Re: Really, what's so bad about it?

[Klaus Hellnick]

On 5/25/12 6:01 AM, Syamsu wrote:
> On 25 mei, 06:56, Earle Jones<earle.jo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> In article<Ce-dnZ7gHewPOyPSnZ2dnUVZ5qKdn...@giganews.com>,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> deadrat<a...@b.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/24/12 11:24 AM, Syamsu wrote:
>>>> On May 24, 4:31 pm, nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>> this is untrue. I'm pretty sure I'm an "evolutionist"- I see evolutionary
>>>>> biology as the best available explanation for the observed diversity of
>>>>> life AND I'm an atheist.
>>
>>>>> But I don't believe right and wrong are matters of objective fact. Is it
>>>>> wrong to punch someone?
>>
>>>> Right and wrong, morality, is derived from what is identified as
>>>> loving or hateful. You identify love and hate as matter of fact, which
>>>> automatically makes your right and wrong a matter of fact too.
>>
>>>> There is a reason why 99 percent of people are religious,
>>
>>> Loving people means not pulling made of "statistics" out of your ass.
>>
>>> <snipped: nonsense based on "statistics" pulled out of your ass/>
>>
>>>>>> which previously resulted in the holocaust.
>>
>>>>> wrong on so many levels. I don't suppose Hitler was particularly keen on
>>>>> evolution or atheism.
>>
>>>> It is very evident that Hitler purposely set out to rationalize
>>>> society, and individuals, in terms of natural selection. So the
>>>> purpose of Germany was defined by Hitler as survival, and
>>>> reproduction, and it's most valuable asset was it's heritable
>>>> material. The heritable material served as some kind of godhead. The
>>>> heritable material was regarded as the source of creativity, and the
>>>> source of love and hate.
>>
>>> Sounds awful. Let's not do what this Hitler person did.
>>
>> *
>> Keep in mind that Adolf Hitler was a good Christian:
>>
>> Hitler's Christianity: http://www.nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm
>>
>> "My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a
>> fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded
>> 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 for the world against the Jewish poison.
>> Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize
>> more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that
>> He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no
>> duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a
>> fighter for truth and justice...And if there is anything which
>> could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress
>> that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own
>> people."
>>
>> -Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The
>> Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp.
>> 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)
>>
>> "And so I believe to-day that my conduct is in accordance with the
>> will of the Almighty Creator. In standing guard against the Jew I
>> am defending the handiwork of the Lord."
>>
>> --Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, v1 ch2
>>
>> For the complete text of 'Mein Kamph' (My Struggle), see:http://www.adolfhitler.ws/lib/books/43kampf/kampf43.htm
>>
>> (This is the 1943 Mannheim translation.)
>>
>> The national government will preserve and defend those basic
>> principles on which our government has been built up. They regard
>> Christianity as the foundation of our national morality and the
>> family as the basis of national life. --Adolf Hitler
>>
>> "What we have to fight for is the necessary security for the existence
>> and increase of our race and people, the subsistence of its children
>> and the maintenance of our racial stock unmixed, the freedom and
>> independence of the Fatherland; so that our people may be enabled to
>> fulfil the mission assigned to it by the Creator."
>>
>> --Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, v1 ch8
>>
>> For more: http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/
>>
>> "In short, the results of miscegenation are always the following:
>> (a) The level of the superior race becomes lowered (b) physical
>> and mental degeneration sets in, thus leading slowly but steadily
>> towards a progressive drying up of the vital sap. The act which
>> brings about such a development is a sin against the will of the
>> Eternal Creator."
>>
>> --Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, v1 ch11)
>>
>> "His life is of this world only and his mentality is as foreign to the
>> true spirit of Christianity as his character was foreign to the great
>> Founder of this new creed two thousand years ago. And the Founder of
>> Christianity made no secret indeed of His estimation of the Jewish
>> people. When He found it necessary He drove those enemies of the human
>> race out of the Temple of God; because then, as always, they used
>> religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests." (A.
>> Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, v1 ch11)
>>
>> "Whoever would dare to raise a profane hand against that highest image
>> of God among His creatures would sin against the bountiful Creator of
>> this marvel and would collaborate in the expulsion from Paradise." (A.
>> Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, v2 ch1)
>>
>> "Thus for the first time a high inner purpose is accredited to the
>> State. In face of the ridiculous phrase that the State should do no
