another democratically elected goverment.
No Christians respected life here. Or freedom. But supported
Nixon heartily despite the horrors we commited in Vietnam
and Cambodia and Chile and winked at support for others
mentioned above.
Reagan.
Reagan lead the GOP in support for military aid to the
genocidal Rios Montt of Guatemala, who practiced wholesale
torture, rape and genocide on the Mayan Indians of Guatemala.
Reagan and the GOP supported the mass murdering ex-Somoza
Guards of Nicaragua.
Reagan and the GOP supported Saddam Hussein of Iraq.
Reagan and the GOP supported the murderous Robert
D'Aubisson of El Salavador, a known far right death
squad leader.
The El Salvadoran government was involved in numerous
murders, and massacres, such as the killing of 400
villagers at a small village called El Mezote, most
of them young women and children.
Reagan and the GOP supported Noriega of Panama.
Reagan and the GOP happily supported Pol Pot's claim
to be the rightful government of Cambodia despite the
genocide committed by the insane Pol Pot's Khmer Regime.
Reagan and the GOP supported a number of murdering
far right extremist guerrilla movements in Africa
including the genocidal Frelimo in Mozambique.
Reagan fought sanctions to end apartheid in South africa.
The Christian and religous right heavily supported Reagan
and the GOP despite numerous examples of such evils as
listed above.The leader of the religous right never cared
nor complained, neither did the religous leaders of the
main stream christian denominations.
There was and is no respect for life in American
christianity as these wholesale and repeat failures of
America christianity collectively over 20 years shows.
Then we had Bush.
Bush continued support for the evil dictators above,
including Pinochet, Pol Pot and others. However,
Saddam screwed us and invaded Iraq, mainly because
Bush screwed up and did not warn him to not do so.
Bush did not act in case of genocide my Jugoslavia's
Milosevic, and Bush and the GOP's loud and obnoxious
footdragging here allowed Milosevic to kill
hundreds of thousands with near impunity.
The leaders of the GOP, House and Senate, and religous
leaders of the right and mainstream denominations never
cared about any of this.
In the Desert Storm war, Bush allowed the US air
force to bomb Iraq's water and sewer systems.
A war crime.
They placed sanctions on Iraq that made it impossible
to keep their water supplies safe resulting in numerous
deaths that eventually would total over 2 million dead
Iraqi civilians, mostly children.
Our government coldly calculated that these sanctions would
indeed would cause mass epidemics and mass death, and did
it anyway.
Thomas Nagy, a California colege professor used the FOIA
statutes to obtain these documents that were published
in September 2001 in the Progressive Magazine.
http://www.progressive.org/0801issue/nagy0901.html
No Christian leaders of either far right or mainstream
cared nor brought Bush and the GOP leadership of House
and Senate to task for this genocide of innocents.
Clinton:
Under Clinton this policy continued. Again, Christians did
not care. All Christians cared about was Clintons
don't-ask-don't-tell gays in military policy and Clinton's
sex life and Whitewater.
$47 million spent investigating whitewater while the Christian
right roared with naked hate. Money spent investigation mass
murder in Iraq caused by our purposeful by our sanctions?
$0.
Roars of disaprovable from Christian America over these mass
murders?
None.
What has 30 years or right winged GOP government and right
winger christianity got us? Mass murder, genocide,
Nothing but callousness, disregard for human life,
mass moral failure of religion, Christianity and
the american right.
Not once did religous christian Americans, either
leadership or rank and file ever find any of these
evils unacceptable or punish any who supported any
of this.
Most GOP House and Senate members were people who
did these things claimed to be christians. Not a one
cares, not a christian cares they did not care or act.
30 years of failure. 30 years of support for
far right genocidal bastards, mass murderers,
and evil.
Total christian failure.
Total lack of any real morality at all
in American christianity.
Christians posture as moral, American christians have
a very bad track records when it comes to morality, they
will happily support any genocdial monster as long as he's
a right winger, and right winger politicians support
that monster no matter how murderous or genocidal he
and his evil regime is.
(End)
--
Xenu is around and about,
mention Hubbard, Xenu pops out!
No way for the clams to stamp Xenu out,
Xenu is around and about!
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rick Merrill" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
30 Aug 2005 01:38:28 PM |
|
|
WCB wrote:
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
------------------------------------------------------------
So we have situations where we have people profaning the name of God
or failing to apply the necessary diligence to their stated worldview,
which has resulted in abuses. On the other hand, we have people
believing in a materialistic and evolutionary paradigm that is
consistent with such abuses. The difference is that as a Christian I
can join the humanist in criticizing the atrocities committed in God's
name, whereas they are consistent with the metaphysical position
embraced by the humanist. In fact, I can correct them by a proper
application of the Christian worldview.
