For mcway to enjoy.

[Necrosis]

somewhat of rebuttal to his hitler rants that are logical fallacies, perhaps dawkins can sum it up briefly on how atheism cannot be used the same way relgious belief can be.

[MCWAY]

YAAAAAAWN!!!!

There's 4^1/2 of my life I can't get back.

Perhaps, we should also be offended by an ignoramous like Dawkins, who can't seem to grasp that people of faith DO support stem cell research (by and large) with one lone exception, which just happens to be the most ethically controversial and the LEAST EFFECTIVE: Embryonic stem cell research.

Or, perhaps we should be offended by Dawkins' supreme ignorance over the fact that, for all his bleating about kids and education, it has been the Christian church that have helped develop schools to help educate not only America's children but children worldwide.

As for quote from Martin Amis, I'm afraid Amis is showing his supreme amnesia on world history. But, Dawkins is right about one thing. Stalin didn't scream "Heil Hitler", when he was slaughtering people left and right. Of course, when millions are being put down, one is hardly concerned about what the one-liners coming from the mouths of the aggressors.

Once again, Dawkins in engaging in revisionist history, trying to paint the Nazis as Christians, hoping to whitewash the secularist tint from them. But, as the saying goes, "that dog don't hunt". The simple fact is, whether Dawkins acknowledges it or not, atheism has IN FACT been used to create atrocities that make the Jihads and Crusades look like catfights at Hooters.

With no god, man is the supreme being. Therefore, the breed of man deemed superior is in fact the ruler of the roost.

Hitler did what he did, thinking he was a "good person", because he was advancing his so-called "master race" and getting rid of the inferior Jews (which I'm sure would have been followed by blacks, Hispanics, and even other white people, he and his ilk deemed to be of inferior stock).

With no Islam, Christianity, or even Baal worship to fuel his "dogma", we are left with one thing for the Fuhrer: Pure bona-fide atheism.

Dawkins can be as offended as he wants. That changes not the facts of history or that this sub-5-minute diatribe was as right as two left shoes.

Nice try, Necrosis! But, you're going to have to better than this.

[Necrosis]

YAAAAAAWN!!!!

There's 4^1/2 of my life I can't get back.

Perhaps, we should also be offended by an ignoramous like Dawkins, who can't seem to grasp that people of faith DO support stem cell research (by and large) with one lone exception, which just happens to be the most ethically controversial and the LEAST EFFECTIVE: Embryonic stem cell research.

Or, perhaps we should be offended by Dawkins' supreme ignorance over the fact that, for all his bleating about kids and education, it has been the Christian church that have helped develop schools to help educate not only America's children but children worldwide.

As for quote from Martin Amis, I'm afraid Amis is showing his supreme amnesia on world history. But, Dawkins is right about one thing. Stalin didn't scream "Heil Hitler", when he was slaughtering people left and right. Of course, when millions are being put down, one is hardly concerned about what the one-liners coming from the mouths of the aggressors.

Once again, Dawkins in engaging in revisionist history, trying to paint the Nazis as Christians, hoping to whitewash the secularist tint from them. But, as the saying goes, "that dog don't hunt". The simple fact is, whether Dawkins acknowledges it or not, atheism has IN FACT been used to create atrocities that make the Jihads and Crusades look like catfights at Hooters.

With no god, man is the supreme being. Therefore, the breed of man deemed superior is in fact the ruler of the roost.

Hitler did what he did, thinking he was a "good person", because he was advancing his so-called "master race" and getting rid of the inferior Jews (which I'm sure would have been followed by blacks, Hispanics, and even other white people, he and his ilk deemed to be of inferior stock).

With no Islam, Christianity, or even Baal worship to fuel his "dogma", we are left with one thing for the Fuhrer: Pure bona-fide atheism.

Dawkins can be as offended as he wants. That changes not the facts of history or that this sub-5-minute diatribe was as right as two left shoes.

Nice try, Necrosis! But, you're going to have to better than this.

you miss the point, saying hitler killed because of atheism is not logical, just like saying he killed because he was a vegetarian,his argument is logical and correct.

hitler was a man of relgion, the belts they wore had religious writings inscribed. examples


“I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.”

( Adolf Hitler, from John Toland [Pulitzer Prize winner], Adolf Hitler, New York: Anchor Publishing, 1992, p. 507. )


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.”

( Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Ralph Mannheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999, p. 562. )

i geuss mein kampf isnt a good source

“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, Ralph Mannheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999, p. 65. )

DIRECT EVIDENCE


“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 as a man I have the duty to see to it that human society does not suffer the same catastrophic collapse as did the civilization of the ancient world some two thousand years ago — a civilization which was driven to its ruin through this same Jewish people.

