| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
| Date: |
10 Apr 2007 10:50:07 AM |
| Object: |
Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
Christians hold that God, Himself, became a sacrifice for mankind.
This is a claim that Islam denies and has denied, since the beginning
of Islam, in all sects of Islam. Yet, they are out there blowing
themselves up in the name of Islam. How are these connected?
Consider...
If God is the source and definition of "good," can sacrifice be good
if God doesn't sacrifice? Either God would have to contain that
virtue in Himself, or self-sacrifice is not a "good" virtue, and
Islamic suicide bombers are engaging in sinful behavior by their non-
virtuous act. If self-sacrifice, however, is a good quality (and we
honor heros for this quality), God WOULD have to have that quality.
However, only Jesus Christ fulfills this quality of dying for the sins
of others (or sacrificing themselves for the punishment due another).
This reveals Islam as a fraud and Christianity as the true path to
Eternal Life.
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
.
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
10 Apr 2007 11:16:46 AM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
If God is the source and definition of "good," can sacrifice be good
if God doesn't sacrifice?
God cannot "sacrifice". To sacrifice is to end up with less than one
started. God did not end up losing anything with Jesus's death, since
the 'sacrifice' was to Himself.
This reveals Islam as a fraud and Christianity as the true path to
Eternal Life.
No. It reveals that Islam is a different religion than Christianity
and is built on entirely different principles.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Muhammad Abdul-Rahman" |
|
| Title: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
10 Apr 2007 01:53:16 PM |
|
|
32492: Are there any weak points in Islam that enable the kaafirs
(Disbelievers) to attack it?
-----
(Go here for Reference & More Questions & Answers about Islam & Muslims:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?vid=ISBN1861791542)
-----
Question:
As you know Muslims are facing many challenges, pressures and criticisms
from non-Muslims in the world. In light of this atmosphere, should we Muslim
not be the most open and honest about our shortcomings and try to tackle
them as opposed to being overly defensive and seeming to make excuses or
cover our faults? The reason for this question is that if we seem to deny or
gloss over obvious shortcomings it will not help us to overcome them.
Perhaps some Muslims feel that to deal with our problems openly will assist
the kufaar in their attacks on Islam. Please advise.
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:
There are no weak points in Islam _ praise be to Allaah _ that the Muslim
needs to worry about. Islam is the perfect religion of Allaah, and Allaah
says (interpretation of the meaning):
"And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice"
[al-An'aam 6:115]
One of the scholars said that this means, it tells the truth in its reports
and is just in its rulings.
Allaah has blessed us by completing His religion and perfecting the
blessing, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):
"This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favour upon
you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion"
[al-Maa'idah 5:3]
If an Islamic ruling seems to a person to be a weak point, he should realize
that the fault lies in his way of thinking, because some of the rulings of
sharee'ah that are absolutely wise and just may appear otherwise to some
people, either because of their whims and desires, or because it goes
against what people are used to in their lives, that goes against sharee'ah.
For example, some think that a man's being the protector and maintainer of
women is a weak point in Islam, because they are used to something which is
contrary to that and which also goes against the fitrah (natural inclination
of man).
Secondly:
An important matter which should be pointed out here is that it is not
permissible for anyone to speak about the rulings of Islam or the tafseer of
Qur'aan or the meanings of hadeeth, rather that should be referred to the
scholars who are well-versed in knowledge.
What happens is that a question is put to an ordinary Muslim, and he cannot
find an answer for it or he gives a wrong answer, or it leaves some doubt in
his heart that he cannot rid himself of.
"if only they had referred it to the Messenger or to those charged with
authority among them, the proper investigators would have understood it from
them (directly). Had it not been for the Grace and Mercy of Allaah upon you,
you would have followed Shaytaan (Satan), save a few of you"
[al-Nisa' 4:83 _ interpretation of the meaning]
Hence we say that Allaah has protected the religion for us through the
scholars and has enabled them to understand it correctly so as to refute
hostile ideas and explain its wisdom to people. That is not for the ordinary
people, rather it is only for the elite, namely the scholars.
Some of scholars used to challenge people to bring them a verse that
contradicts another verse or a hadeeth, or a hadeeth that contradicts
another hadeeth or a verse of Qur'aan, and they would explain to them
anything that appeared to be a contradiction, and they used to openly
challenge everyone on this matter.
Al-Daaraqutni _ who was one of the imams of hadeeth _ stood in Baghdad as a
khateeb and said: "O people of Baghdad! No one can tell lies against the
Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) whilst I am
alive." These words indicate the depth of their knowledge and understanding
of Islam, which was so great that the people of falsehood could not attack
Islam or introduce into it things that were not part of it.
Hence our advice to this questioner and other Muslims, especially those who
mix with kuffaar because of their work or because they live in their
countries, is to strive to seek knowledge and to learn the correct rulings
of Islam that are derived from the Qur'aan and Sunnah, whilst paying
attention to learning the reasons behind these rulings, so that they will
have knowledge with which to refute the specious arguments of those who seek
to attack Islam, and this will enable them to call people to Allaah with
proper insight and understanding.
And Allaah knows best.
-----
(Go here for Reference & More Questions & Answers about Islam & Muslims:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?vid=ISBN1861791542)
-----
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1176220207.892884.128320@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Christians hold that God, Himself, became a sacrifice for mankind.
This is a claim that Islam denies and has denied, since the beginning
of Islam, in all sects of Islam. Yet, they are out there blowing
themselves up in the name of Islam. How are these connected?
Consider...
If God is the source and definition of "good," can sacrifice be good
if God doesn't sacrifice? Either God would have to contain that
virtue in Himself, or self-sacrifice is not a "good" virtue, and
Islamic suicide bombers are engaging in sinful behavior by their non-
virtuous act. If self-sacrifice, however, is a good quality (and we
honor heros for this quality), God WOULD have to have that quality.
However, only Jesus Christ fulfills this quality of dying for the sins
of others (or sacrificing themselves for the punishment due another).
This reveals Islam as a fraud and Christianity as the true path to
Eternal Life.
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
10 Apr 2007 04:06:38 PM |
|
|
If you support Islam you are fighting to stop homosexual perversion,
feminism, abortion, etc.
If you support Christianity you are fighting to destroy the earth,
hoping to be whisked away to another world where there is no
homosexual perversion, feminism, abortion, etc.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html http://www.nsm88.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
10 Apr 2007 04:15:12 PM |
|
|
In article <k1vn13l0rqtmt49oq9sf302pmd0orvl935@4ax.com> Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> writes:
If you support Islam you are fighting to stop homosexual perversion,
feminism, abortion, etc.
Where that "etc" has included flying kites, playing chess, all
non-religious music, soccer, card games, television...oh, yeah,
and schools for girls and jobs for women.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
10 Apr 2007 05:24:24 PM |
|
|
"The net effect of feminism is to make any population that practices
it, dumber. The overall IQ of any population practicing feminism, will
over time become lower. Why is that? Because the women with high IQ's
of any such society will be drawn into the feminist web, and they will
fail to reproduce at even a replacement rate.
What is it about feminism that seeks out and destroys intelligence?
Here are a few factors:
· One of the primary goals of feminism is to promote the freeing
of women from the "mundane" task of raising children. Feminism has set
as one of its goals: zero children for women; a goal which is of
course suicidal, but that does not slow them down.
· Should a woman, who practices the religion of feminism, become
pregnant, she will be encouraged by her fellow feminists to have an
abortion, and terminate the child's life within her.
· Women who are feminists, are driven to have careers. So, even
if they want to have children, they view that as something to be done
later, and to be done quickly. In other words, they will have only
one, or at the most two children, if they get around to it at all. If
they fail to have this attitude, they fear that the childbearing
process will destroy their careers.
· Women who do the best in school, the most intelligent, will be
the most sought after by the feminist clergy who dominated the school
system. These bright young women, will be pushed and directed away
from any thoughts of being a wife and mother as a career. They will be
pounded with rhetoric, and lies, about how terrible past women had it,
and how important it is that they not give in and "go traditional." By
the time they have finished college they have been through a top
quality brainwashing campaign, and it is very unlikely that they will
be able to overcome it on their own.
What happens when all of the brightest young ladies fail to have
children? It will leave only the less intelligent women to shoulder
the burden of carrying on the most important task of all: creating the
next generation. Women who are not doing well in school, do not draw
the feminist sharks to them. They are allowed to proceed on their own
course, and the Leftist propaganda, framed for confusing the
intelligent mind into acceptance, passes lesser minds by. These woman,
who often make wonderful mothers, will go out into the world and they
will have families, as they should. However the higher IQ ladies are
lost to the gene pool.