This is *****. This asserts that humanists are tolerant of evil.
There is no evidence for that. Neither a humanist or a Christian
approves of having his goods stolen.
***********************************************************
The Failure of Christianity in America
W. C . Barwell 3-8-05
***********************************************************
Since Nixon, this nation has rapidly moved to the far right,
taken there mainly by christian right wingers who have fully
supported the GOP as it has moved right to gain support of
christian zealots and conservatives. This started when Nixon
played the racist Southern Strategy card building on civil
rights era resentments by far right Southerners.
So we now have had a essentially a christian GOP government
for 30 years.
Under Nixon:
Christian Americans supported incompetent and corrupt
Vietnamese politicians. And a senseless war in Vietnam
that accomplished nothing.
Nixon lied about having a secret plan to end the war.
supported nixons having instigated awful and murderous
policies as the Phoenix program.
Supported the secret bombings in Cambodia that killed
hundreds of thousands of innocent Cambodians.
Winked at the invasion of East Timur and parts of New
Guinea by our allies, the Indonesions.
The Indonesioans killed 1/4 of the Timurese over several
decades, mass murder, genocide. 2 million dead.
Winked at the Greek far right Junta that overthrew the
Greek government.
Supported the murderous far right Brazilian generals who
overthrew that democratically elected government.
Supported the mass murdering Argentinian government and
their terroristic "Dirty War" of torture, mass murder
and disappearances.
Supported the murderous Pinochet of Chile and overthrow
of yet another democratically elected goverment.
No Christians respected life here. Or freedom. But supported
Nixon heartily despite the horrors we commited in Vietnam
and Cambodia and Chile and winked at support for others
mentioned above.
Reagan.
Reagan lead the GOP in support for military aid to the
genocidal Rios Montt of Guatemala, who practiced wholesale
torture, rape and genocide on the Mayan Indians of Guatemala.
Reagan and the GOP supported the mass murdering ex-Somoza
Guards of Nicaragua.
Reagan and the GOP supported Saddam Hussein of Iraq.
Reagan and the GOP supported the murderous Robert
D'Aubisson of El Salavador, a known far right death
squad leader.
The El Salvadoran government was involved in numerous
murders, and massacres, such as the killing of 400
villagers at a small village called El Mezote, most
of them young women and children.
Reagan and the GOP supported Noriega of Panama.
Reagan and the GOP happily supported Pol Pot's claim
to be the rightful government of Cambodia despite the
genocide committed by the insane Pol Pot's Khmer Regime.
Reagan and the GOP supported a number of murdering
far right extremist guerrilla movements in Africa
including the genocidal Frelimo in Mozambique.
Reagan fought sanctions to end apartheid in South africa.
The Christian and religous right heavily supported Reagan
and the GOP despite numerous examples of such evils as
listed above.The leader of the religous right never cared
nor complained, neither did the religous leaders of the
main stream christian denominations.
There was and is no respect for life in American
christianity as these wholesale and repeat failures of
America christianity collectively over 20 years shows.
Then we had Bush.
Bush continued support for the evil dictators above,
including Pinochet, Pol Pot and others. However,
Saddam screwed us and invaded Iraq, mainly because
Bush screwed up and did not warn him to not do so.
Bush did not act in case of genocide my Jugoslavia's
Milosevic, and Bush and the GOP's loud and obnoxious
footdragging here allowed Milosevic to kill
hundreds of thousands with near impunity.
The leaders of the GOP, House and Senate, and religous
leaders of the right and mainstream denominations never
cared about any of this.
In the Desert Storm war, Bush allowed the US air
force to bomb Iraq's water and sewer systems.
A war crime.
They placed sanctions on Iraq that made it impossible
to keep their water supplies safe resulting in numerous
deaths that eventually would total over 2 million dead
Iraqi civilians, mostly children.
Our government coldly calculated that these sanctions would
indeed would cause mass epidemics and mass death, and did
it anyway.
Thomas Nagy, a California colege professor used the FOIA
statutes to obtain these documents that were published
in September 2001 in the Progressive Magazine.
http://www.progressive.org/0801issue/nagy0901.html
No Christian leaders of either far right or mainstream
cared nor brought Bush and the GOP leadership of House
and Senate to task for this genocide of innocents.
Clinton:
Under Clinton this policy continued. Again, Christians did
not care. All Christians cared about was Clintons
don't-ask-don't-tell gays in military policy and Clinton's
sex life and Whitewater.
$47 million spent investigating whitewater while the Christian
right roared with naked hate. Money spent investigation mass
murder in Iraq caused by our purposeful by our sanctions?