>> more than act as the guardian of public order and tranquillity, so
>> that everybody can peacefully dupe everybody else, it is given a very
>> high mission indeed to preserve and encourage the highest type of
>> humanity which a beneficent Creator has bestowed on this earth." (A.
>> Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, v2 ch2)
>>
>> "Why should it not be possible to induce people to make this sacrifice
>> if, instead of such a precept, they were simply told that they ought
>> to put an end to this truly original sin of racial corruption which is
>> steadily being passed on from one generation to another. And, further,
>> they ought to be brought to realize that it is their bounden duty to
>> give to the Almighty Creator beings such as He himself made to His own
>> image." (A. Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, v2 ch2)
>>
>> "This pestilential adulteration of the blood, of which hundreds of
>> thousands of our people take no account, is being systematically
>> practised by the Jew to-day. Systematically these negroid parasites in
>> our national body corrupt our innocent fair-haired girls and thus
>> destroy something which can no longer be replaced in this world. The
>> two Christian denominations look on with indifference at the
>> profanation and destruction of a noble and unique creature who was
>> given to the world as a gift of God’Äös grace." (A. Hitler, _Mein
>> Kampf_, v2 ch10)
>>
>> "Everybody who has the right kind of feeling for his country is
>> solemnly bound, each within his own denomination, to see to it that he
>> is not constantly talking about the Will of God merely from the lips
>> but that in actual fact he fulfils the Will of God and does not allow
>> God’Äös handiwork to be debased. For it was by the Will of God that men
>> were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and
>> their faculties. Whoever destroys His work wages war against God’Äös
>> Creation and God’Äös Will." (A. Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, v2 ch10)
>>
>> The material below is excerpted from Gary Toolan 9-30-2003: ... c)
>> Hitler was a communicant and an altar boy in the Catholic Church.
>>
>> d) As a young man he was confirmed as a "soldier of Christ." His most
>> ardent goal at the time was to become a priest. Hitler writes of his
>> love for the church and clergy: "I had excellent opportunity to
>> intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church
>> festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the
>> village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most
>> desirable ideal." -Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
>>
>> e) Hitler was NEVER excommunicated nor condemned by his church. Matter
>> of fact the Church felt he was JUST and "avenging for God" in
>> attacking the Jews for they deemed the Semites the killers of Jesus.
>>
>> f) Hitler, Franco and Mussolini were given VETO power over whom the
>> pope could appoint as a bishop in Germany, Spain and Italy. In turn
>> they surtaxed the Catholics and gave the money to the Vatican. Hitler
>> wrote a speech in which he talks about this alliance, this is an
>> excerpt: "The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the
>> new Germany means the acknowledgement of the National Socialist state
>> by the Catholic Church. This treaty shows the whole world clearly and
>> unequivocally that the assertion that National Socialism [Nazism] is
>> hostile to religion is a lie." Adolf Hitler, 22 July 1933, writing to
>> the Nazi Party
>>
>> g) Hitler worked CLOSELY with Pope Pius in converting Germanic society
>> and supporting the church. The Church absorbed Nazi ideals and
>> preached them as part of their sermons in turn Hitler placed Catholic
>> teachings in public education. This photo depicts Hitler with
>> Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo, the papal nuncio in Berlin. It was taken
>> On April 20, 1939, when Orsenigo celebrated Hitler,s birthday. The
>> celebrations were initiated by Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) and became a
>> tradition.
>>
>> h) Each April 20, Cardinal Bertram of Berlin was to send "warmest
>> congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the bishops and the
>> dioceses in Germany with fervent prayers which the Catholics of
>> Germany are sending to heaven on their altars." (If you would like to
>> know more about the secret dealings of Hitler and the Pope I recommend
>> you get a book titled: 'Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius
>> XII', by John Cornwell)
>>
>> Due to Hitler's involvement with the Church he began enacting
>> doctrines of the Church as law. He outlawed all abortion, raged a
>> death war on all homosexuals, and demanded corporal punishment in
>> schools and home. Many times
>> ...
>>
>> meer lezen »
>
> Earle is just another evolutionist lying about the holocaust.
>

It is odd how you constantly accuse others of lying, yet can NEVER give
specific examples. In this case, most people who have studied European
history know that the NAZI leadership was constantly invoking God and
promoting Martin Luther's ideas. Furthermore, educated people are also
aware that Darwin was banned in NAZI Germany and his books were often
burned publicly.
Klaus

[Mitchell Coffey]

[snip]

Nando/Syamsu has, extraordinarily, rejected facts as having much to do
with determining truth. We always suspected this about creationists;
Nando admits it.

