Matt & Trey targeted

[chippa13 1844]

Remember, Hitler attacked the Jews as a race of people and not as a religion.

[Chadd 916]

Remember, Hitler attacked the Jews as a race of people and not as a religion.

He killed them if they were of European or Semitic heritage.

[Jason Harris 31]

In Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote: "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."

Also, in a 1922 speech, he said: "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."

So, regardless whether he viewed Jews as a race of people versus a religion of people, it's apparent he believed he was eradicating them FOR his God.

[rinkrat94 1]

I don't agree. People intolerant of different religions would most likely just find another reason to hate their neighbor and religious intolerance is only one form, you've got plenty of racial intolerance, sexual orientation intolerance, etc, etc to go around that has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs.

You are right. People would just find another way to justify evil acts or intolerance if they could not use religion as the tool or justification. People make their own choices. It goes both ways. If the evil done in religon and gods name is not caused by religion but by personal choice, than all the good that god and religion gets credit for has nothing to do with god. You are proving the point that religion is irrelevant because good people will do good things and evil people will do evil things and god has nothing to do with it.

[iceNsteel 0]

iceNSteel, historians aren't sure of the religious beliefs of some of the more despotic leaders.

Hitler was well known to be a Catholic.

Stalin had studied in the seminary to be a priest, yet denounced Christianity for a while, although contemporaries stated he expressed "a vague idea of a God of nature". Historians believe his policy to create an atheistic state was purely for political reasons; he didn't want the competition for the people's mindshare. However, he reopened the churches after WWII to help the citizens with the rebuilding.

Pol Pot studied at Buddhist and Catholic schools, and contemplated becoming a monk.

There weren't enough quotes from Mao to know his religious beliefs, but we know that he believed religion was an obstacle to his political goals

I think people try to connect the dots that ( a ) Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto; ( b ) Marx appeared to be an atheist who believed society would evolve to not need religion, which he expressed in the Manifesto; and ( c ) some countries in the 20th century claimed to be "Communists"; thus ( d ) all Communist countries are atheistic. The problem with these connections is NONE of the "Communist" regimes were really all that close to Marx's vision of Communism. Basically, most of these regimes bastardized the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" to become a "Dictatorship of the Leader." The point is just because their leaders claimed their countries had become "Communist," it doesn't mean their leaders were atheists.

Still, even all of that is irrelevant to the topic. As someone who's been an atheist for 40 years, I can tell you there is no dogma or texts associated with atheism. All it means is we don't believe in any form of a supreme being. I've spoken to a lot of atheists/agnostics over my life and the general consensus is we don't care about others' religious beliefs as long as they don't try to force it upon us.

Even if some of the leaders above were atheists -- and we know that many of them were not -- they did not commit genocide because the victims weren't non-believers. They committed genocide purely for political or historical reasons. That can't be said for the more radical religious adherents. It is estimated that 9 million people were killed during the Crusades and Spanish Inquisition. Al Queda and the Taliban have killed Muslims for not being Muslim enough. Hitler killed 6 million people for being Jewish.

Hitler was not a Catholic. He may have been raised Catholic, but that doesn't make him a Catholic. There are no ethnic ties to that religion that would in any way apply to anyone that doesn't practice the religion. Alfred Rosenburg was in the process of developing a non-theistic "racial religion" for post war Germany. Hitler's attacks on Christianity were smarter than Stalins, but attacks none the less. For example: NSDAP party functions, Hitler Youth functions, German Girls league functions, and various "cultural" events were held on Sundays. The reason was simple: get Germans out of Lutheran and Catholic churches and into the NSDAP.

As for the rest: atheism is a central tenant of communism. Stalin allowed the Orthodox to continue, albeit with heavy government control, only because he knew the situation in Russia may well devolve if he went as far as to outlaw Christianity. However, some member states of the USSR did declare themselves official atheist. It is illogical to believe that individuals would become involved with communist tenents if they rejected such a central ideal of the communist system.

Of course you don't proclaim to want to do bad things to religious people. You live in a soceity where you are a minority and have no real power. It's simply a fact that atheist dictators empowered by atheist systems of government haven't taken such a live and let live approach.

In Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote: "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."

Also, in a 1922 speech, he said: "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."