$0.
Roars of disaprovable from Christian America over these mass
murders?
None.
What has 30 years or right winged GOP government and right
winger christianity got us? Mass murder, genocide,
Nothing but callousness, disregard for human life,
mass moral failure of religion, Christianity and
the american right.
Not once did religous christian Americans, either
leadership or rank and file ever find any of these
evils unacceptable or punish any who supported any
of this.
Most GOP House and Senate members were people who
did these things claimed to be christians. Not a one
cares, not a christian cares they did not care or act.
30 years of failure. 30 years of support for
far right genocidal bastards, mass murderers,
and evil.
Total christian failure.
Total lack of any real morality at all
in American christianity.
Christians posture as moral, American christians have
a very bad track records when it comes to morality, they
will happily support any genocdial monster as long as he's
a right winger, and right winger politicians support
that monster no matter how murderous or genocidal he
and his evil regime is.
(End)
While overstated, this is why I've become a Democrat after
spending a half dozen decades as a Republican.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
29 Aug 2005 12:04:28 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Jason Spaceman
(notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org) made the light shine upon us with this:
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges, Hitler's
concentration camps, Mao's red death, Pol-Pot's killing fields, and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism.
The difference, of course, is that "Christian Atrocities" such as the
Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition were committed in the name of the
Christian God. Atheists like the political leaders above committed their
atrocities for other reasons. Stalin's purges were not committed in the
name of atheism. To believe so is ridiculous.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
http://home.comcast.net/~vickman/
Plonked by Raytard
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
29 Aug 2005 07:13:16 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Jason Spaceman
(notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org) made the light shine upon us with this:
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges, Hitler's
concentration camps, Mao's red death, Pol-Pot's killing fields, and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism.
The difference, of course, is that "Christian Atrocities" such as the
Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition were committed in the name of the
Christian God. Atheists like the political leaders above committed their
atrocities for other reasons. Stalin's purges were not committed in the
name of atheism. To believe so is ridiculous.
....and places the blame of atheism in the same realm of blame of men.
I mean, all these atrocities that are systematically and predictably put
forth by theists as final clinching proof of the evilness of atheism
were comitted by men. Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler (why thy use him, I'm not
sure), Mao... all men.
Therefore, the male race is evil. Right? Doing it in the name of
masculinity, aren't they?
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "If God had intended us to walk, he wouldn't *
* have invented roller skates." --Willy Wonka *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
29 Aug 2005 08:47:37 PM |
|
|
In article <wwNQe.9411$um2.4889@trnddc03>,
says...
Uncle Vic wrote:
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Jason Spaceman
(notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org) made the light shine upon us with this:
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges, Hitler's
concentration camps, Mao's red death, Pol-Pot's killing fields, and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism.
The difference, of course, is that "Christian Atrocities" such as the
Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition were committed in the name of the
Christian God. Atheists like the political leaders above committed their
atrocities for other reasons. Stalin's purges were not committed in the
name of atheism. To believe so is ridiculous.
...and places the blame of atheism in the same realm of blame of men.
I mean, all these atrocities that are systematically and predictably put
forth by theists as final clinching proof of the evilness of atheism
were comitted by men. Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler (why thy use him, I'm not
sure), Mao... all men.
Yes, fairly short men with dark hair, actually. I suppose that also
contributed to them being murderers. And of course, Hitler was a
vegetarian. We all know what a bunch of thugs those darn vegans are ;).
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Christianity and atrocity |
29 Aug 2005 08:19:30 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet DanielSan
(daniel-san@myrealbox.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
Uncle Vic wrote:
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Jason Spaceman
(notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org) made the light shine upon us with
this:
The non-believer however, cannot be intellectually honest without
admitting that the atrocities committed by Stalin's purges, Hitler's
concentration camps, Mao's red death, Pol-Pot's killing fields, and
others, are consistent with assumptions of naturalism and atheism.
The difference, of course, is that "Christian Atrocities" such as the
Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition were committed in the name of
the Christian God. Atheists like the political leaders above
committed their atrocities for other reasons. Stalin's purges were
not committed in the name of atheism. To believe so is ridiculous.
...and places the blame of atheism in the same realm of blame of men.
I mean, all these atrocities that are systematically and predictably
put forth by theists as final clinching proof of the evilness of
atheism were comitted by men. Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler (why thy use
him, I'm not sure), Mao... all men.
Therefore, the male race is evil. Right? Doing it in the name of
masculinity, aren't they?
Well, all those atheists guys had office equipment, didn't they? You
could also say they were doing it in the name of pencil sharpeners.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
http://home.comcast.net/~vickman/
Plonked by Raytard
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
