For AtheistAlex

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 14 2005, 05:36 PM']

2. Your "evolutionary" account of morality is ludicrous to say the least. A "tribe" can quite easily survive with plenty of murder, rape, etc., as history has demonstrated time and time again. (I can give plenty of details later, if you want.)
Your "morality" doesn't even give you a rational basis to condemn the actions of the Nazis, as they used this same Darwinist logic to justify their bloody atrocities. See, they believed it was justifyable to slaughter Jews and others outside their "tribe," the "Aryan master-race"! They saw this as helping their tribe in its quest for world domination. They saw this as Darwinian survival of the fittest, in which the "master-race" could wipe out "inferior" races to ensure its own survival and dominance.
It seems that atheistic theories tend naturally towards atrocities.
(Note, I'm not implying that you're a Nazi or anything, merely pointing out that your basis of "morality" really gives you no reason to say why the Nazis' actions are wrong, other than that you just don't like them.) [/quote]
I have to interject here because the dribble thats pouring out of your mouth is astounding. First of all about morality. Killing is not bad because its written on some tablet, we know killing is bad because it harms people. We can make a good consensus of whats wrong based on what harms people. If we were to follow the bibles moral code, than it would be ok to kill homosexuals. To kill women who are not virgins on their wedding night. And lets not forget, god created evil:

[i]I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7)[/i]

Or how about Elisha and the bear, we're 42 children were making fun of Elisha for being bald. Elisha got mad, and asked god to punish the kids. god commaned bears to go out and slaughter the kids. Where is the morality in that? There is none, the kids did not deserve to die for something that childish.

Now to address your claims that Atheism and Darwinism is the cause of the Nazis murderous reign. Farthest from the truth. Hitler was far from an athesit. He believed in the occult and he believed heavily in the christian faith. .Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:

[i]"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.[/i]

Finally, Hitler did not kill the jews because of some darwin ideaologies, like alot of christians like to spout. He did it based on his heavy occult beliefs. Mainly a book by H.P Blavatsky called 'The Secret Doctrine'. In this book she talks of root races, and that the aryan race is the most pure and enlighten race while the jew is among the most dirtiest and worthless ones. It inspired him to not only exterminate the jews, but to send teams of his scientist to track down holy relics and to find the last of the true arayans. His belief in the supernatural such as yours is what led him to believe in such absurdities.

And I haven't even gotten to all the atrocities done by the catholic church from killing off some of the greatest scientific minds, to buring people alive for being witches. Religion by nature relies on the irrational, atheism relies on reason , logic and being rational.

[Socrates]

[quote name='AtheistAlex' date='Feb 15 2005, 06:20 AM'] 1. Okay, I can respect your view. I didn't watch most of it, mainly because my mom was not going to let me. But, now that you said this, I will go and rent it again, and this time, I'll try to watch it all.

Oh and about these "ludicrous claims" you talk about. They, like the many outlandish claims against Michael Moore for Farenheit 9/11, will always seem to be just flat wrong. Religion and politics are very polarizing and divisive issues, and for someone to take any stance, it means others will, undoubtedly attack them. Basically, I ask you to understand that things go both ways, and so you were a prime exmaple of "the pot calling the kettle black".

2. The Germans did think it was okay to slaughter and maim people, but we used force to show them the error of their ways. I agree that the Holocaust was an awful evil we should hope not to revisit, but this call to my emotions will not change my judgement. Morality is a social concept, and that means it is subjective.

Nazis saw the Holocaust as the "Final Solution" to their problems. I disagree and so, I can of course say it is wrong. In fact, it is those who believe in an absolute morality who cannot tell what's wrong and what's right in a given situation, because:
a) they must know what the absolute morality is
b) they would need to know such a moral code for all situations at all times
c) to do such a thing, they would need to have a mind of infinite capacity

If you can prove your mind not only has infinite capacity, but also that you know every correct moral decision for all time, then you can tell [u]anyone[/u] what's always right and wrong based off an absolute value set.

But, things change...the world changes, the people change, society changes, and so we adapt, our set of morals changes as well. Sacrifices used to be commonplace and okay, but now they're not. Sure one can say that it's wrong, without a doubt. But would you have said that in that era? Enslaving a man is awfl now, but a years ago, it was good business. You see, morals are not absolutely black and white, but shades of grey.

<<It seems that atheistic theories tend naturally towards atrocities.>>
You are good at this sort of thing, I see. Taking a discussion and turning it into religion-baiting, where you make seemingly innocent statements with sharp, hateful points at the very end.

Here, your thesis implies that atheists, for some reason or another, are either the reason for atrocities, or wish to commit them. Where did you take this idea from, may I ask?