If you think about it, it is the equivalent of an enemy army coming
into a country and shooting all of the most intelligent men in the
country. Those high IQ individuals will have their genes removed from
the gene pool, and the next generation will be that much dumber than
the previous generation. Being done generation after generation, the
results of this feminist sifting process will accumulate over time. As
it runs its course, there will be fewer and fewer intelligent people
in each generation.
In America today, thanks to Leftist philosophy in general, and
feminism specifically, the best and brightest in our society are
reproducing at a level well below the replacement level of 2.1
children. (The replacement level is the number of children, on average
a group of families must have in order for that group to maintain its
current population and to replace itself.) In fact the latest number I
have heard is they are producing 1.5 children on average.
Besides having dismantled our world class school system, the Leftists
are now stealing our most intelligent children from the future
generations by promoting the feminist religion to the members of our
society. We will slowly but surely be forced into being a dumb,
uneducated people who will be only too happy to reside in the third
world society that is planned for our future.
Taking genetic inheritance into consideration, would halt feminism in
its tracks. What our society should be doing is to encourage the most
intelligent women to reproduce in as large numbers as is physically
possible, rather than hanging a "Condemned for a Career" sign over
their womb. By having high IQ women producing large families we would
raise the average IQ of the next generation. That means we would
increase the standard of living for that new generation, because
standard of living is directly tied to IQ. There are studies which
show that criminal behavior is tied to lower IQ and that people with
higher IQs are more likely to be law abiding citizens. So, by chucking
feminism out the door, for the next generation, we can raise the
intelligence, the standard of living, and at the same time lower the
crime rate.
Of course that will not mean anything to the average feminist. They
are not interested in future generations, or else they would not
support abortion, which has killed more young citizens of future
America than there are people in the entire country of Canada.
Feminists are only interested in power for themselves. Everything else
is mere trapping, and window dressing. People like that are not open
to reason. They are not sympathetic to other's difficulties. They are
focused on their own selfish gain, not America's future."
http://www.macstand.com
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html http://www.nsm88.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
10 Apr 2007 05:38:54 PM |
|
|
In article <bi3o131s73u5noelsnqunu2tbsni621p5p@4ax.com> Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> writes:
"The net effect of feminism is to make any population that practices
it, dumber. The overall IQ of any population practicing feminism, will
over time become lower. Why is that? Because the women with high IQ's
of any such society will be drawn into the feminist web, and they will
fail to reproduce at even a replacement rate.
And of course exactly the same argument can be made -- and has
been made, many times -- about intelligence in general: bright
people, men and women both, tend to earn more money and status, those who
thus become better off tend to have smaller families.
And yet we continue to muddle through somehow.
What is it about feminism that seeks out and destroys intelligence?
Here are a few factors:
· One of the primary goals of feminism is to promote the freeing
of women from the "mundane" task of raising children. Feminism has set
as one of its goals: zero children for women; a goal which is of
course suicidal, but that does not slow them down.
No, it hasn't. Feminisim has set as one of its goals that women
could do whatever the hell they want, to the same extent men
could. If this involves wanting children, they could have children;
if not, then no one should pressure them to.
· Should a woman, who practices the religion of feminism, become
pregnant, she will be encouraged by her fellow feminists to have an
abortion, and terminate the child's life within her.
You don't actually know any feminists in this reality, do you?
I do not know of ANYONE who has been pressured to have an
abortion -- other than by their boyfriends.
· Women who are feminists, are driven to have careers. So, even
if they want to have children, they view that as something to be done
later, and to be done quickly. In other words, they will have only
one, or at the most two children, if they get around to it at all. If
they fail to have this attitude, they fear that the childbearing
process will destroy their careers.
One or two children. Sounds like an excellent idea. You have
a thing going for litters?
· Women who do the best in school, the most intelligent, will be
the most sought after by the feminist clergy who dominated the school
system.
Not to mention, in my own personal experience, by the brightest
young men.
These bright young women, will be pushed and directed away
from any thoughts of being a wife and mother as a career. They will be
pounded with rhetoric, and lies, about how terrible past women had it,
and how important it is that they not give in and "go traditional."
I'm starting to question if you know any young women at all here.
By the time they have finished college they have been through a top
quality brainwashing campaign, and it is very unlikely that they will
be able to overcome it on their own.
What happens when all of the brightest young ladies fail to have
children? It will leave only the less intelligent women to shoulder
the burden of carrying on the most important task of all: creating the
next generation. Women who are not doing well in school, do not draw
the feminist sharks to them. They are allowed to proceed on their own
course, and the Leftist propaganda, framed for confusing the
intelligent mind into acceptance, passes lesser minds by. These woman,
who often make wonderful mothers, will go out into the world and they
will have families, as they should. However the higher IQ ladies are
lost to the gene pool.
If you think about it, it is the equivalent of an enemy army coming
into a country and shooting all of the most intelligent men in the
country. Those high IQ individuals will have their genes removed from
the gene pool, and the next generation will be that much dumber than
the previous generation. Being done generation after generation, the
results of this feminist sifting process will accumulate over time. As
it runs its course, there will be fewer and fewer intelligent people
in each generation.
Of course -- just taking your silly argument at face value for
a moment -- women who get out in the work force, instead of
marrying good old Chuck who took them to the prom, will
therby meet many more intelligent men than they would meet if
they follow the early-marriage-and-many-litters philosophy
of yours.
Smarter husband, same woman, brighter kids.
(ignore that regression to the mean behind the curtain)
-- cary
In America today, thanks to Leftist philosophy in general, and
feminism specifically, the best and brightest in our society are
reproducing at a level well below the replacement level of 2.1
children. (The replacement level is the number of children, on average
a group of families must have in order for that group to maintain its
current population and to replace itself.) In fact the latest number I
have heard is they are producing 1.5 children on average.
Besides having dismantled our world class school system, the Leftists
are now stealing our most intelligent children from the future
generations by promoting the feminist religion to the members of our
society. We will slowly but surely be forced into being a dumb,
uneducated people who will be only too happy to reside in the third
world society that is planned for our future.
Taking genetic inheritance into consideration, would halt feminism in
its tracks. What our society should be doing is to encourage the most
intelligent women to reproduce in as large numbers as is physically
possible, rather than hanging a "Condemned for a Career" sign over
their womb. By having high IQ women producing large families we would
raise the average IQ of the next generation. That means we would
increase the standard of living for that new generation, because
standard of living is directly tied to IQ. There are studies which
show that criminal behavior is tied to lower IQ and that people with
higher IQs are more likely to be law abiding citizens. So, by chucking
feminism out the door, for the next generation, we can raise the
intelligence, the standard of living, and at the same time lower the
crime rate.
Of course that will not mean anything to the average feminist. They
are not interested in future generations, or else they would not
support abortion, which has killed more young citizens of future
America than there are people in the entire country of Canada.
Feminists are only interested in power for themselves. Everything else
is mere trapping, and window dressing. People like that are not open
to reason. They are not sympathetic to other's difficulties. They are
focused on their own selfish gain, not America's future."
http://www.macstand.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
11 Apr 2007 04:37:14 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:38:54 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
And of course exactly the same argument can be made -- and has
been made, many times -- about intelligence in general: bright
people, men and women both, tend to earn more money and status, those who
thus become better off tend to have smaller families.
And yet we continue to muddle through somehow.
Muddling through is not enough. We went from cave men to what we are
now. We are not supposed to stop here. The most superior people need
to be having a lot of children.
No, it hasn't. Feminisim has set as one of its goals that women
could do whatever the hell they want,
That is bad and most of them should be mothers.
The leftists who rule America are for having a unisex country and
for fighting "sexism". This should be replaced by a nation that is for
manhood and womenhood. Not only are the sexes different, but the
reason we are attracted to the opposite sex is precisely because they
are different.
In 1852 Emma Snodgrass was arrested in Boston for wearing pants.
Today women are allowed to be policemen and soldiers. Men don't need
to be protected by female policemen.
We don't have to have the kind of society we have now. The
government, and the media, and the schools, may all be leftist
enemies, but their ways are so contrary to human nature that it can be
changed.
The two main forces that reject the unisex society are religion
and nationalism. There certainly
wasn't much feminism going on in a Muslim country like Afganistan. And
it is no coincidence that the USA bombed Afganistan. The USA and its
masters the Jews are the enemy and that is the first thing we need to
be clear about if we are going to change things. There were also
Nationalist countries that were also bombed by the USA and the other
leftists. The media will tell us how terrible they say these countries
were. We must always remember that the media is the enemy and they are
the ones pushing unisex culture on us.