“Then indeed when Rome collapsed there were endless streams of new German bands flowing into the Empire from the North; but, if Germany collapses today, who is there to come after us? German blood upon this earth is on the way to gradual exhaustion unless we pull ourselves together and make ourselves free!

“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, in a speech delivered at Munich, April 12, 1922; from Norman H. Baynes, ed., The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1, New York: Oxford University Press, 1942, pp. 19-20. )

“We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.”

( Adolf Hitler, in a speech delivered in Berlin, October 24, 1933. )

AS USUAL you are wrong while also creating strawmen, you see it doesnt matter if hitler was an atheist, for argument lets say he was, atheism cannot be used as tool to destroy others. No were does it say some are superior, no where does it say to do any of the things hitler did, it has nothing to say other then there is no god.


EPIC FAIL.

[MCWAY]

Last time I checked WW2 was in the 1940s, NOT the 1920s. Let see what good Adolf had to say, WHILE HE WAS WHACKING JEWS, left and right.

”The  heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. (Sound familiar?) Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are the inventions of the Jew”.





“Stamp out Christianity, ROOT and BRANCH!!!” Now that’s hardly a statement made by someone whose Lord and Savior was Jesus Christ and a card-carrying Catholic.


Furthermore, to stamp out Christianity, “root and branch”, take a wild guess as to which ethnic group would have to be exterminated……….the Jewish race.

you miss the point, saying hitler killed because of atheism is not logical, just like saying he killed because he was a vegetarian,his argument is logical and correct.

Complete buffoonery, once again, from your end. Hitler gave the reasons for his destroying the Jews and for some strange reason, his dietary habits never entered the equation.

ONE MORE TIME, since your comprehension tends to be shaky at times, Hitler destroyed Jews because he believed that HIS race was the master race, the top of the so-called evolutionary food chain.

hitler was a man of relgion, the belts they wore had religious writings inscribed. examples

GIVE ME A BREAK!! I guess Madonna or Britney Spears wearing crosses makes them nuns. You can’t be this void of sense.

As for your “examples”, they unfortunately don’t hold water, especially considering what went down when the killing began.

Embarrassed at the murderous legacy of atheist Communist regimes in the twentieth century, leading atheists seek to even the score with believers by portraying Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime as theist and specifically Christian. Atheist websites routinely claim that Hitler was a Christian because he was born Catholic, he never publicly renounced his Catholicism, and he wrote in Mein Kampf, “By defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” Atheist writer Sam Harris writes that since “the Holocaust marked the culmination of…two hundred years of Christian fulminating against the Jews,” therefore “knowingly or not, the Nazis were agents of religion.”
How persuasive are these claims? Hitler was born Catholic just as Stalin was born into the Russian Orthodox Church and Mao was raised as a Buddhist. These facts prove nothing as many people reject their religious upbringing, as these three men did. From an early age, historian Allan Bullock writes, Hitler “had no time at all for Catholic teaching, regarding it as a religion fit only for slaves and detesting its ethics.”
How then do we account for Hitler’s claim that in carrying out his anti-Semitic program he was an instrument of divine providence? During his ascent to power, Hitler needed the support of the German people—both the Bavarian Catholics and the Prussian Lutherans—and to secure this he occasionally used rhetoric such as “I am doing the Lord’s work.” To claim that this rhetoric makes Hitler a Christian is to confuse political opportunism with personal conviction. Hitler himself says in Mein Kampf that his public statements should be understood as propaganda that bears no relation to the truth but is designed to sway the masses. – Dinesh D’Souza, “What’s So Great About Christianity?”

“I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.”

( Adolf Hitler, from John Toland [Pulitzer Prize winner], Adolf Hitler, New York: Anchor Publishing, 1992, p. 507. )


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.”

( Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Ralph Mannheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999, p. 562. )

i geuss mein kampf isnt a good source 



“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, Ralph Mannheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999, p. 65. )

Indeed it is a good source, especially when you include THE REST of what he said, instead of pulling this silly tactic.

DIRECT EVIDENCE


“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 as a man I have the duty to see to it that human society does not suffer the same catastrophic collapse as did the civilization of the ancient world some two thousand years ago — a civilization which was driven to its ruin through this same Jewish people.

“Then indeed when Rome collapsed there were endless streams of new German bands flowing into the Empire from the North; but, if Germany collapses today, who is there to come after us? German blood upon this earth is on the way to gradual exhaustion unless we pull ourselves together and make ourselves free!

“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, in a speech delivered at Munich, April 12, 1922; from Norman H. Baynes, ed., The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1, New York: Oxford University Press, 1942, pp. 19-20. )

“We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.”