<<gives you no reason to say why the Nazis' actions are wrong, other than that you just don't like them>>

Ask yourself this, why don't I like it? It's detrimental to the German and world society as whole, it takes millions upon millions of lives away that could've been our world leaders, and it shows to us that some tribes don't understand what's important about life. Last though not least, it is an omen of future violence against us that we cannot ignore.


Here's hoping we can get back to not calling atheists monsters,

Alex [/quote]
1. After this, I'll stop discussing movies in this thread (just to keep things simple - if you want to reply, we can start another thread - this is my fault - I started the whole movie thing ) I had never said anything about Michael Moore, though I believe he's a filthy liar. A case could be made against Bush without resorting to Moore's falsehoods. His lies are protected by the first ammendment, though, and I think boycotts, protests, and such give movies free publicity and are counter-productive.

2. Without absolute morality, you still have no reason to condemn anything the Nazis or anybody else did.
Your argument about "absolute morality" makes no sense.
You say simply you "disagree" with the Nazi "final solution" and therefore can say it is wrong. (without giving a reason).
I say torture and murder of innocent people is always absolutely wrong ("Thou shalt not kill") and therefore have a firm basis for condeming the Nazi's "solution."

If the morality of actions is always subjective, there is no basis for condeming any action. It all comes down to people's ever-changing and conflicting feelings. If everything is subjective, people can always find a loophole to justify any atrocity.

Do you imply that slavery was morally good when it existed because it was "good business"? Was slavery morally wrong then, or was it morally right?
If slavery was right then, what makes it wrong now? What is to prevent it from becoming morally right again, if in some future time it becomes "good business"?
In fact, slavery is currently "good business" in some Muslim North African countries? Does mean slavery is morally right for them?
Should we oppose slavery in places where it is practiced?

[Socrates]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Feb 15 2005, 11:21 AM'] I have to interject here because the dribble thats pouring out of your mouth is astounding.  First of all about morality.  Killing is not bad because its written on some tablet, we know killing is bad because it harms people. We can make a good consensus of whats wrong based on what harms people.  If we were to follow the bibles moral code, than it would be ok to kill homosexuals. To kill women who are not virgins on their wedding night. And lets not forget, god created evil:

[i]I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7)[/i]

Or how about Elisha and the bear, we're 42 children were making fun of Elisha for being bald. Elisha got mad, and asked god to punish the kids. god commaned bears to go out and slaughter the kids. Where is the morality in that? There is none, the kids did not deserve to die for something that childish.

Now to address your claims that Atheism and Darwinism is the cause of the Nazis murderous reign. Farthest from the truth. Hitler was far from an athesit. He believed in the occult and he believed heavily in the christian faith. .Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:

[i]"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.[/i]

Finally, Hitler did not kill the jews because of some darwin ideaologies, like alot of christians like to spout. He did it based on his heavy occult beliefs. Mainly a book by H.P Blavatsky called 'The Secret Doctrine'. In this book she talks of root races, and that the aryan race is the most pure and enlighten race while the jew is among the most dirtiest and worthless ones. It inspired him to not only exterminate the jews, but to send teams of his scientist to track down holy relics and to find the last of the true arayans. His belief in the supernatural such as yours is what led him to believe in such absurdities.

And I haven't even gotten to all the atrocities done by the catholic church from killing off some of the greatest scientific minds, to buring people alive for being witches.  Religion by nature relies on the irrational, atheism relies on reason , logic and being rational. [/quote]
I don't claim that atheistic Darwinism is the sole motivation for the Nazis' hateful actions, however they certainly used Darwinistic pseudo-science to justify their murderous racism. They used this pseudoscience to claim that the Jews and other races were biologically inferior or subhuman, while the Aryans were evolutionarily superior, and therefore destined to rule the world.
If "social Darwinism" was not so popular at the time, it is unlikely the Nazi's goals would have been so popular in Germany.

While Hitler was baptized a Christian, he firmly rejected his Faith in his adult life. he was an occultic neo-pagan. He used some Christian rhetoric to win German churches to his political cause, but despised and hated Christianity, especially the Catholic Church. He considered Christianity a weak "Semitic" religion which had weakened the German people. On an earlier thread, someone brought some documented quotes from Hitler expressing hatred and contempt for the Christian religion and the Catholic Church. Hitler's greatest opponents in Germany were Bavarian Catholics.
Hitler's beliefs were not "like mine," but quite opposed. To say Hitler's beliefs were "rooted in Christianity" is complete nonsense. His opinions on Christianity were certainly closer to yours!

Let us not forget also that the world's most murderous sytem of government, Communism, was firmly rooted in atheism. Soviet Communism murdered over 20 million people in the Societ Union alone, not counting China, the unspeakable murders of Pol Pot in Cambodia, and other communist regimes.
Atheism was always part of the communist creed. So much for Atheism being a force of peace, rationality, and tolerance!