So, regardless whether he viewed Jews as a race of people versus a religion of people, it's apparent he believed he was eradicating them FOR his God.

And if you bother reading Mein Kampf Hitler attacks Christianity and the pagan religious ideals of racial political parties that existed in Germany at the time that advocated Votanism. Of course Hitler didn't come out in the 20's as an atheist, the guy was smarter than that. He would never have gained any traction with the German mainstream at the time. Hitler wanted power, the language of getting was just whatever worked at the time.

[Jason Harris 31]

iceNsteel, you seem to be attempting to rewrite history. There is some question whether Hitler stayed in the Catholic church until the end, but there is no question whether he considered himself a Christian or whether he was acting on behalf of his Christian God. However, as with the numerous sects of Christianity today, he lived by his own interpretation of the Bible. What is apparent from reading quotes he gave over twenty years, however, is he seemed to stop using the word "Christianity" by the end. I'm not sure why, because there is no doubt he still believed he was doing God's work. Of course, the answer could be as simple as there are less speeches available once the war began.

Here are a sampling of his speeches:

Feb 1925: "It will at any rate be my supreme task to see to it that in the newly awakened NSDAP, the adherents of both Confessions can live peacefully together side by side in order that they may take their stand in the common fight against the power which is the mortal foe of any true Christianity."

Oct 1928: "We are a people of different faiths, but we are one. Which faith conquers the other is not the question; rather, the question is whether Christianity stands or falls.... We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity... in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep distress of our own people."

Feb 1933: "We are determined, as leaders of the nation, to fulfill as a national government the task which has been given to us, swearing fidelity only to God, our conscience, and our Volk.... This the national government will regard its first and foremost duty to restore the unity of spirit and purpose of our Volk. It will preserve and defend the foundations upon which the power of our nation rests. It will take Christianity, as the basis of our collective morality, and the family as the nucleus of our Volk and state, under its firm protection....May God Almighty take our work into his grace, give true form to our will, bless our insight, and endow us with the trust of our Volk."

Mar 1933: "The Government, being resolved to undertake the political and moral purification of our public life, are creating and securing the conditions necessary for a really profound revival of religious life.... The National Government regard the two Christian Confessions as the weightiest factors for the maintenance of our nationality. They will respect the agreements concluded between them and the federal States. Their rights are not to be infringed.... It will be the Government's care to maintain honest co-operation between Church and State; the struggle against materialistic views and for a real national community is just as much in the interest of the German nation as in that of the welfare of our Christian faith. The Government of the Reich, who regard Christianity as the unshakable foundation of the morals and moral code of the nation, attach the greatest value to friendly relations with the Holy See and are endeavouring to develop them."

Apr 1933: "The Catholic Church considered the Jews pestilent for fifteen hundred years, put them in ghettos, etc, because it recognized the Jews for what they were".... I recognize the representatives of this race as pestilent for the state and for the church and perhaps I am thereby doing Christianity a great service by pushing them out of schools and public functions."

Jul 1933: "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."

Jan 1934: "Imbued with the desire to secure for the German people the great religious, moral, and cultural values rooted in the two Christian Confessions, we have abolished the political organizations but strengthened the religious institutions."

Jun 1934: "The National Socialist State professes its allegiance to positive Christianity. It will be its honest endeavour to protect both the great Christian Confessions in their rights, to secure them from interference with their doctrines (Lehren ), and in their duties to constitute a harmony with the views and the exigencies of the State of to-day."

Aug 1934: "No, it is not we that have deserted Christianity, it is those who came before us who deserted Christianity. We have only carried through a clear division between politics which have to do with terrestrial things, and religion, which must concern itself with the celestial sphere. There has been no interference with the doctrine (Lehre ) of the Confessions or with their religious freedom (Bekenntnisfreiheit ), nor will there be any such interference. On the contrary the State protects religion, though always on the one condition that religion will not be used as a cover for political ends....

National Socialism neither opposes the Church nor is it anti-religious, but on the contrary it stands on the ground of a real Christianity.... For their interests cannot fail to coincide with ours alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against a Bolshevist culture, against atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for a consciousness of a community in our national life... These are not anti-Christian, these are Christian principles! And I believe that if we should fail to follow these principles then we should to be able to point to our successes, for the result of our political battle is surely not unblest by God."