Mitchell Coffey

[pnyikos]

On Jun 21, 1:10 pm, Mitchell Coffey <mitchell.cof...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 21, 9:51 am, Klaus Hellnick <khelln...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:> On 5/25/12 6:01 AM, Syamsu wrote:
>
> > > On 25 mei, 06:56, Earle Jones<earle.jo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > >> In article<Ce-dnZ7gHewPOyPSnZ2dnUVZ5qKdn...@giganews.com>,
>
> > >> deadrat<a...@b.com> wrote:
> > >>> On 5/24/12 11:24 AM, Syamsu wrote:
> > >>>> On May 24, 4:31 pm, nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > >>>>> this is untrue. I'm pretty sure I'm an "evolutionist"- I see evolutionary
> > >>>>> biology as the best available explanation for the observed diversity of
> > >>>>> life AND I'm an atheist.
>
> > >>>>> But I don't believe right and wrong are matters of objective fact. Is it
> > >>>>> wrong to punch someone?

Any sensible Christian would say it depends on the circumstances. But
knowledgeable, committed Christians would also say that it is a matter
of objective morality which circumstances make it wrong, and which
circumstances make it OK. [Not counting a few freely acknowledged
gray areas.]

> > >>>> Right and wrong, morality, is derived from what is identified as
> > >>>> loving or hateful.

What is loving or hateful is largely derived from objective right and
wrong, morally speaking. Where subjective morality is concerned, the
roles are reversed. And it is subjective morality of which Syamsu/
Nando talks here:

> > >>>> You identify love and hate as matter of fact, which
> > >>>> automatically makes your right and wrong a matter of fact too.
>
> > >>>> There is a reason why 99 percent of people are religious,

That's a VERY broad and not very helpful concept of "religious" that
is being employed here.

>
> > >>> Loving people means not pulling made of "statistics" out of your ass.
>
> > >>> <snipped: nonsense based on "statistics" pulled out of your ass/>
>
> > >>>>>> which previously resulted in the holocaust.
>
> > >>>>> wrong on so many levels. I don't suppose Hitler was particularly keen on
> > >>>>> evolution or atheism.

I don't know enough about Hitler to render a really informed opinion
on this one, but Stalin is an easy case: even though he was raised a
Russian Orthodox and even contemplated becoming a priest in his early
years, he turned atheist and made life very hard for Christians.

And I do believe he was keen on evolution. He even promoted various
theories of evolution and abiogenesis that were more in harmony with
Marxism than the prevailing theories of the time.

[big snip]

> > >> e) Hitler was NEVER excommunicated nor condemned by his church. Matter
> > >> of fact the Church felt he was JUST and "avenging for God" in
> > >> attacking the Jews for they deemed the Semites the killers of Jesus.

I seriously doubt that any of the mainstream denominations made any
kind of official statement along these lines. This was a piece of
the popular culture of the time, held by an unknown fraction of the
populace.

[snip]

> > >> g) Hitler worked CLOSELY with Pope Pius in converting Germanic society
> > >> and supporting the church. The Church absorbed Nazi ideals and
> > >> preached them as part of their sermons in turn Hitler placed Catholic
> > >> teachings in public education.

I'd like to see evidence for this statement and also a source (if any)
for statement (e).

[snip]

> > > Earle is just another evolutionist lying about the holocaust.
>
> > It is odd how you constantly accuse others of lying, yet can NEVER give
> > specific examples.
>
> [snip]
>
> Nando/Syamsu has, extraordinarily, rejected facts as having much to do
> with determining truth. We always suspected this about creationists;

You did? I expected you to be a bit more free of derogatory
stereotypes than this, Mitchell. And who else is included in "We"?