I am not claiming that all atheists are Communists or murderers, but this ought to be remebered every time an atheist blames religion for all the world's violence and problems!

The Catholic Chruch rarely burned anyone for being a witch. This is anti-Catholic propaganda. Witch-burning and witch-hunts were a largely Protestant phenomenon. And I challenge you to name one "great scientific mind" who was put to death by the Church!

Edited February 15, 2005 by Socrates

[blovedwolfofgod]

Even though Im just a "Lurker", I think I have a point here for Alex:

On the subject of moral subjectivity:
I have learned through my various history/poli sci classes that the standard of morality is based on the beliefs of the most powerful force. Example: Genocide- before the 1950s, there wasnt a word for this. The Geneva Convention on Genocide wasnt called until Rapheal Lemkin worked his rear off to get delegates to the UN to hold a conference. This convention was made practically null and void when the US signed and wrote its reservation clause. Now countries have no legal recourse to stop genocide. While we dont like it, nobody has to stop it and its sorta ok because the most powerful force on the planet said that they didnt wanna get involved.

That may be a weak example...

Here's my next one. Women's rights... Women's rights picked up in the US and largely is pushed by the US today. Somehow, the feminists got enough power here to effect foriegn policy and national opinions. Yeah, forcible removal of the clitoris is bad... but why? Their purpose is to stop their women from being promiscuous. Im not going to argue that it actually stops that... I have no idea. But now its a world issue and its in the UN in the GA 6th commitee because the US decided to ennact legislation that the rest of the world saw, went somewhere, some journalists wrote about it, thought it was bad because of their western mentality and the US applied pressure to raise its profile and try to stop the badness.

This is just to try to illustrate that human morality isnt universal. The US went from slavery to massive war to anti-slavery (except in the deep south). South America doesnt have slavery because they needed money from Europe and the great powers there didnt like it. Power affects human morality. There can be no consensus because power changes hands frequently and everyone wants it. The weak go with the strong, the stronger oppose the opposition, a fight breaks out and the winner imposes that morality on the new territory and sphere of influence.

The one thing that is seemingly unchanging is the teachings of the Church. Again, Im not here to debate the actions of the Church, but the teachings really have remained consistent. And it wasnt necessarily through who had power. Since the beginning, homosexuality was bad. Romans and the greeks before them practised it. Granted, it was regulated and usually only accepted if you had children already or were younger (16-25ish). But the Church set up the morality from a weak power, maintained it, maintained it during power, and now as a passive force, still keeps it. There is something to be said for that.

Sidenote: to the person who was talking about bible morality, the one who said we would kill homos and women who werent virgins prior to marriage... son, that was the old testament. Theres a new one. You should read it. Good stuff. Says the new law is mercy and love, the justice will come soon enough.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 15 2005, 01:34 PM']



The Catholic Chruch rarely burned anyone for being a witch. This is anti-Catholic propaganda. Witch-burning and witch-hunts were a largely Protestant phenomenon. And I challenge you to name one "great scientific mind" who was put to death by the Church! [/quote]
[quote]I don't claim that atheistic Darwinism is the sole motivation for the Nazis' hateful actions, however they certainly used Darwinistic pseudo-science to justify their murderous racism.  They used this pseudoscience to claim that the Jews and other races were biologically inferior or subhuman, while the Aryans were evolutionarily superior, and therefore destined to rule the world.
If "social Darwinism" was not so popular at the time, it is unlikely the Nazi's goals would have been so popular in Germany.[/quote]

You dont get it at all. Hitler believed in 'divine right'. The german race, (aryans), were the master race not because they had evolved into a higher form. Or because other races have de-evoled. But rather that, it was the purest and best from the start. That god had intended them to be the most powerful race. And that all races were under them. And that the reason those races lived was because the aryans carried them along. You need to read on the volk movement and what was going on in germany at the time. Not spew out some stuff that seems to make sense to you, but its not acurate at all and not the truth.

[quote]
While Hitler was baptized a Christian, he firmly rejected his Faith in his adult life.  he was an occultic neo-pagan.  He used some Christian rhetoric to win German churches to his political cause, but despised and hated Christianity, especially the Catholic Church.  He considered Christianity a weak "Semitic" religion which had weakened the German people.  On an earlier thread, someone brought some documented quotes from Hitler expressing hatred and contempt for the Christian religion and the Catholic Church.  Hitler's greatest opponents in Germany were Bavarian Catholics.
Hitler's beliefs were not "like mine," but quite opposed.  To say Hitler's beliefs were "rooted in Christianity" is complete nonsense.  His opinions on Christianity were certainly closer to yours![/quote]

What you mention is a book written by the supposed secretary of hitler. None of these anti-christian quotes were ever recorded or written down by hitler. They all came second hand. Towards the end alot of the current german philosophers wanted to move away from christianity because of its jewish roots. But the religious mentality was still very prevalent.