( Adolf Hitler, in a speech delivered in Berlin, October 24, 1933. )

AS USUAL you are wrong while also creating strawmen, you see it doesnt matter if hitler was an atheist, for argument lets say he was, atheism cannot be used as tool to destroy others. No were does it say some are superior, no where does it say to do any of the things hitler did, it has nothing to say other then there is no god.


EPIC FAIL.

More like epic denial on your part.

Shortly after assuming power in Germany in 1933, Adolf Hitler stated that he intended “to stamp out Christianity root and branch,” for “One is either a Christian or a German—you cannot be both.” Christianity should be destroyed by force or ”left to rot like a gangrenous limb,” Hitler argued, so that most Germans will be Christians, “never again. That tale is finished…but we can hasten matters. The parsons will be made to dig their own graves. They will betray their God to us.” Henry F. Schaefer, “Science and Christianity”, p. 138 (‘What about Adolf Hitler? Wasn’t he a Christian?)

“Hitler spoke of both Protestants and Catholics with contempt, convinced that all Christians would betray their God when they were forced to choose between the swastika and the Cross: ‘Do you really believe the masses will be Christian again?  Nonsense!  Never again.  That tale is finished.  No one will listen to it again.  But we can hasten matters.  The parsons will dig their own graves.  They will betray their God to us.  They will betray anything for the sake of their miserable jobs and incomes’” -  Erwin Lutzer, "Hitler's Cross: The Revealing Story of How the Cross of Christ was Used as a Symbol of the Nazi Agenda"

[MCWAY]

Yet, more evidence of Hitler's "Christianity".

'The dogma of Christianity,' he declared in one of his wartime conversations, 'gets worn away before the advances of science....Gradually the myths crumble. All that is left is to prove that in nature there is no frontier between the organic and the inorganic. When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know the stars are not sources of light, but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds like ours, then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity....The man who lives in communion with nature necessarily finds himself in opposition to the Churches, and that why they're heading for ruin—for science is bound to win.' [excerpt from Hitler's Table Talk] - Alan Bullock, "Hitler, A Study in Tyranny"

Now why does that sound so darn familiar, again?  OOOHHH!! It's the same mess that atheists like Dawkins (and you) keep spouting. So much for the claim of a simple disbelief in a deity.

Then, there's the man-worshipping-himself routine:

As time went on, it became clearer that he. was thinking of himself as the Messiah and that it was he who was destined to lead Germany to glory. His references to the Bible became more frequent and the movement began to take on a religious atmosphere. Comparisons between Christ and himself became more numerous and found their way into his conversation and speeches. For example, he would say:

"When I came to Berlin a few weeks ago and looked at the traffic in the Kurfuerstendamm, the luxury, the perversion, the iniquity, the wanton display, and the Jewish materialism disgusted me so thoroughly, that I was almost beside myself. I nearly imagined myself to be Jesus Christ when He came to His Father's temple and found it taken by the money-changers. I can well imagine how He felt when He seized a whip and scourged them out."

During his speech, according to Hanfstangl, he swung his whip around violently as though to drive out the Jews and the forces of darkness, the enemies of Germany and German honor. Dietrich Eckart, who discovered Hitler as a possible leader and had witnessed this performance, said later, "When a man gets to the point of identifying himself with Jesus Christ, then he is ripe for an insane asylum." The identification in all this was not with Jesus Christ, the Crucified, but with Jesus Christ, the furious, lashing the crowds.

As a matter of fact, Hitler has very little admiration for Christ, the Crucified. Although he was brought up a Catholic, and received Communion, during the war, he severed his connection with the Church directly afterwards. This kind of Christ he considers soft and weak and unsuitable as a German Messiah.

The latter must be hard and brutal if he is to save Germany and lead it to its destiny.

"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by only a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned me 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 rose at last in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was the fight for the world against the Jewish poison."

And to Rauschning he once referred to "the Jewish Christ-creed with its effeminate, pity-ethics".

It is not clear from the evidence whether the new State religion was part of Hitler's plan or whether developments were such that it became feasible. It is true that Rosenberg had long advocated such a move, but there is no evidence that Hitler was inclined to take such a drastic step until after he had come to power. It is possible that he felt he needed the power before he could initiate such a change, or it may be that his series of successes were so startling that the people spontaneously adopted a religious attitude towards him which made the move more or less obvious. In any case, he has accepted this God-like role without any hesitation or embarrassment. - Walter C. Langer, "A Psychological Analysis of Adolph Hitler: His Life and Legend."

[loco]

And what about Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot?  All atheists who murdered millions of innocent people, their own people.

The numbers of innocent people who have been murdered by "religious people" for "religious reasons" does not even come close to that.


"It is dishonest to pretend that the Crusades count against theism but that Stalin doesn’t count against atheism." -  H. Allen Orr

Prof. Orr is an evolutionary geneticist whose research focuses on the genetics of speciation and the genetics of adaptation.

