| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Iain" |
| Date: |
20 Jan 2004 05:08:17 AM |
| Object: |
The Hitler Thing |
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
However, the way atheists respond is counterproductive. Their response
is the equivelant of that of a black man, who upon being discriminated
against, defends himself not by saying that his colour is of no
practical significance to the situation, but instead giving reasons
why he may not be black. The problem with this response is that the
black man(regardless of how true the accusation of being black is), is
implying that the basis for the argument is correct and that
discrimination based on colour is valid.
The most important response to such ramblings regarding evil people
who share the same knowledge as scientists, is not one that deals with
their sincerity, but one that breaks the connection between the
creationist's argument, and it's purpose(to put to shame atheists).
Regardless of what Hitler may have believed or why he may have done
what he did, there are atheists and evolutionists et cetera, who are
genuinely evil people. However, saying that the theory of evolution is
evil because it was used as a premise by one person is like saying the
theory of sharpness is evil because people used it to make swords.
In a nutshell, it is important to remind people that although it is
condradictory of certain religious beliefs, the theory of evolution
does not take their form: it is not good or evil, just a matter of
fact.
It is a written conclusion based on the data taken by the harmless
bearded fellow on £10 notes.
After the point has been made irrelevant, one can then proceed to make
corrections to the creationist's misinformation, without being lowered
to their standard of argument.
--
Iain
.
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
20 Jan 2004 07:12:26 AM |
|
|
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401200308.1333d972@posting.google.com...
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
However, the way atheists respond is counterproductive. Their response
is the equivelant of that of a black man, who upon being discriminated
against, defends himself not by saying that his colour is of no
practical significance to the situation, but instead giving reasons
why he may not be black. The problem with this response is that the
black man(regardless of how true the accusation of being black is), is
implying that the basis for the argument is correct and that
discrimination based on colour is valid.
The most important response to such ramblings regarding evil people
who share the same knowledge as scientists, is not one that deals with
their sincerity, but one that breaks the connection between the
creationist's argument, and it's purpose(to put to shame atheists).
Regardless of what Hitler may have believed or why he may have done
what he did, there are atheists and evolutionists et cetera, who are
genuinely evil people. However, saying that the theory of evolution is
evil because it was used as a premise by one person is like saying the
theory of sharpness is evil because people used it to make swords.
In a nutshell, it is important to remind people that although it is
condradictory of certain religious beliefs, the theory of evolution
does not take their form: it is not good or evil, just a matter of
fact.
It is a written conclusion based on the data taken by the harmless
bearded fellow on £10 notes.
After the point has been made irrelevant, one can then proceed to make
corrections to the creationist's misinformation, without being lowered
to their standard of argument.
The truth of the matter is that Hitler was a Christian, not an atheist. He
also used his own incorrect interpretation of Darwin's theories to justify
many of his killings. I don't see how correcting the first point (about his
religion) undermines a correction of the second point (his interpretation of
evolution is incorrect). Could you elaborate?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Goodness Godless" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
20 Jan 2004 09:18:58 AM |
|
|
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:_O9Pb.2948$Fp1.1890850@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401200308.1333d972@posting.google.com...
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
<snip>
Wrong! Hitler was born and died a Chistian.
--
Goodness Godless
When I was young there was no respect for the young, and now that I am old
there is no respect for the old. I missed out coming and going.
J.B. Priestley
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
21 Jan 2004 04:36:14 AM |
|
|
"Goodness Godless" <goodness@godless.net> wrote in message news:<1074611835.681657@athnrd02.forthnet.gr>...
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:_O9Pb.2948$Fp1.1890850@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401200308.1333d972@posting.google.com...
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
<snip>
Wrong! Hitler was born and died a Chistian.
What do you mean "wrong"? What statement above is wrong?
--
Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Goodness Godless" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing - On the other hand |
21 Jan 2004 07:45:07 AM |
|
|
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401210236.562ea514@posting.google.com...
"Goodness Godless" <goodness@godless.net> wrote in message
news:<1074611835.681657@athnrd02.forthnet.gr>...
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:_O9Pb.2948$Fp1.1890850@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401200308.1333d972@posting.google.com...
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these
facts
are incorrect.
<snip>
Wrong! Hitler was born and died a Chistian.
What do you mean "wrong"? What statement above is wrong?
--
Iain
If there is any "guilt by association" for atheists to deal with
it is with the fact that Stalin and Lenin claimed to be atheists.