> Nando admits it.
>
> Mitchell Coffey

Anyone who thinks Nando is a typical creationist has a few screws
loose.

Peter Nyikos

[Mitchell Coffey]

See below.

> > Nando admits it.
>
> > Mitchell Coffey
>
> Anyone who thinks Nando is a typical creationist has a few screws
> loose.

It was a joke, Peter. Since I can't blame people for not getting my
humor, I'll note that, no: comments applicable to Nando are not
applicable to anyone one else. I apologize to any creationist who
thought I was actually sufficiently dumb to think that Nandos beliefs
may be generalized to creationists, or to any other carbon-based life
form. Nando is unique, and for all I know, runs on silicon-based
chemistry (which would help explain his core belief that rocks have
free will).

Mitchell Coffey

[Syamsu]

> > Earle is just another evolutionist lying about the holocaust.
>
> It is odd how you constantly accuse others of lying, yet can NEVER give
> specific examples. In this case, most people who have studied European
> history know that the NAZI leadership was constantly invoking God and
> promoting Martin Luther's ideas. Furthermore, educated people are also
> aware that Darwin was banned in NAZI Germany and his books were often
> burned publicly.
> Klaus

Here specifically Klaus is lying about the holocaust to safeguard the
reputation of darwinism.

[Syamsu]

You are lying about me. And my article on free will still stands on
creationwiki for a month now.

I accept subjectivity in respect to agency. Who somebody is as the
owner of their choices is categorically a subjective issue, and
subjectivity works by a way of choosing.

You reject subjectivity, you reject reaching a conclusion about what
exists without evidence. You directly kill emotions that way,
replacing them with pseudoscientific objective facts about agency.

[Mitchell Coffey]

Prove it.

Mitchell Coffey

[Mitchell Coffey]

No, you've said you reject facts as having much to do with determining
truth.

And my article on free will still stands on
> creationwiki for a month now.

So?

> I accept subjectivity in respect to agency. Who somebody is as the
> owner of their choices is categorically a subjective issue, and
> subjectivity works by a way of choosing.

Nothing here about accepting facts as determining truth.

> You reject subjectivity, you reject reaching a conclusion about what
> exists without evidence. You directly kill emotions that way,
> replacing them with pseudoscientific objective facts about agency.

If I reject subjectivity, you should be able to produce a quote where
I reject subjectivity. You won't because you're a compulsive liar. By
the way, in this last paragraph you *are* rejecting facts as having
much to do with determining truth, thus showing I wasn't lying about
you, as you claimed. More compulsive lying on your part.

By the way, how do you build a bridge just using your emotions to
reach a conclusion?

Mitchell Coffey

[Boikat]

In order to do that, Nando would have to rely on objective facts,
which (in his mind) invalidates his "proof", and then his head would
explode.

So, yes, he needs to prove that Klaus is lying, or retract his
accusation.

Boikat

[J.J. O'Shea]

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 17:03:34 -0400, Boikat wrote
(in article
<598f509b-967c-4379...@f14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>):

But he won't.


--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

[Boikat]

A "creationwiki" article consisting of "Grunt! Evoluution bad because
it make my head hurt, grunt!" would also still stand.

>
> I accept subjectivity in respect to agency. Who somebody is as the
> owner of their choices is categorically a subjective issue, and
> subjectivity works by a way of choosing.

Apparently, so does babbling inane strings of words. At least for you,
anyway.

>
> You reject subjectivity, you reject reaching a conclusion about what
> exists without evidence. You directly kill emotions that way,
> replacing them with pseudoscientific objective facts about agency.

Most sane people reject you insane attemps at pushing your inane pile
of blathercrap.

Boikat

[Syamsu]

There is no more proof needed than the post itself. Even somebody who
doesnt know anything about the history would know that Klaus is
producing a self-serving story.

[Syamsu]

You right here reject subjectivity. There is no subjectivity except
subjectivity in respect to agency. Subjectivity doesnt work with
facts, because then it is objectivity.

[Boikat]

In other words, you cannot support your claim. Nobody is surprised.

Boikat

[Mitchell Coffey]

In other words, you're unable to point to a single thing in his post
and prove it's a lie.