Feminism is something we must always fight against. But a normal
man who considers women his enemy must eventually go mad. Feminism may
be a major symptom of what is wrong with this country but it is only a
symptom. The Jewish control of the media and society is the disease.
And feminism is Jewish:
Gloria Steinem was a Jew. Bella Abzug was a Jew. Betty Friedan was
a Jew.
"THE JEWISH 100: A Ranking Of the Most Influential Jews Of All Time"
By Michael Shaprio
# 56 Betty Friedan (b. 1921)
Born Betty Naomi Goldstein to Harry and Miriam (Horowitz) Goldstein in
Peoria, Illinois, educated at Smith College, married in 1947 to Carl
Friedan, the mother of three children, divorced in 1969, activist,
best-selling author, professor, a founder of the National Organization
for Women (NOW), the National Women's Political Caucus, and the First
Women's Bank, researcher, journalist, Democrat, clinical psychologist,
and grandmother, Betty Friedan was the most influential feminist of
the postwar era. Deemed by Marilyn French and others as an "initiator
of the 'second wave' of feminism, " Friedan's writings and lectures,
including the highly influential books THE FEMININE MYSTIQUE and THE
SECOND STAGE, synthesized women's views on what equality meant and how
to live and work... When the war against fascism ended two decades
later, four million women lost their jobs to returning GIs. Women were
again told that their place was in the home. The freedom to work to
build up and defend their nation was over. Men would earn the family's
bread. What the boys needed was a warm place to come home to every
night. Ironically, American soldiers had accepted some of the values
toward women (Kinder, Kuche, Kirche - children, kitchen, church) as
the Nazis they thought they had defeated...
to the same extent men
could. If this involves wanting children, they could have children;
if not, then no one should pressure them to.
We should make "mother" a real job with a real paycheck.
You don't actually know any feminists in this reality, do you?
I don't want to know any.
I do not know of ANYONE who has been pressured to have an
abortion -- other than by their boyfriends.
The Jewish controlled media pushes for women in careers which means
they will often kill their offspring.
One or two children. Sounds like an excellent idea. You have
a thing going for litters?
It takes around 2.5 children per family just to carry on the
existing amount of people. We need a lot more White people than that.
Not to mention, in my own personal experience, by the brightest
young men.
I'm starting to question if you know any young women at all here.
The media is very anti-motherhood and pushes careers. They have a
point if "mother" isn't a real job with a real paycheck. We should
make it a real job.
Of course -- just taking your silly argument at face value for
a moment -- women who get out in the work force, instead of
marrying good old Chuck who took them to the prom, will
therby meet many more intelligent men than they would meet if
they follow the early-marriage-and-many-litters philosophy
of yours.
Smarter husband, same woman, brighter kids.
(ignore that regression to the mean behind the curtain)
We could have some system where they meet more men.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html http://www.nsm88.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
11 Apr 2007 05:14:26 PM |
|
|
In article <2okq13d46enojol08887a6uetr6dfq697p@4ax.com> Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> writes:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:38:54 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
And of course exactly the same argument can be made -- and has
been made, many times -- about intelligence in general: bright
people, men and women both, tend to earn more money and status, those who
thus become better off tend to have smaller families.
And yet we continue to muddle through somehow.
Muddling through is not enough. We went from cave men to what we are
now. We are not supposed to stop here. The most superior people need
to be having a lot of children.
Bright people tend to have small families -- and that's the
men's choice too, not just the women's. What's your plan
for that one -- make `em stay home too, and hope they *****
more often?
(oopsie: unexpected speedbump -- bright people also tend to
use contraceptives more often, and use them correctly)
No, it hasn't. Feminisim has set as one of its goals that women
could do whatever the hell they want,
That is bad and most of them should be mothers.
Lemme make certain that our listening audience go that one:
you're telling us that women should NOT be allowed to
do whatever they want with their lives?
The leftists who rule America
We do? Whoa! Why am I always the last one to find out.
{silly screed making its 180th consecutive Usenet appearance snipped}
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
11 Apr 2007 05:59:25 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:14:26 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
Bright people tend to have small families -- and that's the
men's choice too, not just the women's.
We need to change that. The first thing we should do is make
"mother" a real job with a real paycheck.
What's your plan
for that one -- make `em stay home too, and hope they *****
more often?
No, men should do other work.
(oopsie: unexpected speedbump -- bright people also tend to
use contraceptives more often, and use them correctly)
That is anti-evolutionary and needs to be stopped. We should start by
making "mother" a real job with a real paycheck. We should remove the
Jews from controlling the media and have pro-mother shows on TV.
Lemme make certain that our listening audience go that one:
you're telling us that women should NOT be allowed to
do whatever they want with their lives?
That is not what I said. They should not be allowed to be policemen
or soldiers etc. but other jobs should not be denied. But we should
promote "mother" and make it a real job with a real paycheck.
The leftists who rule America
We do? Whoa! Why am I always the last one to find out.
America is for feminism and race-mixing because it is ruled by
leftist Jews.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html http://www.nsm88.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
11 Apr 2007 09:04:43 PM |
|
|
Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote:
(oopsie: unexpected speedbump -- bright people also tend to
use contraceptives more often, and use them correctly)
That is anti-evolutionary
It is impossible to be antievolutionary.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
12 Apr 2007 04:23:15 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:04:43 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
<lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote:
(oopsie: unexpected speedbump -- bright people also tend to
use contraceptives more often, and use them correctly)
That is anti-evolutionary
It is impossible to be antievolutionary.
That is what the USA and liberalism is doing. Here is an article
from a country that was going in the right direction:
This speech delivered by Dr. Walter Grob, the head of the Nazi Party's
Office of Racial Policy. He was speaking to a women's meeting at the
Gau Party Rally in Cologne on 13 October 1934. After this speech I
will make my comment on it.
My Dear German Women and Girls!
When Germans come together today to discuss the things that concern us
both as individuals and as a nation, it is a solemn occasion, whether
we wish it to be or not. During the political struggles of the past,
we could speak of party programs or of civilization without any
involvement of our soul.
Now we have forgotten how to approach an issue merely with our
understanding, merely with our mouth, merely with our heart. We have
become whole people once again. When we speak with others, we do so
with our full being.
That is what made the movement strong, and great, and powerful from
its first days. It is also that which the enemy on this side of the
border and the other cannot understand, and which it hates with deadly
strength. As this great and beautiful people's movement began, so too
began a hard and bitter struggle between enemy and German forces,
between an old world that is really long dead and buried, and the new
world that is struggling to reach the light through us. This struggle
has been going on in people's hearts and souls for years, and is
nowhere near its end. The world finds it difficult to understand that
which is at the center of our endeavors:
The value of blood and race.
Our enemies first laughed in pity, then in hatred as we spoke of it.
Let us speak of what we National Socialists mean by that so that it
will become clear why the German woman may be even more concerned
about these matters than the man, his state, and his fighting
organization can be.
There was a time in the past when we were untrue, untrue in the
deepest sense. We were untrue not to other people, or parties, or
states, or kings, but untrue to something far greater, untrue to the
laws of life. As long as the world exists, as long as life grows,
flourishes and perishes, so long will this life have the urge to live
on into the future and win new territory. Whether plant or animal or
man-as we, or I, or you:
wherever there is life, it has the longing to bring forth new life.
It should be unnecessary to speak of such things. We speak of them
only because for a few decades a crazy era ignored, blasphemed and
mocked these greatest, most beautiful and purest dreams of life. This
was an age that made the idol of money supreme and said: "The world
should be governed not be what serves life, rather by what some fool
of an accountant decides is best." We know the results. The great laws
of life were evaluated according to money sacks and checkbooks. When
we think back on our parents, grandparents and great grandparents,
there were many children in the house. It may have been crowded and
hard financially, but we were happy, perhaps because there were so
many of us in so large a family. But the time came when people said:
"As man or woman, as parents or teachers of leaders, you have the duty
to show the people the way to a better future." That better future,
people thought, could only be a richer future, a future in which the
individual had more money. And when they were asked where this money
would come from, a false teaching arose in the last century: "The
fewer people there are, the more an individual child can inherit from
his parents." He who loves his children and wishes a prosperous future
for his nation should therefore see to it that Germany's population is
small, and that only a few children continue the family after he is
gone. That was the terrible teaching of birth control, which Marxism
preached and the bourgeois followed. No one dared stand against it.
That was the doctrine that made us what we are today:
a dying people,
in which fewer children are born each year, in which today more people
die each year than are born. This all was supposed to lead to a happy
future. It understood happiness only in terms of possessions. It was
therefore inherently false. But even in its own terms it was false,
for it forgot something:
When a people begins to die, when a people no longer obeys the laws of
life, when a people values money more than its existence and
posterity, this people is on the path to disaster, both historically
and politically. Within a few decades it will be dead, oppressed by
other peoples who are stronger, closer to life, and who follow life's
laws better than we.