Gould on God Can religion and science be happily reconciled? in the Boston Review
http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/orr.html

[Necrosis]

And what about Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot?  All atheists who murdered millions of innocent people, their own people.

The numbers of innocent people who have been murdered by "religious people" for "religious reasons" does not even come close to that.


"It is dishonest to pretend that the Crusades count against theism but that Stalin doesn’t count against atheism." -  H. Allen Orr

Prof. Orr is an evolutionary geneticist whose research focuses on the genetics of speciation and the genetics of adaptation.

Gould on God Can religion and science be happily reconciled? in the Boston Review
http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/orr.html

it is not dishonest, atheism was not a driving factor and has no bearing on killing people etc.. its only claim is there is no god. How can you extrapolate that to murdering someone?

and no relgious killings far outnumber anything, if i was to agree with your ridiculous assesment. Watch the video, the logic doesnt follow. If stalin was a vegetarian would it be vegetarianism that caused genocide? same argument applies to atheism.

[loco]

it is not dishonest, atheism was not a driving factor and has no bearing on killing people etc.. its only claim is there is no god. How can you extrapolate that to murdering someone?

and no relgious killings far outnumber anything, if i was to agree with your ridiculous assesment. Watch the video, the logic doesnt follow. If stalin was a vegetarian would it be vegetarianism that caused genocide? same argument applies to atheism.

It is dishonest.  Your logic can be applied both ways.  Pseudo-religious, or even secular leaders have used religion to get people to murder others.  This is driven, not by religion, but by their desire to obtain or maintain power, wealth and recognition.  Same goes for atheist leaders, who use secular ideologies to get people to murder others.  It is neither atheism nor theism that drives atheist or theist leaders to get people to murder for them.

But the fact still remains that secular ideologies drove atheists to murder millions of innocent people, something religion doesn't even come close to.

Yes, the numbers of innocent lives taken by atheists driven by secular ideologies far outnumbers the innocent lives taken by "religious" people driven by "religion."

You and Dawkins are entitled to your opinions.  I am going to disagree with both of you and I am going to agree with H. Allen Orr.

Necrosis, I really wish you would post as much, if not more, in the nutrition board as you post here.  Don't let Dawkins get you all worked up and hating religion and religious people. 

Dawkins loves God and he loves religion.  Even though he is an accomplished Biologist and not a Theologian, writing books and giving lectures about God and religion has made him a very rich and very famous man among many audiences, something he wasn't able to achieve writing and giving lectures about Biology. 

[MCWAY]

it is not dishonest, atheism was not a driving factor and has no bearing on killing people etc.. its only claim is there is no god. How can you extrapolate that to murdering someone?

Very easily, just as was ACTUALLY DONE by the aforementioned atheistic dictators. If there is no God, then man is the highest sentient being in the universe. Therefore, if you believe that, due to ethnicity or some other trait, you are the best of the best, then all it takes is the political, financial, or military muscle to impose that ideology onto your neighbors.

If you want what someone else has and can convince yourself that (by right of birth, ethnicity, or whatever) it should be yours, you simply need the muscle and the moxie to take it from him.

and no relgious killings far outnumber anything, if i was to agree with your ridiculous assesment. Watch the video, the logic doesnt follow. If stalin was a vegetarian would it be vegetarianism that caused genocide? same argument applies to atheism.

The heck it does!! Dawkins doesn't even believe the garbage he's spewing. His own words betray him. Does he really simply believe that there is no God? HECK NO!!!

He believes religion should be utterly abolished and those who are of faith (particularly Christians and Muslims) are INFERIOR (at least, intellectually) to him and his "logic-and-reason-there-is-no-God" brethren. His words and deeds HARDLY REFLECT someone who merely holds no belief in a deity (just like those of Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, and YOU).

[Necrosis]

It is dishonest.  Your logic can be applied both ways.  Pseudo-religious, or even secular leaders have used religion to get people to murder others.  This is driven, not by religion, but by their desire to obtain or maintain power, wealth and recognition.  Same goes for atheist leaders, who use secular ideologies to get people to murder others.  It is neither atheism nor theism that drives atheists or theists leaders to get people to murder for them.

But the fact still remains that secular ideologies drove atheists to murder millions of innocent lives, something religion doesn't even come close to.

Yes, the numbers of innocent lives taken by atheists driven by secular ideologies far outnumbers the innocent lives taken by "religious" people driven by "religion."

You and Dawkins are entitled to your opinions.  I am going to disagree with both of you and I am going to agree with H. Allen Orr.

Necrosis, I really wish you would post as much, if not more, in the nutrition board as you post here.  Don't let Dawkins get you all worked up and hating religion and religious people. 