[quote]Let us not forget also that the world's most murderous sytem of government, Communism, was firmly rooted in atheism.  Soviet Communism murdered over 20 million people in the Societ Union alone, not counting China, the unspeakable murders of Pol Pot in Cambodia, and other communist regimes.
Atheism was always part of the communist creed.  So much for Atheism being a force of peace, rationality, and tolerance[/quote]

This only shows you how much you truly do not know. Religion was not banned in russia during those times. You could believe what you wanted and even churhces were built during that era. THe difference is that the state had no religion. It was a complete seperation. If you want to blame atheisism for communism, not the system itself than thats your perogative. Basiclly your argument is that the reason those people were bad was that they were atheist. I would say the totalitarian aspects of communism is the root of the evil, not atheisism. Also Stalin during his time, restore the Orthodox Church hierarchy to serve russia, not a very atheistisc thing to do.


[quote]I am not claiming that all atheists are Communists or murderers, but this ought to be remebered every time an atheist blames religion for all the world's violence and problems![/quote]

Would there be a middle east conflict witout religion? There would be no islamic militants without a religion? Would the hindus and muslims be fighting over kashmir without a religion? Would the crusades have occured? How many religious wars have been waged over history compared to how many have been waged over atheism?

[quote]The Catholic Chruch rarely burned anyone for being a witch.  This is anti-Catholic propaganda.  Witch-burning and witch-hunts were a largely Protestant phenomenon.  And I challenge you to name one "great scientific mind" who was put to death by the Church![/quote]

Propaganda. Open your eyes. Ever heard of the Inquisitions. It is said that somewhere between 1-9 million people were killed throughout this time. It took the vatican until this century to issue a statement of regret about the inquistions. And to clear Gailleo's name. Giordano Bruno died during the inqusistions, he was an astronomer. Now factor in the crusades, and you got yourself a heavy death toll of millions.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='blovedwolfofgod' date='Feb 15 2005, 03:57 PM'] This is just to try to illustrate that human morality isnt universal. The US went from slavery to massive war to anti-slavery (except in the deep south). South America doesnt have slavery because they needed money from Europe and the great powers there didnt like it. Power affects human morality. There can be no consensus because power changes hands frequently and everyone wants it. The weak go with the strong, the stronger oppose the opposition, a fight breaks out and the winner imposes that morality on the new territory and sphere of influence.



[/quote]
The bible is filled with slavery and it NEVER states it as being immoral. No where in the commandments do I see it. No where does jesus ever say its wrong. This is what the bible says about slavery:

[i]Ephesians 6:5-9: "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him."[/i]

So this tells us that being a good slave, is like being good to god. Where is the morality in that? The best christian appologetics have to say about this is that, the bible helped improve the treatment of slaves, and that they were not mis treated like its commonly thought. I think this is a poor excuse, slavery is wrong period. But I guess according to god its not, right?

[Socrates]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Feb 15 2005, 04:05 PM']

You dont get it at all. Hitler believed in 'divine right'. The german race, (aryans), were the master race not because they had evolved into a higher form. Or because other races have de-evoled. But rather that, it was the purest and best from the start. That god had intended them to be the most powerful race. And that all races were under them. And that the reason those races lived was because the aryans carried them along. You need to read on the volk movement and what was going on in germany at the time. Not spew out some stuff that seems to make sense to you, but its not acurate at all and not the truth.



What you mention is a book written by the supposed secretary of hitler. None of these anti-christian quotes were ever recorded or written down by hitler. They all came second hand. Towards the end alot of the current german philosophers wanted to move away from christianity because of its jewish roots. But the religious mentality was still very prevalent.



This only shows you how much you truly do not know. Religion was not banned in russia during those times. You could believe what you wanted and even churhces were built during that era. THe difference is that the state had no religion. It was a complete seperation. If you want to blame atheisism for communism, not the system itself than thats your perogative. Basiclly your argument is that the reason those people were bad was that they were atheist. I would say the totalitarian aspects of communism is the root of the evil, not atheisism. Also Stalin during his time, restore the Orthodox Church hierarchy to serve russia, not a very atheistisc thing to do.




Would there be a middle east conflict witout religion? There would be no islamic militants without a religion? Would the hindus and muslims be fighting over kashmir without a religion? Would the crusades have occured? How many religious wars have been waged over history compared to how many have been waged over atheism?



Propaganda. Open your eyes. Ever heard of the Inquisitions. It is said that somewhere between 1-9 million people were killed throughout this time. It took the vatican until this century to issue a statement of regret about the inquistions. And to clear Gailleo's name. Giordano Bruno died during the inqusistions, he was an astronomer. Now factor in the crusades, and you got yourself a heavy death toll of millions. [/quote]
It's you who doesn't get it! Maybe it's time you do some serious study of history instead of rehashing the same old anti-religious tracts.