If present trends continue, by the end of the century Germany will be
a nation with only 40-50 million inhabitants,
and we know that on our borders other peoples are growing quickly and
strongly. Sooner or later, these other peoples will come in conflict
with a shrinking and dying German people, and the result of the
supposed doctrine of happiness will be a hard and bitter
national death for our children.
Those who believed that they can give their children a happy and
peaceful future by reducing the number of children err deeply. They
give the children only the promise of a hard and bitter struggle for
Germany's existence as a state and as an idea.
Today when we work to show people that the ideas of yesterday are
false, that the state and nation cannot do without the family, that
the family cannot exist without children, and when we not only provide
economic support to make it easier to begin families and have
children, but also tell people again and again of the sanctity of life
and the necessity of continuing our people into the future, our
enemies on both sides of the border suddenly have insults and hateful
things to say about us. They wish to disturb our work. Suddenly there
are voices saying: "National Socialism's doctrines are inhumane and
barbaric. National Socialism's views on children turn people into
breeding animals. When it says
that it is the duty of men and women to continue the eternal chain of
life, a chain that begins in the distant past and continues into the
future, a chain of which we are only a link leading into the distant
future,
our enemies on both sides of the border claim: "You reject the dignity
and value of humanity. National Socialism holds that men and women
have no value other than that of breeding cattle." It is a shame that
we have to respond to such words, but it is necessary because our
enemies have always tried to persuade women to oppose us, even though
what we say is rooted in the souls of the men and women we speak to.
This is our response: "You are mistaken in accusing us of thinking
that the only purpose of humanity is to continue the species by
passing on our blood to future generations. We know the other values.
We support them and find wherever we can those values that the
individual shows in his work and selfless service. We know well enough
that
each person lives a double life. The first is the one he lives between
birth and death. We are to do as much as we can to make this life
rich, to accomplish that which is good and beautiful, to use our
strengths and gifts for others. That is the duty of the individual.
But as a person you are something more:
You are a member of the chain of life, a drop in the great bloodstream
of your people.
There too you have duties and obligations before the eternity of the
nation. You have the duty to pass on what you received from your
parents and ancestors. I do not believe that such behavior, which
obeys both the laws of reason and of life, is barbaric, hateful or
inhumane. I believe instead that the barbarism is to be found in the
years we have left behind us, when any dirty lout could besmirch the
most valuable, holy life of a man or women in their families, or drag
children through the filth, without anyone defending their culture
against such an attack.
I believe that when we tell people once more of the great value of
blood, and remind them that they have duties not only for the 60-year
span in which they work and serve, but also to the millennia of the
past from which we come and to the millennia of the future to which we
are heading, then we are giving them higher values than those of
yesterday. Let me say also, however, that it is wrong if someone
thinks that only those who found families and bear children are
valuable to our state. We know that is not so. We know there are
reasons why some people leave their people's flow of blood. We know
that some are denied what the nation places great value on. We do not
ignore them or think ourselves their betters. We only say this: "My
friend, you and I must do our duty to our people, and when we cannot
fulfill it in one way, then we must do what we can with even greater
energy and devotion.
When you do your duty, you are one of us,
we extend our hand to you, we honor your humanity and your service for
Germany. Let us work together so that in the future, as many people as
possible will be able to serve the nation in both ways.
That is a piece of the thinking of blood and race that National
Socialism has taught us. And there is another aspect. When we see
people today, we can recognize that we are not all alike. There are
differences in value;
each person does not have the same value as everyone else.
In the past, people believed that these differences were superficial,
the result of the environment in which one grew up. People believed
that what became of a person depended primarily on the house he grew
up in or in his social environment, or the class he came from. They
believed that a person born in a slum, surrounded by shadows, troubles
and poverty, a child lacking in love and affection, could only become
a second-class human being, a physically and psychologically ill
member of the society, someone failed by the society and the state.
One thought that a child growing up in such slum inevitably became
sick, or even criminal. It was because he grew up in such a poor
environment. The Marxists claimed that if every child in Germany grew
up in an environment that gave him all he needed, he would inevitably
become a useful, decent, upright, proud and honest adult. After a few
years or decades, the entire German people would consist of such
decent and useful people. In the past people believed the environment
was responsible even when a person failed miserably.
We recall the days of delirium, when millions of unemployed had been
thrown on the street by a sick political and economic system, made
superfluous. A single person pried the tracks apart and derailed a
train in the middle of the night. Within a minute he murdered 30
innocent people who had never done anything to him, and stole their
money. And what did the world of yesterday say? "He can't help
himself. He is a victim of circumstances. He has Beethoven's hands and
an artistic temperament. We need not put him on the gallows or in
prison to protect us and our children. No, this poor Schlesinger is
only sick because of his environment. Put him in a modern sanitarium,
give him what he needs: radio, a library, a smoking salon, a language
teacher, a pastor, a newspaper room, give him everything he needs to
put him in touch with better things. In a few years, this mass
murderer of 30 people will leave as an ideal human being, so pure and
innocent that one can put him in charge of a kindergarten." That's
what people thought in the past.
Today that seems a bad joke to us, a crazy fantasy, but a few years
ago it was government policy in Germany. Those who did well under such
policies and have joined to fight us think that they can accuse our
doctrines of blood and race as barbaric.
Why do we see things differently? Because we have learned something:
In the end, you are not as important and significant as you thought
yesterday;
your strength and abilities are not as great as you believed during
the liberal era. Oh yes, it was a lovely dream to say: "I will do with
my life what I want, and if I happen to be a teacher, I will teach
what I want, and do what I enjoy, and what I think right." Well, that
was your idea of the environment.
We are a bit more modest, a bit more humble before the laws of fate.
We have learned that what I can do for myself or what you can do for
yourself, or what we can all do to each other, is not as important, or
as deep, as that which a greater power has already done to us. It is
that power that even before our birth gave us a part of our nature,
and laid out our path for us in the world. Here are joined two things:
the knowledge of modern science and the sensitivity and understanding
of a humble person. Suddenly we see that:
What you are, what I am and what I can be in my life is in part
predetermined by that which I have inherited.
If my inheritance is good and strong, and if I am true to it and
develop what is within me, my life will be successful, and perhaps of
benefit and joy to others. If such an inheritance is denied me, or if
for some inexplicable reason fate has given me other, perhaps weak,
perhaps even bad traits, I can struggle against them for my entire
life, and will still not be able to rid myself of that which slumbers
in me because of the actions of a higher power.
We see then that a good part of a people's history is determined by
what it has inherited. If we ask what sorts of physical or
intellectual traits these may be, or what groups there are, we will
see that each people has three groups. The first is a large group of
people with average gifts, the most of us who are able to deal with
the normal problems life presents us with. Next there is a very small
group. This group has received a better inheritance than most of us,
not because of any particular virtue on its part, but simply because
of fate. The leaders of humanity, those who build states, lead people,
or touch the soul, come from this group. And there is a third small
group with particular traits, also not their fault: those who are sick
or genetically defective. They are not up to the challenges of life,
and need outside help to survive.
As humanity of a nation goes through the centuries, the decisive fact
is which of these three groups is the strongest. One might say: "That
is not a question at all. The strongest will win, the group from which
the leaders come. This superior group has to be the strongest in the
end, it must gradually have its way." Well, that is how things would
be without people, if people with their little brains did not believe
that they could change the laws of life given to the world by heaven.
Man has interfered in these matters. He has tried to change the laws
of struggle and existence and selection. Those were ancient laws of
life, to which men too were subject:
That which cannot meet the challenges dies.
That is hard, perhaps, but it is also the way that nature makes life
stronger and better. Man has tried more and more to abolish these
laws. He has kept life going by using artificial means in cases where,
left to itself, it would have ended. He used all his understanding,
love and sympathy to keep a person alive, even when it is no joy, but
only a burden and misery. We now keep thousands, even tens of
thousands of unhappy creatures alive through artificial means, those
to whom life itself has denied the right to life. But keeping them
alive was not itself the problem. What is worse is that they were
given the opportunity to pass on their unfortunate physical and mental
characteristics. That was the worst that happened: we took the
physically weak, the mentally ill, the genetically defective criminals
and not only kept them alive and cared for them-that is our duty as
human beings, which we certainly do not want to ignore in the future
either-and gave them the ability to have children with the same
deficiencies, thus doubling or multiplying their misery. The German
people do not know the extent of this misery, it does not know the
depressing spirit of the homes where thousands of cripples live their
lives only by being fed and cared for, poor creatures who are worse
than any animal. The animal at least is as it should be. These poor
creatures are distortions of life, no joy either to themselves or
others. They are a burden throughout their miserable existences, but
thanks to the selfless care and devotion of those who care for them
may live 60, 70 or 80 years. The German people do not realize the
enormous sums that have been spent for decades, money that is taken
from those who are healthy, who could do something useful, but cannot
because the money is lacking.