Dawkins loves God and he loves religion.  Even though he is an accomplished Biologist and not a Theologian, writing books and giving lectures about God and religion has made him a very rich and very famous man among many audiences, something he wasn't able to achieve writing and giving lectures about Biology. 

what secular ideology?
you must of not watched the video, he clearly demonstrates a logical progression as to why your argument fails.

[Necrosis]

Very easily, just as was ACTUALLY DONE by the aforementioned atheistic dictators. If there is no God, then man is the highest sentient being in the universe. Therefore, if you believe that, due to ethnicity or some other trait, you are the best of the best, then all it takes is the political, financial, or military muscle to impose that ideology onto your neighbors.

If you want what someone else has and can convince yourself that (by right of birth, ethnicity, or whatever) it should be yours, you simply need the muscle and the moxie to take it from him.

The heck it does!! Dawkins doesn't even believe the garbage he's spewing. His own words betray him. Does he really simply believe that there is no God? HECK NO!!!

He believes religion should be utterly abolished and those who are of faith (particularly Christians and Muslims) are INFERIOR (at least, intellectually) to him and his "logic-and-reason-there-is-no-God" brethren. His words and deeds HARDLY REFLECT someone who merely holds no belief in a deity (just like those of Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, and YOU).

atheists do not have to believe they are the highest sentient beings. Another strawman, you cannot commit acts in the name of atheism.


"If you want what someone else has and can convince yourself that (by right of birth, ethnicity, or whatever) it should be yours, you simply need the muscle and the moxie to take it from him"

sooooooooo? what does this have to do with atheism, you could do that right now even if you beleived in god.

"Very easily, just as was ACTUALLY DONE by the aforementioned atheistic dictators. If there is no God, then man is the highest sentient being in the universe. Therefore, if you believe that, due to ethnicity or some other trait, you are the best of the best, then all it takes is the political, financial, or military muscle to impose that ideology onto your neighbors."

man you are just spewing rhetoric and lies, atheism doesnt say this. In fact it is religion that promotes elitism.

[loco]

what secular ideology?
you must of not watched the video, he clearly demonstrates a logical progression as to why your argument fails.

Nationalism and Communism.

[MCWAY]

what secular ideology?
you must of not watched the video, he clearly demonstrates a logical progression as to why your argument fails.

THIS SECULAR IDEOLOGY:

An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment.

This came from the American Atheists Organization. But, it's safe to say that their international brethren (including Dawkins) hold to this.

[MCWAY]

atheists do not have to believe they are the highest sentient beings. Another strawman, you cannot commit acts in the name of atheism.


"If you want what someone else has and can convince yourself that (by right of birth, ethnicity, or whatever) it should be yours, you simply need the muscle and the moxie to take it from him"

sooooooooo? what does this have to do with atheism, you could do that right now even if you beleived in god.

Indeed, you can. But, as usual, you miss the point by a country mile. Your question was how can atheism get extrapolated into murder. I gave the answer to that. The fact that religion can ALSO be extrapolated in similar fashion makes no difference.

"Very easily, just as was ACTUALLY DONE by the aforementioned atheistic dictators. If there is no God, then man is the highest sentient being in the universe. Therefore, if you believe that, due to ethnicity or some other trait, you are the best of the best, then all it takes is the political, financial, or military muscle to impose that ideology onto your neighbors."

man you are just spewing rhetoric and lies, atheism doesnt say this. In fact it is religion that promotes elitism.

Atheism does, as well, in PRACTICE. Dawkins believes that he is intellectually superior, in part, because he no longer believes in God. And, quite frankly, SO DO YOU (whether you actually have the spine to admit it or not).

Atheists refer to themselves as "freethinkers", which implies that people of faith are enslaved (and thus, inferior). They've also called themselves "brights", implying that believers in God are not so "bright" (intellectually speaking), and thus, inferior.

I don't know where you keep getting this foolishness, claiming that atheism is simply a benign disbelief in God. But it doesn't match up to the facts. Your words and actions betray that; those of Dawkins (the current atheistic flavor-of-the-month "prophet") do so as well.

[Necrosis]

Indeed, you can. But, as usual, you miss the point by a country mile. Your question was how can atheism get extrapolated into murder. I gave the answer to that. The fact that religion can ALSO be extrapolated in similar fashion makes no difference.


Atheism does, as well, in PRACTICE. Dawkins believes that he is intellectually superior, in part, because he no longer believes in God. And, quite frankly, SO DO YOU (whether you actually have the spine to admit it or not).

Atheists refer to themselves as "freethinkers", which implies that people of faith are enslaved (and thus, inferior). They've also called themselves "brights", implying that believers in God are not so "bright" (intellectually speaking), and thus, inferior.