But Hiter was a christian.
--
Goodness Godless
When I was young there was no respect for the young, and now that I am old
there is no respect for the old. I missed out coming and going.
J.B. Priestley
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Goodness Godless" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
21 Jan 2004 07:29:41 AM |
|
|
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401210236.562ea514@posting.google.com...
"Goodness Godless" <goodness@godless.net> wrote in message
news:<1074611835.681657@athnrd02.forthnet.gr>...
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:_O9Pb.2948$Fp1.1890850@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401200308.1333d972@posting.google.com...
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these
facts
are incorrect.
<snip>
Wrong! Hitler was born and died a Chistian.
What do you mean "wrong"? What statement above is wrong?
--
Iain
Its very simple, it is Christians who might like to deal with the "guilt by
association" with Hitler, Hitler was a Christian.
--
Goodness Godless
My Nation is Planet Earth because my
Passport is my Education - anon.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
21 Jan 2004 02:29:04 PM |
|
|
(Iain) wrote in message news:<6feb9a89.0401210236.562ea514@posting.google.com>...
"Goodness Godless" <goodness@godless.net> wrote in message news:<1074611835.681657@athnrd02.forthnet.gr>...
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:_O9Pb.2948$Fp1.1890850@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"Iain" < > wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401200308.1333d972@posting.google.com...
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
<snip>
Wrong! Hitler was born and died a Chistian.
What do you mean "wrong"? What statement above is wrong?
"The folkish-minded man, in particular, has the sacred duty, each in
his own denomination, of making people stop just talking superficially
of God's will, and actually fulfill God's will, and not let God's word
be desecrated.
For God's will gave men their form, their essence, and their
abilities. Anyone who destroys His work is declaring war on the Lord's
creation, the divine will. Therefore, let every man be active, each in
his own denomination if you please, and let every man take it as his
first and most sacred duty to oppose anyone who in his activity by
word or deed steps outside the confines of his religious community and
tries to butt into the other."
.... Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will
of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am
fighting for the work of the Lord."
- Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf"
"Three years later he informed General Gerhart Engel: "I am now as
before a Catholic and will always remain so." He never left the
church, and the church never left him. Great literature was banned by
his church, but his miserable Mien Kampf never appeared on the Index
of Forbidden Books. "
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_haught/holy.html
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a
fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded
only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and
summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest
not as a sufferer but as a fighter.
In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the
passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and
seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and
adders. How terrific was his fight against the Jewish poison."
Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more
profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had
to shed his blood upon the Cross."
As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I
have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice..."
And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting
rightly, it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I
have also a duty to my own people. And when I look on my people I see
them work and work and toil and labor, and at the end of the week they
have only for their wages wretchedness and misery."
When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their
queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no
Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity for them, if I did not,
as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom
today this poor people are plundered and exploited."
- Adolf Hitler, "My New Order"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
21 Jan 2004 07:41:25 AM |
|
|
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message news:<_O9Pb.2948$Fp1.1890850@news1.news.adelphia.net>...
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401200308.1333d972@posting.google.com...
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
However, the way atheists respond is counterproductive. Their response
is the equivelant of that of a black man, who upon being discriminated
against, defends himself not by saying that his colour is of no
practical significance to the situation, but instead giving reasons
why he may not be black. The problem with this response is that the
black man(regardless of how true the accusation of being black is), is
implying that the basis for the argument is correct and that
discrimination based on colour is valid.
The most important response to such ramblings regarding evil people
who share the same knowledge as scientists, is not one that deals with
their sincerity, but one that breaks the connection between the
creationist's argument, and it's purpose(to put to shame atheists).
Regardless of what Hitler may have believed or why he may have done
what he did, there are atheists and evolutionists et cetera, who are
genuinely evil people. However, saying that the theory of evolution is
evil because it was used as a premise by one person is like saying the
theory of sharpness is evil because people used it to make swords.
In a nutshell, it is important to remind people that although it is
condradictory of certain religious beliefs, the theory of evolution
does not take their form: it is not good or evil, just a matter of
fact.
It is a written conclusion based on the data taken by the harmless
bearded fellow on £10 notes.
After the point has been made irrelevant, one can then proceed to make
corrections to the creationist's misinformation, without being lowered
to their standard of argument.