There was a winter in which children in Bavaria did not even have
wooden shoes to wear as they walked through the snow on their way to
school. They had to walk for hours bare-footed. At the same time, the
government made sure that those unfortunate souls in a large
institution had fresh bananas twice a week so that they got the
necessary vitamins. But these vitamins could not give them joy or
strength or health. But they were thus denied to those somewhere in
the Bavarian forest, or in the Ruhr, or in a poor fishing village on
the Frisian coast, where they could have reduced the poverty and need
in some worker's house. At the same time there was a case where
a single mentally ill Negro of English citizenship lived for 16 years
in an institution in Berlin, costing 26,000 Marks.
26,000 Marks were thrown away on a life that had no meaning. 26,000
Marks that could have been used to prepare a dozen strong, healthy and
gifted children for life and a job.
But I am not speaking of this as a kind of theft. Money is not an end
in itself. Rather, we have here committed a theft of spirit and soul,
because we tried to persuade the nation and humanity that our own
greatness could come from sacrificing for the worst and most helpless.
In the end, we went so far as
to put the sick and the dying before the young, strong, healthy and
promising.
That is against nature and life. A nation going this way is heading
for the abyss. We went so far as to preach year after year to healthy
families that they should have no children, or at most one, else they
sinned against the nation and the spirit of this enlightened age. But
if some imbecile of a ***** and a genetically ill criminal had
children, they were not only a financial burden for their entire
lives, but also took the labor of people who our society gave nothing
better to do than to change these poor creatures three times a day and
feed them. That is a perversion of everything great and healthy, and
is a sin against life and the spirit of creation.
With full knowledge of our duties as human beings and the requirements
of pity, we made the decision not to allow such miserable creatures to
pass on their misery to the next generation, multiplied perhaps two or
three or more times. That is a major accomplishment, for which our
children and their children will one day thank us.
I know that there are those who will say: "You are meddling in matters
that are not your concern. You are interfering in an area outside
human control. Life and death are not in the hands of man, but in
those of a higher power. If God wants sick and genetically ill people
to be born, you may not interfere through laws, operations, or any
other measures with God's will. And if you do so-and you have with
your Law to Prevent Inherited Illness-then you are acting against the
will of God, and you are heretics."
This is our answer: "My friend, you are wrong. It is true that we are
subject to a higher power. We humans may never interfere with the
great laws of the Creator. But you are wrong. See the laws the Creator
has established for his world and your life. The great law is that
life must be able to preserve itself, and that if it cannot, it will
collapse. It is the hard, brutal law of the struggle for existence and
of selection and extinction. It was the law we saw day by day, hour by
hour, under all the clouds of heaven and all the stars of the sky, in
which life seemed to find a senseless death, whether plant or animal
or person, whether in distant Africa or near us.
That which cannot meet the challenges of life dies, no matter how much
pain it causes,
and even if your small understanding or mind cannot comprehend it,
these are the great laws of life and the world that God himself gave
us. These are the laws, my German friend, that in our crazy fantasies
we broke in the past."
With overweening human pride and false pity, we broke the great law
and kept those alive who under the laws of God would long since have
perished.
Today we are once more following these old laws, using humane methods,
for they follow a more hard and brutal course in nature according to
God's will. We are doing nothing more than reestablishing the laws of
creation, and bowing to the heavenly order. We are thus showing piety
and true humility-you are the heretics.
This applies as well to the third and last principle of our racial
thinking. This third and last principle is that the people on this
world, in America, Africa or China, are different both in body and
soul. They are not equal, as yesterday's lie had it.
People are different.
They not only speak different languages and look different: no, they
are different in the depths of their hearts and natures, and in their
abilities for good and evil. In the past people believed that these
differences were accidental, the result of climate or civilization,
and that one could overcome these differences and create a unified man
in a unified state in which all would be equally happy. We have
learned that such ideas are false. We have learned that the
differences between the major blood groups of the world, between the
major races, are not the result of human action, but of the laws of
Creation. We have learned that the lines between blood and blood, race
and race, are also the lines between soul and soul and spirit and
spirit. We have learned that the opposite of the old phrase "What God
has brought together, let no man put asunder" is also true. We have
learned:
What God has separated, man should not bring together.
Heaven thought it good not to have only one type of people on the
earth, but different kinds, various racially-bound peoples. That is a
part of Creation. We bow before this truth and respect the borders.
That means that the foundation of our separation of the races is not a
matter of politics or economics, rather it rests on a higher level, to
which we in the end are responsible.
In our Reich, we are separating that which belongs to us, because it
is blood of our blood, from that which does not belong to us, because
it is foreign. We are doing that which is right not only for the
moment, but for eternity.
Believe me, my dear German fellow citizens, it is not true, as some
say, that this doctrine is a sign of arrogance or superiority or
boasting. We do not think ourselves better than the other races on the
earth. No, we do not think ourselves better, nor do we believe that
others are worse than we are. We insist only on one thing-a law
established by the Creator himself:
Man differs from man and race from race in this world.
The others may not be better or worse, but they are different than we
are, and because they are different than we are, there is a kind of
wall between us that is part of the laws of life. That is the core of
National Socialism's racial thinking. Our goal is not to insult
others, to say: "What a great guy I am!" Rather, we hold to the humble
recognition that each healthy piece of life has its corner of the
world, and its special tasks. This is just as true of humans as it is
of plants and animals in all their multiplicity. We know that one type
is no more valuable than another. But we also know that each variety
of life has a right to existence only as long as it keeps itself pure
and strong. Only when a tree bears the proper fruit does it have a
right to live. Otherwise it will be cut down and destroyed. We do not
know why things are the way they are, and it would be foolish to ask
the reason. That is how things are. Our task is to humbly accept the
laws that govern our human existence, and to accept the fact that we
are born Germans in Germany, not as Chinese or Eskimos. That is not
because of our virtues, nor it is our fault, nor was it our will. It
was fate that came from above. We have no choice but to accept this
fate and to develop the abilities that fate has given us according to
necessity and law.
Others may develop in their own way, in their own land. We must listen
to the depths of our own people, to draw from blood and inheritance
the strength we need to build our homeland. A higher power will take
care of the life beyond.
I believe, my dear German fellow citizens, that everyone who is of our
spirit will grant the correctness of our thinking about blood and
race, and will say: "I see now that you are not only on the right
path, but are honest and in the deepest sense true to demands that are
greater than the laws of man."
Let us then together follow the path to a new worldview. Let us go the
path of blood and race, which does not ignore faith and knowledge and
a sense of higher powers. Let us go this path, not a path of matter,
superstition and heresy, rather a path of deep humility and piety
before the laws of God. Let us go along this path together and listen
to the deepest depths where blood and soul rule. Let us draw from
there the strength to build the state, and even more important the
Reich. It will be a Reich not only of politics, a Reich of
organization, or the economy, but a Reich of people. Germany today has
the fortune to find a new way, led by a great Fuehrer. German women
today have the good fortune to see a strong and loyal woman at their
head. Let us together go forward, hand in hand, as befits comrades
building the future, and let us join the strength of men and women,
rooted deep in their blood, to build what the world has never before
seen:
The holy Reich of the German soul.
Heil!
My comment:
In the past there was survival of the fittest and humans evolved
into higher beings with that. But it was a cruel world. Notice in the
above speech that he did say:
"we took the physically weak, the mentally ill, the genetically
defective criminals and not only kept them alive and cared for
them-that is our duty as human beings, which we certainly do not want
to ignore in the future either"
Survival of the fittest should be replaced by sterilization. We would
still evolve into higher beings, but this way is much more humane.
We should take care for those who need help and many work hours
would be done to provide for them, and all we ask in return is for
them not to pass their misfortune onto more generations. We are not
asking too much at all.
It was a great speech. These policies that would make a nation
unimaginably great, a heaven on earth. Heil Hitler.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html http://www.nsm88.com/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SueDoeCyAnts" |
|
| Title: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
12 Apr 2007 12:57:45 PM |
|
|
on Wed 11 Apr 2007 07:04:43p
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> posted
in news:ls4r13lvfd5jjrqjrtdr4066dg51o1r1fv@4ax.com:
Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote:
(oopsie: unexpected speedbump -- bright people also tend to
use contraceptives more often, and use them correctly)
That is anti-evolutionary
It is impossible to be antievolutionary.