Any serious historian will conclude that Hitler and the Nazis were quite antithetic to traditional Christianity. Despite the lies of the anti-Catholic detractors, the fact remains that Pope Pius XII was one of the greatest protectors and helpers of the Jews during WWII.

This "Hitler was a good Christian" nonsense is a load of horse dung, and I think you know it.

Communism is indeed an atheistic ideology, based on the anti-religious theories of Karl Marx. ALL of the communist leaders and governments were militantly atheist and anti-religious, including Josef Stalin, the greatest mass-murderer in history. If you doubt this, read the memoirs of Hungarian Cardinal Mindzenty, who suffered horrific torture under the Communists, or of Solzhenitsyn. The communist governments were vehemently atheist and anti-religious, and did persecute Christians (and still do in China). Communist schools indoctrinate the children in atheism, and religion was actively discouraged by the government.
The communist leaders realized that they could not completely wipe out the Church in their countries, so they strictly regulated it, as Stalin did, to make it a puppet of the (still atheist) Communist Government. People were not "free to beleive whatever they want," but had to not teach anything contrary to what the communist government told them to teach. Those who opposed the comunists were punished, including by being sent to the Gulag. This is not "separation of Church and State," but strict state control of the Church.

You cannot esacpe the fact that the communists were all atheists, and atheism was seen as an intrensic part of Communist ideology.
Atheistic Communism has been responsible for far more deaths and atrocities than any other regime or system in history.
Why we should continue to beleive that athiesm will somehow deliver us from all the world's problems (as communism also promised to do) is beyond me.

The facts stand: More people have been killed and more have been persecuted by atheistic governments than by any other!

You;re the one only listening to propoganda. I have indeed heard of the inquistition, and know that those figures you gave me are lies. Where did you get them from? What were his methods? The vast majority of people put before the inquistition were found innocent and not killed. (I can get some figures later.)

The violence in the Middle East largely between Muslims and Jews, not Christians. And many of the Jews are actually secularists. It is a conflict over land more than religion.

The Crusades were a defensive war, in which Christians came to reclaim the Christian Holy Land from the Muslims which had invaded it by military force. What attrocities were commited by the Christians (such as the sack of Constantinople) were soundly condemned by the Church.

Melchisedec, open your eyes, and start reading something besides Pravda and atheistic anti-Christian propoganda. You might learn something.

[save ferris 101]

Ok, just to clear things up, the Fascism in Nazi Germany did not believe in the Church or support it. To the Fascists, the state was the religion, and their leader, Hitler, was a quasi-god. The whole basis of Fascism is that the state is the center of everything. After the war, Hitler and his ministers were going to get rid of the Church.

[AtheistAlex]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 15 2005, 12:57 PM'] 1. After this, I'll stop discussing movies in this thread (just to keep things simple - if you want to reply, we can start another thread - this is my fault - I started the whole movie thing ) I had never said anything about Michael Moore, though I believe he's a filthy liar. A case could be made against Bush without resorting to Moore's falsehoods. His lies are protected by the first ammendment, though, and I think boycotts, protests, and such give movies free publicity and are counter-productive.

2. Without absolute morality, you still have no reason to condemn anything the Nazis or anybody else did.
Your argument about "absolute morality" makes no sense.
You say simply you "disagree" with the Nazi "final solution" and therefore can say it is wrong. (without giving a reason).
I say torture and murder of innocent people is always absolutely wrong ("Thou shalt not kill") and therefore have a firm basis for condeming the Nazi's "solution."

If the morality of actions is always subjective, there is no basis for condeming any action. It all comes down to people's ever-changing and conflicting feelings. If everything is subjective, people can always find a loophole to justify any atrocity.

Do you imply that slavery was morally good when it existed because it was "good business"? Was slavery morally wrong then, or was it morally right?
If slavery was right then, what makes it wrong now? What is to prevent it from becoming morally right again, if in some future time it becomes "good business"?
In fact, slavery is currently "good business" in some Muslim North African countries? Does mean slavery is morally right for them?
Should we oppose slavery in places where it is practiced? [/quote]
1. Okay...

2. *sigh* I wrote all that and it still wasn't read, I see.

Notice, that in what you have said, you have admitted that there is a moral subjectivism, no matter what [i]I[/i] think personally about these events. You have said, that one group, like slavemasters, see things one way, and we here and now, post-slavery, see these events completely differently.

Slavery may not have been considered morally good, and whether it was morally bad, well, that was an issue that was in contention as well. Now, though, most everyone is in agreement that slavery is wrong. Thusly, it [u]is[/u] wrong.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 15 2005, 08:04 PM']
[/quote]
[quote]It's you who doesn't get it!  Maybe it's time you do some serious study of history instead of rehashing the same old anti-religious tracts.[/quote]

Oh brother, you are so predictable. So you are not saying that, darwin inspired the nazis and that atheism and communism are the same are not the same old anti-atheism tracts? I doubt you will answer that truthfully.