The truth of the matter is that Hitler was a Christian, not an atheist. He
also used his own incorrect interpretation of Darwin's theories to justify
many of his killings. I don't see how correcting the first point (about his
religion) undermines a correction of the second point (his interpretation of
evolution is incorrect). Could you elaborate?
I mean that atheists always argue against the accusation of Hitler
being an atheist, but that this is a diversion against a better
response: that it doesn't paint you or I with the same brush as he,
even if he was(which he wasn't).
Rationally, arguing against Hitler being an atheist is futile, because
even though such an argument is correct, it reinforces the premise of
the fundy: that is matters because atheism is a religion which results
in a uniform system of immoral morals et-cetera.
--
Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
21 Jan 2004 10:36:21 AM |
|
|
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401210541.23b622a0@posting.google.com...
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:<_O9Pb.2948$Fp1.1890850@news1.news.adelphia.net>...
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6feb9a89.0401200308.1333d972@posting.google.com...
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
However, the way atheists respond is counterproductive. Their response
is the equivelant of that of a black man, who upon being discriminated
against, defends himself not by saying that his colour is of no
practical significance to the situation, but instead giving reasons
why he may not be black. The problem with this response is that the
black man(regardless of how true the accusation of being black is), is
implying that the basis for the argument is correct and that
discrimination based on colour is valid.
The most important response to such ramblings regarding evil people
who share the same knowledge as scientists, is not one that deals with
their sincerity, but one that breaks the connection between the
creationist's argument, and it's purpose(to put to shame atheists).
Regardless of what Hitler may have believed or why he may have done
what he did, there are atheists and evolutionists et cetera, who are
genuinely evil people. However, saying that the theory of evolution is
evil because it was used as a premise by one person is like saying the
theory of sharpness is evil because people used it to make swords.
In a nutshell, it is important to remind people that although it is
condradictory of certain religious beliefs, the theory of evolution
does not take their form: it is not good or evil, just a matter of
fact.
It is a written conclusion based on the data taken by the harmless
bearded fellow on £10 notes.
After the point has been made irrelevant, one can then proceed to make
corrections to the creationist's misinformation, without being lowered
to their standard of argument.
The truth of the matter is that Hitler was a Christian, not an atheist.
He
also used his own incorrect interpretation of Darwin's theories to
justify
many of his killings. I don't see how correcting the first point (about
his
religion) undermines a correction of the second point (his
interpretation of
evolution is incorrect). Could you elaborate?
I mean that atheists always argue against the accusation of Hitler
being an atheist, but that this is a diversion against a better
response: that it doesn't paint you or I with the same brush as he,
even if he was(which he wasn't).
Rationally, arguing against Hitler being an atheist is futile, because
even though such an argument is correct, it reinforces the premise of
the fundy: that is matters because atheism is a religion which results
in a uniform system of immoral morals et-cetera.
I don't think it is futile at all. Hitler's hatred of the Jews is largely
based on his Christian religion, and the holocaust is to be blamed largely
on Hitler's religious views. Those who ignore history are bound to repeat
it. I see no reason in ignoring the holocaust, or allowing Christians to
change history.
You might have a point if Hitler's religion was irrelevant to his actions,
but it seems as if this was the largest reason for the holocaust. Other
reasons are his incorrect interpretation of evolution, nationalism, and
ethno-centrism.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
21 Jan 2004 10:47:35 PM |
|
|
On 21 Jan 2004 05:41:25 -0800, (Iain) wrote:
I mean that atheists always argue against the accusation of Hitler
being an atheist,
Since he never was an atheist, issued those nice striped jogging suits
to atheists and free one tickets to holiday camps, I really think we
should.
but that this is a diversion against a better
response: that it doesn't paint you or I with the same brush as he,
even if he was(which he wasn't).
I can understand your reaction, but Hitler was a christian. Not only
that: he had FULL SUPPORT OF ALL CHRISTIAN CHURCHES, both inside
Germany and outside. Very few christians opposed Hitler before the
war, or even during.
I'd like to hear about a church that opposed Hitler from day one when
he attempted to assume power. I don't know of any.
Rationally, arguing against Hitler being an atheist is futile, because
even though such an argument is correct, it reinforces the premise of
the fundy: that is matters because atheism is a religion which results
in a uniform system of immoral morals et-cetera.