AuntieSemantic
responds to
Antisemite
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
12 Apr 2007 04:24:51 PM |
|
|
On 12 Apr 2007 17:57:45 GMT, SueDoeCyAnts <pseudocy@labb.port5.com>
wrote:
on Wed 11 Apr 2007 07:04:43p
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> posted
in news:ls4r13lvfd5jjrqjrtdr4066dg51o1r1fv@4ax.com:
Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote:
(oopsie: unexpected speedbump -- bright people also tend to
use contraceptives more often, and use them correctly)
That is anti-evolutionary
It is impossible to be antievolutionary.
AuntieSemantic
responds to
Antisemite
Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
"anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the
Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America's only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before the Jews America
didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.
Americans had a revolution when they were ruled by the British. If
the British accused
them of being "anti-British" would the Americans throw down their guns
and apologize?
Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
"anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
serving verbiage.
The Jewish controlled media said the French were "cheese eating
surrender monkeys". Why can't the French howl "anti-French" like the
Jews howl "anti-Semite"? Because the French don't control the media,
Jews do.
This is what President Nixon said:
http://www.hnn.us/comments/15664.html
"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
consideration."
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html http://www.nsm88.com/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
11 Apr 2007 09:03:30 PM |
|
|
Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:38:54 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
And yet we continue to muddle through somehow.
Muddling through is not enough. We went from cave men to what we are
now. We are not supposed to stop here.
We aren't.
The most superior people need to be having a lot of children.
Not necessarily.
No, it hasn't. Feminisim has set as one of its goals that women
could do whatever the hell they want,
That is bad and most of them should be mothers.
No one should be a mother who does not want to be a mother.
The leftists who rule America are for having a unisex country
Not hardly.
Not only are the sexes different, but the
reason we are attracted to the opposite sex is precisely because they
are different.
I am different from you, but I find you quite unattractive.
No. I think there is more reason than merely being different.
In 1852 Emma Snodgrass was arrested in Boston for wearing pants.
Today women are allowed to be policemen and soldiers.
This is good.
Men don't need to be protected by female policemen.
I have no problem with it.
We don't have to have the kind of society we have now.
But we want it, so you lose, loser.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Suicide Bombers Reveal Islam as a Fraud |
12 Apr 2007 04:31:09 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:03:30 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
<lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
..
Muddling through is not enough. We went from cave men to what we are
now. We are not supposed to stop here.
We aren't.
You aren't just stopping, but going in the wrong direction. Here is
an article from a country going in the right direction:
This speech delivered by Dr. Walter Grob, the head of the Nazi Party's
Office of Racial Policy. He was speaking to a women's meeting at the
Gau Party Rally in Cologne on 13 October 1934. After this speech I
will make my comment on it.
My Dear German Women and Girls!
When Germans come together today to discuss the things that concern us
both as individuals and as a nation, it is a solemn occasion, whether
we wish it to be or not. During the political struggles of the past,
we could speak of party programs or of civilization without any
involvement of our soul.
Now we have forgotten how to approach an issue merely with our
understanding, merely with our mouth, merely with our heart. We have
become whole people once again. When we speak with others, we do so
with our full being.
That is what made the movement strong, and great, and powerful from
its first days. It is also that which the enemy on this side of the
border and the other cannot understand, and which it hates with deadly
strength. As this great and beautiful people's movement began, so too
began a hard and bitter struggle between enemy and German forces,
between an old world that is really long dead and buried, and the new
world that is struggling to reach the light through us. This struggle
has been going on in people's hearts and souls for years, and is
nowhere near its end. The world finds it difficult to understand that
which is at the center of our endeavors:
The value of blood and race.
Our enemies first laughed in pity, then in hatred as we spoke of it.
Let us speak of what we National Socialists mean by that so that it
will become clear why the German woman may be even more concerned
about these matters than the man, his state, and his fighting
organization can be.
There was a time in the past when we were untrue, untrue in the
deepest sense. We were untrue not to other people, or parties, or
states, or kings, but untrue to something far greater, untrue to the
laws of life. As long as the world exists, as long as life grows,
flourishes and perishes, so long will this life have the urge to live
on into the future and win new territory. Whether plant or animal or
man-as we, or I, or you:
wherever there is life, it has the longing to bring forth new life.
It should be unnecessary to speak of such things. We speak of them
only because for a few decades a crazy era ignored, blasphemed and
mocked these greatest, most beautiful and purest dreams of life. This
was an age that made the idol of money supreme and said: "The world
should be governed not be what serves life, rather by what some fool
of an accountant decides is best." We know the results. The great laws
of life were evaluated according to money sacks and checkbooks. When
we think back on our parents, grandparents and great grandparents,
there were many children in the house. It may have been crowded and
hard financially, but we were happy, perhaps because there were so
many of us in so large a family. But the time came when people said:
"As man or woman, as parents or teachers of leaders, you have the duty
to show the people the way to a better future." That better future,
people thought, could only be a richer future, a future in which the
individual had more money. And when they were asked where this money
would come from, a false teaching arose in the last century: "The
fewer people there are, the more an individual child can inherit from
his parents." He who loves his children and wishes a prosperous future
for his nation should therefore see to it that Germany's population is
small, and that only a few children continue the family after he is
gone. That was the terrible teaching of birth control, which Marxism
preached and the bourgeois followed. No one dared stand against it.
That was the doctrine that made us what we are today:
a dying people,
in which fewer children are born each year, in which today more people
die each year than are born. This all was supposed to lead to a happy
future. It understood happiness only in terms of possessions. It was
therefore inherently false. But even in its own terms it was false,
for it forgot something:
When a people begins to die, when a people no longer obeys the laws of
life, when a people values money more than its existence and
posterity, this people is on the path to disaster, both historically
and politically. Within a few decades it will be dead, oppressed by
other peoples who are stronger, closer to life, and who follow life's
laws better than we.
If present trends continue, by the end of the century Germany will be
a nation with only 40-50 million inhabitants,
and we know that on our borders other peoples are growing quickly and
strongly. Sooner or later, these other peoples will come in conflict
with a shrinking and dying German people, and the result of the
supposed doctrine of happiness will be a hard and bitter
national death for our children.
Those who believed that they can give their children a happy and
peaceful future by reducing the number of children err deeply. They
give the children only the promise of a hard and bitter struggle for
Germany's existence as a state and as an idea.
Today when we work to show people that the ideas of yesterday are
false, that the state and nation cannot do without the family, that
the family cannot exist without children, and when we not only provide
economic support to make it easier to begin families and have
children, but also tell people again and again of the sanctity of life
and the necessity of continuing our people into the future, our
enemies on both sides of the border suddenly have insults and hateful
things to say about us. They wish to disturb our work. Suddenly there
are voices saying: "National Socialism's doctrines are inhumane and
barbaric. National Socialism's views on children turn people into
breeding animals. When it says
that it is the duty of men and women to continue the eternal chain of
life, a chain that begins in the distant past and continues into the
future, a chain of which we are only a link leading into the distant
future,
our enemies on both sides of the border claim: "You reject the dignity
and value of humanity. National Socialism holds that men and women
have no value other than that of breeding cattle." It is a shame that
we have to respond to such words, but it is necessary because our
enemies have always tried to persuade women to oppose us, even though
what we say is rooted in the souls of the men and women we speak to.
This is our response: "You are mistaken in accusing us of thinking
that the only purpose of humanity is to continue the species by
passing on our blood to future generations. We know the other values.
We support them and find wherever we can those values that the
individual shows in his work and selfless service. We know well enough
that
each person lives a double life. The first is the one he lives between
birth and death. We are to do as much as we can to make this life
rich, to accomplish that which is good and beautiful, to use our
strengths and gifts for others. That is the duty of the individual.
But as a person you are something more:
You are a member of the chain of life, a drop in the great bloodstream
of your people.
There too you have duties and obligations before the eternity of the
nation. You have the duty to pass on what you received from your
parents and ancestors. I do not believe that such behavior, which
obeys both the laws of reason and of life, is barbaric, hateful or
inhumane. I believe instead that the barbarism is to be found in the
years we have left behind us, when any dirty lout could besmirch the
most valuable, holy life of a man or women in their families, or drag
children through the filth, without anyone defending their culture
against such an attack.