[quote]Any serious historian will conclude that Hitler and the Nazis were quite antithetic to traditional Christianity.  Despite the lies of the anti-Catholic detractors, the fact remains that Pope Pius XII was one of the greatest protectors and helpers of the Jews during WWII.
[/quote]

I will not get into a debate about this controversial pope because it could be a long discussion. Any information you disagree with is labeled propaganda. That just reveals the blinders you choose to put on when the information is not to your liking.
Are we both guilty of making history subjective? No need to answer that, I know your answer already.


[quote]This "Hitler was a good Christian" nonsense is a load of horse dung, and I think you know it.[/quote]

Please point out where I said that or ever implied it. My statement was that hitler was a religious , superstious man. His ideaologies arrised from religous ferver and not science. The nazis fascination with the occult and holy relics has been recorded in history and even been portrayed and popular movies. Many men have spread evil in the name of god, he was no different. My mom is a christian, my wife is a christian, my whole darn family are christians practically. Im not comparing them to hitler. You need to relax and take a sip of holy water.


[quote]You cannot esacpe the fact that the communists were all atheists, and atheism was seen as an intrensic part of Communist ideology.
Atheistic Communism has been responsible for far more deaths and atrocities than any other regime or system in history.
Why we should continue to beleive that athiesm will somehow deliver us from all the world's problems (as communism also promised to do) is beyond me.[/quote]

The problem with communism was , communism itself , not atheism. The dictatorships that run a communist government and the freedoms they limit are what is ultimately responisble for the deaths of which you speak of. Atheism in a free society like a america would not create an evironment where death is mandated down from the government. Atheism is not even the root concept of communism, its all about social class and differences. Nothing divides us more than religion and classes, like the divide between you and I. They sought to destroy that, and it was a very bad idea. No more does Stalin represent atheism than hitler represents the germans.



[quote]You;re the one only listening to propoganda.  I have indeed heard of the inquistition, and know that those figures you gave me are lies.  Where did you get them from?  What were his methods?  The vast majority of people put before the inquistition were found innocent and not killed.  (I can get some figures later.)[/quote]

The church appologize for the inquistions in 2000, and at the same time they reported lower numbers of the number of dead. The numbers I have seen on various resources have always been in the millions, if you want to put your blinders on for that, go right ahead. Your still skirting the issue that the church was responsible for their deaths, how do you answer that. 1 or 1 millions, its a precious life none the less.


[quote]
The violence in the Middle East largely between Muslims and Jews, not Christians.  And many of the Jews are actually secularists.  It is a conflict over land more than religion.[/quote]

And what is the significance of this land. Its holy land that contains holy relics. I mean cmon, you are denying its a religious war? Ask any muslim or jew and they will set you straight. You need to really read on the mideast conflict, because you know nothing. In a nutshell its over religious sites that are both holy to muslims and jews, I could go more indepth if you wish. And you never even rebutted my other examples. I mean if I was given a weak, I am sure I could come up with more wars and more death and carnage over religion than you could ever find from atheism.

[quote]Melchisedec, open your eyes, and start reading something besides Pravda and atheistic anti-Christian propoganda.  You might learn something.[/quote]

Pravda, is that the alien news paper. You got me confused with somebody else cause I dont read fairy tales.

In Reason...

[Socrates]

[quote]I will not get into a debate about this controversial pope because it could be a long discussion. Any information you disagree with is labeled propaganda. That just reveals the blinders you choose to put on when the information is not to your liking.
Are we both guilty of making history subjective? No need to answer that, I know your answer already. [/quote]

Well it's good you apparently know the answer. Choosing only to pay attention to material which supports your own atheistic position and dismissing anything that does not support it, then accusing me of "putting on blinders" seems hardly a way to debate!

The slanders about Pope Pius XII mostly came out long after his death, and by those with an agenda against the Church. These claims have afterwards all been roundly and soundly rebuked by others, but you're right. That debate should go to another thread.

[quote]My statement was that hitler was a religious , superstious man. His ideaologies arrised from religous ferver and not science.[/quote]

Superstitious, perhaps, but hardly religious. He denied the Church and was not even a church-goer, and is known to have been quite anti-Christian. His ideologies arose from megalamania and racism, not "religious fervor"! Religion involves submitting to a higher Authority. Hitler wanted to crush anything that stood in the way of his drive to power. (I think you watch too much Indiana Jones.)