I don't know where you keep getting this foolishness, claiming that atheism is simply a benign disbelief in God. But it doesn't match up to the facts. Your words and actions betray that; those of Dawkins (the current atheistic flavor-of-the-month "prophet") do so as well.

how so, that is the fundamental belief. I myself also oppose religious actions.

watch the video, it explains why your argument makes no sense

[MCWAY]

how so, that is the fundamental belief. I myself also oppose religious actions.

That is PART of the fundamental belief. The rest, which you repeatedly and foolishly trying to sidestep, go hand-in-hand with that:

Namely,

"Heaven is here on Earth"
"Man is his own and only salvation"
"Only through (man's) logic and reason can man be fulfilled"

And, that's just the short list.

watch the video, it explains why your argument makes no sense

I've already watched it (or did you forget about that from my initial post here).

[Necrosis]

That is PART of the fundamental belief. The rest, which you repeatedly and foolishly trying to sidestep, go hand-in-hand with that:

Namely,

"Heaven is here on Earth"
"Man is his own and only salvation"
"Only through (man's) logic and reason can man be fulfilled"

where are you getting this non sense?

i can see how you would derive those beliefs from an atheistic stance, however, many atheists would disagree.

i leave open the possibility of god, unlike you i have an open mind. I would side with dawkins on my stance.

[MCWAY]

where are you getting this non sense?

There goes that memory loss, again. Let me break it down, Barney-style, since you seem to have such difficulty, grasping the situation.

"Heaven is here on earth"

An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment.

"Man is his own and only salvation; only through (man's) logic and reason can man be fulfilled"

An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment.

i can see how you would derive those beliefs from an atheistic stance, however, many atheists would disagree.

I didn't "derive" those beliefs. They're spelled out, clear as day, in black-and-white by atheists nation/worldwide.

In fact, I do recall asking you specifically to indicate ANY group of atheists, in which those three "creeds" did not apply. The clock's still ticking.

i leave open the possibility of god, unlike you i have an open mind. I would side with dawkins on my stance.

Once again, your words betray you. If you side with Dawkins, then you DON'T believe in the possibility of a god, because (NEWS FLASH!!!) Dawkins doesn't either. Plus, Dawkins, contrary to your strange and inaccurate claims, DOES NOT hold a mere benign disbelief in God. His words, including those in that video clip, are proof of that.

[Necrosis]

There goes that memory loss, again. Let me break it down, Barney-style, since you seem to have such difficulty, grasping the situation.

"Heaven is here on earth"

An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment.

"Man is his own and only salvation; only through (man's) logic and reason can man be fulfilled"

An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment.


I didn't "derive" those beliefs. They're spelled out, clear as day, in black-and-white by atheists nation/worldwide.

In fact, I do recall asking you specifically to indicate ANY group of atheists, in which those three "creeds" did not apply. The clock's still ticking.


Once again, your words betray you. If you side with Dawkins, then you DON'T believe in the possibility of a god, because (NEWS FLASH!!!) Dawkins doesn't either. Plus, Dawkins, contrary to your strange and inaccurate claims, DOES NOT hold a mere benign disbelief in God. His words, including those in that video clip, are proof of that.

dawkins isnt a strict atheist, he leaves open the possibility of a god. He has stated this many times. Again i do not accept what the atheist organization has laid out, i could be a buddist and beleive in reincarnation, yet still be an atheist and beleive in no god, what is so hard for you to understand that atheism is a disbelief in god. If you want to apply that to the supernatural etc then its your perogative, but it doesn't make it correct.

you mistake his disdain for religion as evidence for angst against beleivers in god etc.... he has said it over and over if it makes you happy fine, however, keep it from effecting others. As you have demonstrated it does effect others becauase as you have admitted you are completely closed minded thus a danger to free thought and progress.

Plus faith leads to some outrageous acts and is irrational.Something society does not need.

[MCWAY]

dawkins isnt a strict atheist, he leaves open the possibility of a god. He has stated this many times. Again i do not accept what the atheist organization has laid out, i could be a buddist and beleive in reincarnation, yet still be an atheist and beleive in no god, what is so hard for you to understand that atheism is a disbelief in god. If you want to apply that to the supernatural etc then its your perogative, but it doesn't make it correct.

What are you talking about? Dawkins isn't a "strict atheist"? PLEASE!! Either he believes there is a God or he doesn't. If he doesn't, he ain't an atheist; if he doesn't, he is.

Furthermore, you can't be a Buddhist, believe in re-incarnation and STILL be an atheist. And the reason is simple: At some point, you'll have to explain exactly what/whom you believe will turn you into someone else in your "next life". And since that someone obviously isn't a human or natural being, guess what option is left......a SUPERNATURAL BEING!!

you mistake his disdain for religion as evidence for angst against beleivers in god etc.... he has said it over and over if it makes you happy fine, however, keep it from effecting others. As you have demonstrated it does effect others becauase as you have admitted you are completely closed minded thus a danger to free thought and progress.