Mitchell Coffey

[Mitchell Coffey]

I do not reject subjectivity above. The two are not mutually
exclusive. In this thread you claim I lied about when I noted that
you rejected facts as having much to do with determining truth. Yet
here you are, claiming that finding any use in facts is rejecting any
use of subjectivity! So it was you who was lying.

Once again, how do you build a bridge just using your emotions to
reach conclusions?

Mitchell Coffey

[Syamsu]

Ridiculous, you accept subjectivity based on facts, which is ofcourse
objectivity. Subjectivity works by a way of choosing.

And again, that you cant recognize the posting of Klaus for the
selfserving tripe that it is, means you have degenerated truth to a
debatinggame.

[Boikat]

You didn't answer his question.

>
> And again, that you cant recognize the posting of Klaus for the
> selfserving tripe that it is, means you have degenerated truth to a

> debatinggame.-

What is recognized is that you spout nonsense as if it were an
objective fact.

Boikat

[Syamsu]

Twisting and turning about accepting subjectivity, and supporting lies
about the holocaust.

You will not accept subjectivity, because you will not accept the
existence of anything without evidence.

[Mitchell Coffey]

So you admit you were lying when you claimed you did not reject facts

as having much to do with determining truth.

Mitchell Coffey

[Boikat]

Only your ass backwards take on subjectivity.

> and supporting lies
> about the holocaust.

The only one lying about the Holocaust around here is you.

.
>
> You will not accept subjectivity, because you will not accept the
> existence of anything without evidence.

You really are doing your best to insure everyone knows that you have
no concept of reality or reason, aren't you?

Boikat

[Syamsu]

Klaus cited a few facts which were all self-serving to incriminate
religion, and decriminate darwinism. He is arguing about the holocaust
like a debating game, which is unethical, and therefore lies. The fact
is also that Darwin was taught in the schoolbook for the Hitler-
youth.

And to get at the bottom of it, it is the denial of freedom by
science, coupled with it's straightforward rejection of subjectivity,
that is at the basis of the holocaust, what makes the holocaust the
holocaust. Subjectivity of nazi's was only an instrument in their
social darwinist rationalization to survive, so to say, the nazi's
believed the doctrine of survival, and besides that they were ready to
fanatically believe much of anything, if they thought believing such
would enhance survival. The rationalization of society in terms of
race or genetics caused people to become emotionless, simply because
it was a rationalization which promoted rationalizing everything,
leaving little room for emotion. Much of the same thing can be said
of communism, that it rationalizes everything, and therefore leaves
little room for emotion.

IMO it is in error to point to Christianity too much as the culprit,
because the fact of it is Christianity was much influenced by science.
Promoting Jesus as an Aryan like among others Heackel did, was IMO
very lethal to Christianity. It turned divine love into a matter of
scientific fact issue, destroying the role for faith. New Aryan
Christian sects caused a lot of problems among Christians. Also much
of the beliefs about equality of mankind were related to Adam and Eve,
who were thrown out by science. That said though, a religion should be
equipped to deal with stuff. Most significantly I would guess the
Catholic church didn't cultivate morality of it's adherents
efficiently by relying on too much centralized authority.

But in guessing which alternatives were actually available to people,
IMO it is glaringly obvious that the tipping-point away from
democracy, and towards dictatorship was caused by science. Because it
is easy, not hard, for science to acknowledge the fact that freedom is
real, and to support the existence of things without evidence,
subjectivity in respect to agency. This alternative was available to
them, and they rejected it. And it was then logical for a political
ideology to take hold in the intellectual climate of opinion in which
freedom played no significant role. Hitler was a social darwinist. And
conversely somebody who accepts the reality of freedom, and accepts
subjectivity, is more likely to support a system of government based
on choosing, where there is freedom of expression. Freedom of
expression makes sense with accepting subjectivity, and democracy
makes sense when accepting freedom is real.

[Slow Vehicle]

> ...
>
> read more »

I know how pointless this is, but do you have any kind of source at
all that indicates that "Darwin was taught" in the Jugend schoolbooks?
It seems to me that you are still confusing ToE and "social
darwinism", as if there were a chapter on "Dealing with the Final
Solution" in _Origins of Species_.
On the other hand, it could just be that that is the combination of
words that came up when you turned on today's word salad
generator...which would save any of it from meaning anything.