I believe that when we tell people once more of the great value of
blood, and remind them that they have duties not only for the 60-year
span in which they work and serve, but also to the millennia of the
past from which we come and to the millennia of the future to which we
are heading, then we are giving them higher values than those of
yesterday. Let me say also, however, that it is wrong if someone
thinks that only those who found families and bear children are
valuable to our state. We know that is not so. We know there are
reasons why some people leave their people's flow of blood. We know
that some are denied what the nation places great value on. We do not
ignore them or think ourselves their betters. We only say this: "My
friend, you and I must do our duty to our people, and when we cannot
fulfill it in one way, then we must do what we can with even greater
energy and devotion.
When you do your duty, you are one of us,
we extend our hand to you, we honor your humanity and your service for
Germany. Let us work together so that in the future, as many people as
possible will be able to serve the nation in both ways.
That is a piece of the thinking of blood and race that National
Socialism has taught us. And there is another aspect. When we see
people today, we can recognize that we are not all alike. There are
differences in value;
each person does not have the same value as everyone else.
In the past, people believed that these differences were superficial,
the result of the environment in which one grew up. People believed
that what became of a person depended primarily on the house he grew
up in or in his social environment, or the class he came from. They
believed that a person born in a slum, surrounded by shadows, troubles
and poverty, a child lacking in love and affection, could only become
a second-class human being, a physically and psychologically ill
member of the society, someone failed by the society and the state.
One thought that a child growing up in such slum inevitably became
sick, or even criminal. It was because he grew up in such a poor
environment. The Marxists claimed that if every child in Germany grew
up in an environment that gave him all he needed, he would inevitably
become a useful, decent, upright, proud and honest adult. After a few
years or decades, the entire German people would consist of such
decent and useful people. In the past people believed the environment
was responsible even when a person failed miserably.
We recall the days of delirium, when millions of unemployed had been
thrown on the street by a sick political and economic system, made
superfluous. A single person pried the tracks apart and derailed a
train in the middle of the night. Within a minute he murdered 30
innocent people who had never done anything to him, and stole their
money. And what did the world of yesterday say? "He can't help
himself. He is a victim of circumstances. He has Beethoven's hands and
an artistic temperament. We need not put him on the gallows or in
prison to protect us and our children. No, this poor Schlesinger is
only sick because of his environment. Put him in a modern sanitarium,
give him what he needs: radio, a library, a smoking salon, a language
teacher, a pastor, a newspaper room, give him everything he needs to
put him in touch with better things. In a few years, this mass
murderer of 30 people will leave as an ideal human being, so pure and
innocent that one can put him in charge of a kindergarten." That's
what people thought in the past.
Today that seems a bad joke to us, a crazy fantasy, but a few years
ago it was government policy in Germany. Those who did well under such
policies and have joined to fight us think that they can accuse our
doctrines of blood and race as barbaric.
Why do we see things differently? Because we have learned something:
In the end, you are not as important and significant as you thought
yesterday;
your strength and abilities are not as great as you believed during
the liberal era. Oh yes, it was a lovely dream to say: "I will do with
my life what I want, and if I happen to be a teacher, I will teach
what I want, and do what I enjoy, and what I think right." Well, that
was your idea of the environment.
We are a bit more modest, a bit more humble before the laws of fate.
We have learned that what I can do for myself or what you can do for
yourself, or what we can all do to each other, is not as important, or
as deep, as that which a greater power has already done to us. It is
that power that even before our birth gave us a part of our nature,
and laid out our path for us in the world. Here are joined two things:
the knowledge of modern science and the sensitivity and understanding
of a humble person. Suddenly we see that:
What you are, what I am and what I can be in my life is in part
predetermined by that which I have inherited.
If my inheritance is good and strong, and if I am true to it and
develop what is within me, my life will be successful, and perhaps of
benefit and joy to others. If such an inheritance is denied me, or if
for some inexplicable reason fate has given me other, perhaps weak,
perhaps even bad traits, I can struggle against them for my entire
life, and will still not be able to rid myself of that which slumbers
in me because of the actions of a higher power.
We see then that a good part of a people's history is determined by
what it has inherited. If we ask what sorts of physical or
intellectual traits these may be, or what groups there are, we will
see that each people has three groups. The first is a large group of
people with average gifts, the most of us who are able to deal with
the normal problems life presents us with. Next there is a very small
group. This group has received a better inheritance than most of us,
not because of any particular virtue on its part, but simply because
of fate. The leaders of humanity, those who build states, lead people,
or touch the soul, come from this group. And there is a third small
group with particular traits, also not their fault: those who are sick
or genetically defective. They are not up to the challenges of life,
and need outside help to survive.
As humanity of a nation goes through the centuries, the decisive fact
is which of these three groups is the strongest. One might say: "That
is not a question at all. The strongest will win, the group from which
the leaders come. This superior group has to be the strongest in the
end, it must gradually have its way." Well, that is how things would
be without people, if people with their little brains did not believe
that they could change the laws of life given to the world by heaven.
Man has interfered in these matters. He has tried to change the laws
of struggle and existence and selection. Those were ancient laws of
life, to which men too were subject:
That which cannot meet the challenges dies.
That is hard, perhaps, but it is also the way that nature makes life
stronger and better. Man has tried more and more to abolish these
laws. He has kept life going by using artificial means in cases where,
left to itself, it would have ended. He used all his understanding,
love and sympathy to keep a person alive, even when it is no joy, but
only a burden and misery. We now keep thousands, even tens of
thousands of unhappy creatures alive through artificial means, those
to whom life itself has denied the right to life. But keeping them
alive was not itself the problem. What is worse is that they were
given the opportunity to pass on their unfortunate physical and mental
characteristics. That was the worst that happened: we took the
physically weak, the mentally ill, the genetically defective criminals
and not only kept them alive and cared for them-that is our duty as
human beings, which we certainly do not want to ignore in the future
either-and gave them the ability to have children with the same
deficiencies, thus doubling or multiplying their misery. The German
people do not know the extent of this misery, it does not know the
depressing spirit of the homes where thousands of cripples live their
lives only by being fed and cared for, poor creatures who are worse
than any animal. The animal at least is as it should be. These poor
creatures are distortions of life, no joy either to themselves or
others. They are a burden throughout their miserable existences, but
thanks to the selfless care and devotion of those who care for them
may live 60, 70 or 80 years. The German people do not realize the
enormous sums that have been spent for decades, money that is taken
from those who are healthy, who could do something useful, but cannot
because the money is lacking.
There was a winter in which children in Bavaria did not even have
wooden shoes to wear as they walked through the snow on their way to
school. They had to walk for hours bare-footed. At the same time, the
government made sure that those unfortunate souls in a large
institution had fresh bananas twice a week so that they got the
necessary vitamins. But these vitamins could not give them joy or
strength or health. But they were thus denied to those somewhere in
the Bavarian forest, or in the Ruhr, or in a poor fishing village on
the Frisian coast, where they could have reduced the poverty and need
in some worker's house. At the same time there was a case where
a single mentally ill Negro of English citizenship lived for 16 years
in an institution in Berlin, costing 26,000 Marks.
26,000 Marks were thrown away on a life that had no meaning. 26,000
Marks that could have been used to prepare a dozen strong, healthy and
gifted children for life and a job.
But I am not speaking of this as a kind of theft. Money is not an end
in itself. Rather, we have here committed a theft of spirit and soul,
because we tried to persuade the nation and humanity that our own
greatness could come from sacrificing for the worst and most helpless.
In the end, we went so far as
to put the sick and the dying before the young, strong, healthy and
promising.
That is against nature and life. A nation going this way is heading
for the abyss. We went so far as to preach year after year to healthy
families that they should have no children, or at most one, else they
sinned against the nation and the spirit of this enlightened age. But
if some imbecile of a ***** and a genetically ill criminal had
children, they were not only a financial burden for their entire
lives, but also took the labor of people who our society gave nothing
better to do than to change these poor creatures three times a day and
feed them. That is a perversion of everything great and healthy, and
is a sin against life and the spirit of creation.
With full knowledge of our duties as human beings and the requirements
of pity, we made the decision not to allow such miserable creatures to
pass on their misery to the next generation, multiplied perhaps two or
three or more times. That is a major accomplishment, for which our
children and their children will one day thank us.
I know that there are those who will say: "You are meddling in matters
that are not your concern. You are interfering in an area outside
human control. Life and death are not in the hands of man, but in
those of a higher power. If God wants sick and genetically ill people
to be born, you may not interfere through laws, operations, or any
other measures with God's will. And if you do so-and you have with
your Law to Prevent Inherited Illness-then you are acting against the
will of God, and you are heretics."