Keep it from affecting others? Maybe you missed the memo, but the overwhelming majority of people on this planet believe that there is a supernatural deity, leaving you, Dawkins, and the rest of your ilk the odd men out.

As for the rest of your spiel, I am hardly a danger to free thought and progress. It is free thought that allows me to examine things and come to the conclusion that indeed there is a God. Once again, in your godless arrogance, you have erroneously equated free though to lack of belief in God, a supreme false and flimsy premise to say the least.

Plus faith leads to some outrageous acts and is irrational.Something society does not need.

Lack of faith leads to that as well. Just look at the aforementioned examples of Hitler and Stalin.

[Necrosis]

What are you talking about? Dawkins isn't a "strict atheist"? PLEASE!! Either he believes there is a God or he doesn't. If he doesn't, he ain't an atheist; if he doesn't, he is.

Furthermore, you can't be a Buddhist, believe in re-incarnation and STILL be an atheist. And the reason is simple: At some point, you'll have to explain exactly what/whom you believe will turn you into someone else in your "next life". And since that someone obviously isn't a human or natural being, guess what option is left......a SUPERNATURAL BEING!!

Keep it from affecting others? Maybe you missed the memo, but the overwhelming majority of people on this planet believe that there is a supernatural deity, leaving you, Dawkins, and the rest of your ilk the odd men out.

As for the rest of your spiel, I am hardly a danger to free thought and progress. It is free thought that allows me to examine things and come to the conclusion that indeed there is a God. Once again, in your godless arrogance, you have erroneously equated free though to lack of belief in God, a supreme false and flimsy premise to say the least.

Lack of faith leads to that as well. Just look at the aforementioned examples of Hitler and Stalin.

hitler was religious, what cant you understand about that. raised a catholic, he had god inscribed on all soldiers belts, may many religious comments in mien kampf that i outlined. Quit the lies.

also people do things in the name of faith, things that there god would approve of.

no one has ever bombed a building in the name of no god, or because there is no god. Dawkins explains how the logic doesnt follow, it cannot, its illogical, you keep living your lie though. The evidence is there for all to see.

[MCWAY]

hitler was religious, what cant you understand about that. raised a catholic, he had god inscribed on all soldiers belts, may many religious comments in mien kampf that i outlined. Quit the lies.

hitler was religious, what cant you understand about that. raised a catholic, he had god inscribed on all soldiers belts, may many religious comments in mien kampf that i outlined. Quit the lies.[/quote]

Key word, genius...WAS a Catholic. Dawkins WAS an Anglican Does that mean I should DQ his current actions and statement and call him a Christian, based on his upbringing?

Hitler's "religious comments" are well-documented. The problem is that you keep side-stepping the ones he makes, when he starts whacking Jews, namely ones like these:

  “One is either a Christian or a German—you cannot be both.” Christianity should be destroyed by force or ”left to rot like a gangrenous limb.” Yep, that sounds like a real born-again, soldier of the Cross to me.

Or, ones like this, Do you really believe the masses will be Christian again?  Nonsense!  Never again.  That tale is finished.  No one will listen to it again.  But we can hasten matters.  The parsons will dig their own graves.  They will betray their God to us.  They will betray anything for the sake of their miserable jobs and incomes’

also people do things in the name of faith, things that there god would approve of.

The word is "their", O enlightened one.

no one has ever bombed a building in the name of no god, or because there is no god. Dawkins explains how the logic doesnt follow, it cannot, its illogical, you keep living your lie though. The evidence is there for all to see.

Indeed, the evidence is there, which is why your foot goes deeper down your throat with each post. Again, you could combine the deaths from Jihads and the Crusades and barely sniff the body count that Hitler left behind. He killed Jews, because he deemed them inferior, on the evolutionary food chain (not because of his belief in God or in the name of Christianity). He and his fellow Aryans were the so-called master race.

Hitler wanted the masses to worship HIM, and that ain't happening as long as people believed in Jesus Christ. Thus, the Fuhrer had to, in his own words, "stamp out Christianity, ROOT AND BRANCH."

[Necrosis]

hitler was religious, what cant you understand about that. raised a catholic, he had god inscribed on all soldiers belts, may many religious comments in mien kampf that i outlined. Quit the lies.

Key word, genius...WAS a Catholic. Dawkins WAS an Anglican Does that mean I should DQ his current actions and statement and call him a Christian, based on his upbringing?