[quote]The problem with communism was , communism itself , not atheism. The dictatorships that run a communist government and the freedoms they limit are what is ultimately responisble for the deaths of which you speak of. [/quote]

Atheism was regarded by all the communists revolutionaries and leaders as an intrinsic part of Communism. The rejection of God and Church authority is part of their beleif that rejects all other authority and sets up "socialist man" (in practice, teh Communist state) as the supreme authority. The Communist leaders would all disagree with you that atheism was not important to their ideology.

The fact remains that atheistic Communism governments have killed more people than any other governments in history! You still have not refuted this point.

Fallen human beings will abuse power and do evil things under any religion or lack thereof, but atheism, which recognizes no higher moral authority than itself, gives tyrants free reign. Both Communsism and Nazism were systems which were "free" from higher religious authority and recognized themselves as the ultimate authority.

You blame religion and the Church for any deaths or attrocities committed under a Christian ruler, yet deny that atheism had any responsibility for the (much greater) atrocities commited by atheist regimes. Looks like a major double-standard at work here.

I suppose you will also claim that religious fervor had nothing to do with the countless Catholic Christian saints who devoted their lives to the service of the poor and suffering.

I will get back later on the Inquisition. I don't have the source with me now, but can get it later, perhaps this weekend when I have time.

All religions are not created equal. As a Catholic, I beleive that the Catholic Church is the true religion. It certainly does not condone the actions of Muslim suicide bombers and the like. Lumping Christians with Muslim terrorists and whatnot all together to generically denounce "religion" as evil, is a common and falacious tactic of secularists.

Edited February 16, 2005 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='AtheistAlex' date='Feb 15 2005, 10:41 PM'] 1. Okay...

2. *sigh* I wrote all that and it still wasn't read, I see.

Notice, that in what you have said, you have admitted that there is a moral subjectivism, no matter what [i]I[/i] think personally about these events. You have said, that one group, like slavemasters, see things one way, and we here and now, post-slavery, see these events completely differently.

Slavery may not have been considered morally good, and whether it was morally bad, well, that was an issue that was in contention as well. Now, though, most everyone is in agreement that slavery is wrong. Thusly, it [u]is[/u] wrong. [/quote]
Nowhere have I said that morality is subjective. Obviously, people "see" moral matters differently, but that does not mean the differnet positions are not objectively morally right or wrong.

You still have not given a clear answer on whether slaver was morally right or wrong. You seem to imply that if enough people say it's right, it's right. You seem to be saying that it may have been right at the time because many thought it was right, but now it's wrong because most people agree it's wrong.

Now, though, most everyone is in agreement that slavery is wrong. Thusly, it [u]is[/u] wrong.

Your definition of "morality" seems to boil down to majority rule. Whatever most people think is good, is good.

Tell me, if the majority of people decided it is good to torture and kill Socrates and AtheistAlex, would this make those actions morally good??

Majority rule is a very weak basis for a system of morality, to say the least

[AtheistAlex]

It is not "majority rule". That is our democracy.

No, this is a societal concept, where morality is defined as the "set, or sets of various things different cultures decide are the things their people ought to, or ought not to do." That's subjective, my friend.

To ask "Is it moral?" assuming it is obviously objective, completely ignores what I have said. So my answer would have to be "Not applicable."

Have a nice night,

Alex

[jasJis]

Alex,
What's up with "It is not "majority rule". That is our democracy."? Doesn't make sense. Isn't our democracy a majority rule?

Not everything that is "TRUE" can be measured emperically. The emotions that influence the human psyche cannot be measured emperically, but it is true that emotions do have real and significant influence and have a tremendous impact on human behavior. How emperically can one measure Adolph's motives for choosing the course of action that resulted in the deaths of many that can be measured emperically?

The science of physics cannot explain the science of phsychology. We are not robots with positronic brains pre-programmed with the 3 laws. Read Issac Assimov's novels, especially I Robot. Much of the sci-fi of the 70's & 80's explored the disconnect between 'emperical' science and the reality of human behavior when viewed from a larger perspective of eons. As Copernicus, Galileo, and Columbus probably told the science world of their time 'It's a matter of limited perspective, you goof-balls'. An example of limited perspective are dogs. If they can't smell it, it most likely doesn't exist. That's why they don't watch TV. They've got no soul.

[Melchisedec]

[quote]
Well it's good you apparently know the answer.  Choosing only to pay attention to material which supports your own atheistic position and dismissing anything that does not support it, then accusing me of "putting on blinders" seems hardly a way to debate!
[/quote]

You steal my material. No originality.

[quote]
Superstitious, perhaps, but hardly religious.  He denied the Church and was not even a church-goer, and is known to have been quite anti-Christian.  His ideologies arose from megalamania and racism, not "religious fervor"!  Religion involves submitting to a higher Authority.  Hitler wanted to crush anything that stood in the way of his drive to power. 
[/quote]

[i]re·li·gious: Having or showing belief in and reverence for God or a deity.[/i]

Hitler believed in god, and believed that he was somehow chosen to be the important person he was. THereforce, he meets the defition of religious. Maybe not your defintion, but the standard accepted one. Mein Kampf was the blueprint for the course hitler laid out. During that time, hitler was indeed very religious and that was the inspiration for his evil deeds. While later on in his life he left more orthodox religious views to more occult ones. His racist views stemmed from these religious sources as opposed to social darwinism.