A fundy will not be able to comprehend reality anyway.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Henderson" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
23 Jan 2004 12:32:19 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:47:35 +0700, Jos Flachs
<'wcruise'@ksc15.th.com> wrote:
I can understand your reaction, but Hitler was a christian. Not only
that: he had FULL SUPPORT OF ALL CHRISTIAN CHURCHES, both inside
Germany and outside. Very few christians opposed Hitler before the
war, or even during.
Not only that, but the RCC worked tirelessly after the war to smuggle
Nazis out of Germany under Red Cross visas. They knew full well about
the holocaust by that time, yet did their best to rescue the Germans
responsible to safety.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
22 Jan 2004 07:19:20 PM |
|
|
On 20 Jan 2004 03:08:17 -0800 in alt.atheism
iain_inkster@hotmail.com (Iain) wrote:
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
However, the way atheists respond is counterproductive. Their response
is the equivelant of that of a black man, who upon being discriminated
against, defends himself not by saying that his colour is of no
practical significance to the situation, but instead giving reasons
why he may not be black. The problem with this response is that the
black man(regardless of how true the accusation of being black is), is
implying that the basis for the argument is correct and that
discrimination based on colour is valid.
The most important response to such ramblings regarding evil people
who share the same knowledge as scientists, is not one that deals with
their sincerity, but one that breaks the connection between the
creationist's argument, and it's purpose(to put to shame atheists).
Regardless of what Hitler may have believed or why he may have done
what he did, there are atheists and evolutionists et cetera, who are
genuinely evil people. However, saying that the theory of evolution is
evil because it was used as a premise by one person is like saying the
theory of sharpness is evil because people used it to make swords.
In a nutshell, it is important to remind people that although it is
condradictory of certain religious beliefs, the theory of evolution
does not take their form: it is not good or evil, just a matter of
fact.
It is a written conclusion based on the data taken by the harmless
bearded fellow on £10 notes.
After the point has been made irrelevant, one can then proceed to make
corrections to the creationist's misinformation, without being lowered
to their standard of argument.
There is something in what you say, but I don't entirely agree.
Hitler was Germany's religious leader as much as their political
leader and it is very worthwhile to point that out.
To counter the argument "Hitler was an atheist, therefore
atheism is evil" with the argument "Hitler was a Christian,
therefore Christianity is evil" is very silly, as Hitler's brand
of Christianity is supported by very few Christians today. It is,
however, important to set the record straight. I am not certain
what Hitler himself believed, but he consistently claimed to be a
Christian throughout his entire career - and that was an
essential component of the Nazi ideology. He drew on the intense
anti-semitism that had been one strand of Christianity for
centuries. It is no coincidence that he came to power in that
part of Europe where the 17th century religious wars had been the
most bloody and where the witch burning fanatics had been the
most viscous.
This wasn't the cuddly 'Be nice to Everyone' brand of
Christianity; neither was it the 'Be Good and you will prosper"
kind of Protestantism; or even the "Slog your guts out in this
world and Pie in the Sky when you Die" variety.
No, this was the Old Testament barbarianism. Supposedly some of
the early Christians wanted to dump the Old Testament, but the
corrupt and rotten Roman state would have none of it. They must
have loved all the blood and guts of the Book of Judges.
And the creationists bleating that evolution must be bad because
Hitler was an evolutionist? There I agree with you. It is enough
to point out that Hitler was not evil because of his - very
confused - belief in evolution. Actually, I think that many of
those who argue this way are being dishonest, presenting an
argument they know to be nonsense. But those witless folk who are
convinced by this stuff need answering - and telling them "No,
Hitler was a Christian, so it is your religion that is evil" is
very unlikely to weaken their belief.
-
Martin Thomas
Official "Teddy Bear" Atheist
mart666t@netscape.NO.HAWKERS.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Henderson" |
|
| Title: Re: The Hitler Thing |
21 Jan 2004 05:35:00 PM |
|
|
On 20 Jan 2004 03:08:17 -0800, (Iain) wrote:
The "guilt by association" nonsense about Hitler, saying he is an
atheist, describing his interpretation of evolutionary dynamics et
cetera, used by creationists, as an attempt to "shame" atheists, are
often responded to by atheists, who proceed to explain why these facts
are incorrect.
It has nothing to do with guilt by association, but in setting the
record straight. Hitler was a life-long Catholic and held that God
had personally told him to kill the Jews. That doesn't prove that
Christians are evil and horrible, but it does prove that people can
use God as a means to justify just about any action, as can be clearly
shown throughout history.
.
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|