Hitler's "religious comments" are well-documented. The problem is that you keep side-stepping the ones he makes, when he starts whacking Jews, namely ones like these:

  “One is either a Christian or a German—you cannot be both.” Christianity should be destroyed by force or ”left to rot like a gangrenous limb.” Yep, that sounds like a real born-again, soldier of the Cross to me.

Or, ones like this, Do you really believe the masses will be Christian again?  Nonsense!  Never again.  That tale is finished.  No one will listen to it again.  But we can hasten matters.  The parsons will dig their own graves.  They will betray their God to us.  They will betray anything for the sake of their miserable jobs and incomes’

The word is "their", O enlightened one.


Indeed, the evidence is there, which is why your foot goes deeper down your throat with each post. Again, you could combine the deaths from Jihads and the Crusades and barely sniff the body count that Hitler left behind. He killed Jews, because he deemed them inferior, on the evolutionary food chain (not because of his belief in God or in the name of Christianity). He and his fellow Aryans were the so-called master race.

Hitler wanted the masses to worship HIM, and that ain't happening as long as people believed in Jesus Christ. Thus, the Fuhrer had to, in his own words, "stamp out Christianity, ROOT AND BRANCH."

what are you references because in mein kampf he explicitly states his religious views, he had the soldiers take oaths, belts inscribed etc..

in his own words throughout the book he talks of religion.I wasn't using was in that semantic fashion, i was saying that he was a catholic not an atheist.

Not in the past tense, it came out poorly, or you lack comprehension

why would all his soldiers be required to wear belts with religious logos? your argument makes no sense, combined with his diary of sorts its a closed case.

[MCWAY]

what are you references because in mein kampf he explicitly states his religious views, he had the soldiers take oaths, belts inscribed etc..

Try actually reading my past posts, Necrosis. I posted the specific reference with each quote.

in his own words throughout the book he talks of religion.I wasn't using was in that semantic fashion, i was saying that he was a catholic not an atheist.

Again, key word here is...."WAS"! Hitler was not such, when it came time for his "master race" to attempt its takeover and rule.

A Catholic doesn't strive to "stamp out Christianity root and branch" (Hitler's own words).

Not in the past tense, it came out poorly, or you lack comprehension

why would all his soldiers be required to wear belts with religious logos? your argument makes no sense, combined with his diary of sorts its a closed case.

PLEASE!!! Hitler's soldiers, wearing religious logos, makes them about as Christian as Madonna's wearing a cross makes her a nun. This is pitiful, even by your standards.

Once again, in cowardly fashion, you duck and dodge the words of Hitler, during his attempt to rise to world domination,

"Do you really believe the masses will be Christian again?  Nonsense!  Never again.  That tale is finished.  No one will listen to it again.  But we can hasten matters.  The parsons will dig their own graves.  They will betray their God to us.  They will betray anything for the sake of their miserable jobs and incomes’

Or, One is either a Christian or a German—you cannot be both! And since it was the GERMANS, slaughtering Jews left and right, guess what (per Hitler's words) that disqualified them from being...............CHRI STIANS!!

And a devout Catholic is going to indicate that Christianity should be "destroyed by force" or "left to rot like a gangrenous limb"? I don't think so. Yet, you think wearing a cross on a belt buckle is going to erase all that.

[Necrosis]

Try actually reading my past posts, Necrosis. I posted the specific reference with each quote.

Again, key word here is...."WAS"! Hitler was not such, when it came time for his "master race" to attempt its takeover and rule.

A Catholic doesn't strive to "stamp out Christianity root and branch" (Hitler's own words).

Not in the past tense, it came out poorly, or you lack comprehension

PLEASE!!! Hitler's soldiers, wearing religious logos, makes them about as Christian as Madonna's wearing a cross makes her a nun. This is pitiful, even by your standards.

Once again, in cowardly fashion, you duck and dodge the words of Hitler, during his attempt to rise to world domination,

"Do you really believe the masses will be Christian again?  Nonsense!  Never again.  That tale is finished.  No one will listen to it again.  But we can hasten matters.  The parsons will dig their own graves.  They will betray their God to us.  They will betray anything for the sake of their miserable jobs and incomes’

Or, One is either a Christian or a German—you cannot be both! And since it was the GERMANS, slaughtering Jews left and right, guess what (per Hitler's words) that disqualified them from being...............CHRI STIANS!!

And a devout Catholic is going to indicate that Christianity should be "destroyed by force" or "left to rot like a gangrenous limb"? I don't think so. Yet, you think wearing a cross on a belt buckle is going to erase all that.

man i might be retarded but i dont see references? could you please highlight them? i see quotes with no reference

why would he write chiristian stuff in mein kampf? someones story makes no sense. So you have his upbringing combined with mein kampf and the soldiers fatigues VS some quotes that probably came from a christian book amirite??