[quote]
(I think you watch too much Indiana Jones.)
[/quote]

I love them movies

[quote]
Atheism was regarded by all the communists revolutionaries and leaders as an intrinsic part of Communism.  The rejection of God and Church authority is part of their beleif that rejects all other authority and sets up "socialist man" (in practice, teh Communist state) as the supreme authority.  The Communist leaders  would all disagree with you that atheism was not important to their ideology.[/quote]

Let me stomped out your dumb statements and paint it very clearly to you.

[i] com·mu·nism:
1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
2. Communism
1. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
2. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.
[/i]

Communism is primarily an economic system, it is not inspired or require atheism to work. Can you explain to me if Atheism is required, how could there be a system called [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_communism"]Religious Communism[/url] that predates Marxism? Please answer that. Here is the truth, atheism was imposed by the Marxist because they believed that religion was like a drug that would help people forget about the problems of their captialist system. Hence the term 'opium for the masses'. THey believed that by taking religion out of the system, that the people would have to face the realities of the flaws of the polcitical system.

I will illustrate exactly the logic you are using right now with the KKK. Here are the requirements for being in the KKK - (white, Christian, at least 18). Now I can say that Christianity is an intrinsic part of being a Klans man. I mean, what is the Klan without a cross to burn. So is it right for me to say that without christianity there would be no KKK? Or that christianity led to the KKK? Do I need to touch upon the facist christian regimes of old for it to get through to you? Atheism and communism are not one in the same, Atheism just means lack of theiest belief, no more , no less.Calling KKK , christian racism, paints an incorrect picutre and I will not resort to your logical fallacies.


[quote]
The fact remains that atheistic Communism governments have killed more people than any other governments in history!  You still have not refuted this point.[/quote]

That statement is an outright lie that I definitely refute and have refuted. We can start a thread on all the religious wars versus all the wars inspired by atheism and it would be no contest. More blood has been shed by religion than anything else, hands down.

[quote]Fallen human beings  will abuse power and do evil things under any religion or lack thereof, but atheism, which recognizes no higher moral authority than itself, gives tyrants free reign.  Both Communsism and Nazism were systems which were "free" from higher religious authority and recognized themselves as the ultimate authority.[/quote]

Thats like saying the Kings of the middle ages were not brutal tyrants because they were guided by the higher authority of the Catholic church. We call it the Dark ages for a reason. Its no diffent to commit acts of hatred because you have no moral authority to live up to or to believe you are acting on behalf of god. From that statement that would leave all of the asian world as immoral because in there belief, there is no god. Yet their murder rates are far lower than ours. Tyrants have always been there own gods, regardless if they appealed to a religious moral authority or not. Your argument that atheist are immoral is offensive at best.

[quote]You blame religion and the Church for any deaths or attrocities committed under a Christian ruler, yet deny that atheism had any responsibility for the (much greater) atrocities commited by atheist regimes.  Looks like a major double-standard at work here.[/quote]

The reason I blame religion is because they used religion as a reason for war. Heresy, infidels, holy land disputes, the list goes on. I dont remember any wars where people who didnt believe in any god faught and killed people who worhsipped one. It was always differing beliefs fighting each other, converting each other and proving their gods are the truest gods. Its no different today.


[quote]I suppose you will also claim that religious fervor had nothing to do with the countless Catholic Christian saints who devoted their lives to the service of the poor and suffering.[/quote]

Thats the positives of religious fervor and devotion. I truly love mother theresa or gandhi or even martin luther king. I cant image a speech by MLK without any kind of spiritual talk. But atheist do public service and work and care for mankind. I for one , work 40 + hours a week and volunteer 20+ hours a week. And you'll get a kick out of this. I volunteer for a faith based organization, but it doesnt bother me at all. Im there to help the kids who need help. Heck, I even join in the prayer circle. But all atheist are immoral evil doers right????


[quote]
All religions are not created equal.  As a Catholic, I beleive that the Catholic Church is the true religion.  It certainly does not condone the actions of Muslim suicide bombers and the like.  Lumping Christians with  Muslim terrorists and whatnot all together to generically denounce "religion" as evil, is a common and falacious tactic of secularists.[/quote]

To you all religions are not created equally, but to an atheist they are. The defintion of religion encompasses your beliefs aswell as beliefs you disagree with. Whether you like it or not, they are religions and I will referr to them as religions.

Edited February 17, 2005 by Melchisedec