This is our answer: "My friend, you are wrong. It is true that we are
subject to a higher power. We humans may never interfere with the
great laws of the Creator. But you are wrong. See the laws the Creator
has established for his world and your life. The great law is that
life must be able to preserve itself, and that if it cannot, it will
collapse. It is the hard, brutal law of the struggle for existence and
of selection and extinction. It was the law we saw day by day, hour by
hour, under all the clouds of heaven and all the stars of the sky, in
which life seemed to find a senseless death, whether plant or animal
or person, whether in distant Africa or near us.
That which cannot meet the challenges of life dies, no matter how much
pain it causes,
and even if your small understanding or mind cannot comprehend it,
these are the great laws of life and the world that God himself gave
us. These are the laws, my German friend, that in our crazy fantasies
we broke in the past."
With overweening human pride and false pity, we broke the great law
and kept those alive who under the laws of God would long since have
perished.
Today we are once more following these old laws, using humane methods,
for they follow a more hard and brutal course in nature according to
God's will. We are doing nothing more than reestablishing the laws of
creation, and bowing to the heavenly order. We are thus showing piety
and true humility-you are the heretics.
This applies as well to the third and last principle of our racial
thinking. This third and last principle is that the people on this
world, in America, Africa or China, are different both in body and
soul. They are not equal, as yesterday's lie had it.
People are different.
They not only speak different languages and look different: no, they
are different in the depths of their hearts and natures, and in their
abilities for good and evil. In the past people believed that these
differences were accidental, the result of climate or civilization,
and that one could overcome these differences and create a unified man
in a unified state in which all would be equally happy. We have
learned that such ideas are false. We have learned that the
differences between the major blood groups of the world, between the
major races, are not the result of human action, but of the laws of
Creation. We have learned that the lines between blood and blood, race
and race, are also the lines between soul and soul and spirit and
spirit. We have learned that the opposite of the old phrase "What God
has brought together, let no man put asunder" is also true. We have
learned:
What God has separated, man should not bring together.
Heaven thought it good not to have only one type of people on the
earth, but different kinds, various racially-bound peoples. That is a
part of Creation. We bow before this truth and respect the borders.
That means that the foundation of our separation of the races is not a
matter of politics or economics, rather it rests on a higher level, to
which we in the end are responsible.
In our Reich, we are separating that which belongs to us, because it
is blood of our blood, from that which does not belong to us, because
it is foreign. We are doing that which is right not only for the
moment, but for eternity.
Believe me, my dear German fellow citizens, it is not true, as some
say, that this doctrine is a sign of arrogance or superiority or
boasting. We do not think ourselves better than the other races on the
earth. No, we do not think ourselves better, nor do we believe that
others are worse than we are. We insist only on one thing-a law
established by the Creator himself:
Man differs from man and race from race in this world.
The others may not be better or worse, but they are different than we
are, and because they are different than we are, there is a kind of
wall between us that is part of the laws of life. That is the core of
National Socialism's racial thinking. Our goal is not to insult
others, to say: "What a great guy I am!" Rather, we hold to the humble
recognition that each healthy piece of life has its corner of the
world, and its special tasks. This is just as true of humans as it is
of plants and animals in all their multiplicity. We know that one type
is no more valuable than another. But we also know that each variety
of life has a right to existence only as long as it keeps itself pure
and strong. Only when a tree bears the proper fruit does it have a
right to live. Otherwise it will be cut down and destroyed. We do not
know why things are the way they are, and it would be foolish to ask
the reason. That is how things are. Our task is to humbly accept the
laws that govern our human existence, and to accept the fact that we
are born Germans in Germany, not as Chinese or Eskimos. That is not
because of our virtues, nor it is our fault, nor was it our will. It
was fate that came from above. We have no choice but to accept this
fate and to develop the abilities that fate has given us according to
necessity and law.
Others may develop in their own way, in their own land. We must listen
to the depths of our own people, to draw from blood and inheritance
the strength we need to build our homeland. A higher power will take
care of the life beyond.
I believe, my dear German fellow citizens, that everyone who is of our
spirit will grant the correctness of our thinking about blood and
race, and will say: "I see now that you are not only on the right
path, but are honest and in the deepest sense true to demands that are
greater than the laws of man."
Let us then together follow the path to a new worldview. Let us go the
path of blood and race, which does not ignore faith and knowledge and
a sense of higher powers. Let us go this path, not a path of matter,
superstition and heresy, rather a path of deep humility and piety
before the laws of God. Let us go along this path together and listen
to the deepest depths where blood and soul rule. Let us draw from
there the strength to build the state, and even more important the
Reich. It will be a Reich not only of politics, a Reich of
organization, or the economy, but a Reich of people. Germany today has
the fortune to find a new way, led by a great Fuehrer. German women
today have the good fortune to see a strong and loyal woman at their
head. Let us together go forward, hand in hand, as befits comrades
building the future, and let us join the strength of men and women,
rooted deep in their blood, to build what the world has never before
seen:
The holy Reich of the German soul.
Heil!
My comment:
In the past there was survival of the fittest and humans evolved
into higher beings with that. But it was a cruel world. Notice in the
above speech that he did say:
"we took the physically weak, the mentally ill, the genetically
defective criminals and not only kept them alive and cared for
them-that is our duty as human beings, which we certainly do not want
to ignore in the future either"
Survival of the fittest should be replaced by sterilization. We would
still evolve into higher beings, but this way is much more humane.
We should take care for those who need help and many work hours
would be done to provide for them, and all we ask in return is for
them not to pass their misfortune onto more generations. We are not
asking too much at all.
It was a great speech. These policies that would make a nation
unimaginably great, a heaven on earth. Heil Hitler.
The most superior people need to be having a lot of children.
Not necessarily.
The most superior people need to be having a lot of children.
No one should be a mother who does not want to be a mother.
Maybe but we could do some things:
Here is what a liberal posted. Much of it is certainly true, though
there may be some liberal distortions and spin:
"Hiter's regime implemented a 26-point plan:
Here are the 1,2,3's to increasing the birthrate:
1. Churn out pro-marriage propaganda.
2. Ban contraceptives and abortions.
3. Fire all women from civil service jobs and the medical, legal and
teaching professions.
4. Restrict women from entering into universities.
5. Create "Young Maiden" Leagues charged with the task of teaching
girls
all about "home, hearth and motherhood."
6. Offer tax-deductible Marriage Loans to allow young couples the
money to
set up a household of their own.
7. Offer tax exemptions to unmarried mothers.
8. Offer "Honor Cards" to mothers who have 3 or more children under
the age
of ten. This "Honor Card" will allow mother to go first in any
line-ups,
receive discounts on various goods and services, plus free movie
tickets.
This strategy was tried in one country and the effect was quite
notable...in
just one year the birth rate jumped from 59 per 1,000 to 73 per 1,000.
Not
high enough was the cry!
9. Create a Mother and Child Bureau charged with the task of
dispensing
advice on having, caring for, and affording babies.
10. Set up temporary homes for unwed mothers.
11. Set up a Marriage Bureau charged with the task of matching men
and
women.
12. Pass a law that makes it illegal for women to refuse to have
children.
13. Exclude women from jury duty.
14. Exclude women from ecclasiactical duties.
15. Promote motherhood. "How fine and noble it is to be a mother!"
16. Have a campaign to promote, "Ten Commandments for Choosing a
Spouse."
17. Indoctrinate the "Young Maidens" to accept that it is their moral
and
patriotic duty to bear children.
18. Track down men and use judicial force to have them marry the
pregnant
girls they left behind.
19. Make government the legal guardian of all illegitimate children.
20. Compel all unmarried adults to register their reasons why they
are not
married and demand of them an action plan as to how they will go about
correcting their situation.
21. Compel all childless married couples to register their reasons
why they
have no children and demand an action plan describing what they are
doing
about it.
The birth rate now stands at 77 per 1,000. Not high enough!
22. At a time when divorces were illegal, divorce was granted to
infertile
and/or estranged couples, freeing up the fertile partner to remarry
someone
else.
23. At a time when midwifery was not permitted, a Midwives Law was
granted
to allow women the help they needed to bear children.
The birth rate rose to 81 per 1,000.
24. On Mother's Day present medals of awards to mothers who have at
least 4
children. Medals come in three catagories, bronze, silver and gold
depending on the number of children. The medal? "Honor Cross of the
Mother" with the inscription "The child ennobles the Mother!"
25. Temporarily suspend the requirement to marry if the man is called
off to
war. Let him impregnate his girlfriend before leaving.
26. Have government assume legal guardianship of all children whose
fathers
died in combat.
The birth rate rose to 85 per 1,000. Not bad. Time to pour out the
champagne and celebrate.
This increase in the birthrate from 59 to 85 per 1,000 was achieved
over a
7-year period. The years were from 193 | | | | | | | |