Feb 1939: "If positive Christianity means love of one's neighbour, i.e. the tending of the sick, the clothing of the poor, the feeding of the hungry, the giving of drink to those who are thirsty, then it is we who are the more positive Christians. For in these spheres the community of the people of National Socialist Germany has accomplished a prodigious work."

Jan 1945: "God the Almighty has made our nation. By defending its existence we are defending His work....

Only He can relieve me of this duty Who called me to it. It was in the hand of Providence to snuff me out by the bomb that exploded only one and a half meters from me on July 20, and thus to terminate my life's work. That the Almighty protected me on that day I consider a renewed affirmation of the task entrusted to me....

Therefore, it is all the more necessary on this twelfth anniversary of the rise to power to strengthen the heart more than ever before and to steel ourselves in the holy determination to wield the sword, no-matter where and under what circumstances, until final victory crowns our efforts....

In the years to come I shall continue on this road, uncompromisingly safeguarding my people's interests, oblivious to all misery and danger, and filled with the holy conviction that God the Almighty will not abandon him who, during all his life, had no desire but to save his people from a fate it had never deserved, neither by virtue of its number nor by way of its importance....

In vowing ourselves to one another, we are entitled to stand before the Almighty and ask Him for His grace and His blessing. No people can do more than that everybody who can fight, fights, and that everybody who can work, works, and that they all sacrifice in common, filled with but one thought: to safeguard freedom and national honor and thus the future of life."

As for the rest: atheism is a central tenant of communism. Stalin allowed the Orthodox to continue, albeit with heavy government control, only because he knew the situation in Russia may well devolve if he went as far as to outlaw Christianity. However, some member states of the USSR did declare themselves official atheist. It is illogical to believe that individuals would become involved with communist tenents if they rejected such a central ideal of the communist system.

Of course you don't proclaim to want to do bad things to religious people. You live in a soceity where you are a minority and have no real power. It's simply a fact that atheist dictators empowered by atheist systems of government haven't taken such a live and let live approach.

Considering NONE of the "Communist" countries put ALL of the tenets of the Communist Manifesto into practice -- it's not at all illogical to assume they would reject specific paragraphs of the Manifesto.

Finally, the bolded part is an incredibly cynical way to look at the world, if you truly believe what you wrote. I don't want to do bad things to religious people because I have no desire to bad things to people, period.

[LkptTiger 1]

iceNsteel, you seem to be attempting to rewrite history.

I believe he's trying to argue that Hitler's sole mission throughout his campaign was securing his own power within Germany and, ultimately, Europe - that none of his ambitions were in any way truly religiously oriented, and that he simply used that angle in order to convince Germans to rally behind him.

He said "God" and the Bible-Beaters fell in-line. They're called "blinders": commonly worn by horses, they're quite easy to slip over the peripheral vision of a religious people.

[Jason Harris 31]

I agree on all points, Lkpt, but I'd still maintain that that is "rewriting history." We have all evidence -- from speeches he made for his God and against the Jews, to churches opened under the National Socialist banner, to killing Jews -- that he was a man on a religious crusade, but multitude of people (not just iceNsteel) are trying to suggest that he faked thirty years of speeches and actions.

That harkens to the crux of this argument. Has religion led to an inordinate number of genocides or would these people "find another reason to hate" as others have suggested?

While understanding there can be psychos on all sides of this debate, the huge difference between atheists/agnostics and those who are religious is the radical element of the religious feel they have the Ultimate Validator justifying their actions. At most, a psycho who doesn't believe that God exists is killing people to prove his own warped points -- perhaps against an overly strict religious upbringing, which I'm not saying meanly. He's not trying to make points for "all of atheism."

I've said it before, but the rest of the atheists don't have a political agenda other than not wanting religion foisted upon them.

(By the way, on the argument of "finding another reason to hate," considering many racists cite passages of the official books as requiring them to be racists, it wouldn't shock me if polls showed that there are a lower percentage of racists among atheists.)

[chippa13 1844]

I agree on all points, Lkpt, but I'd still maintain that that is "rewriting history." We have all evidence -- from speeches he made for his God and against the Jews, to churches opened under the National Socialist banner, to killing Jews -- that he was a man on a religious crusade, but multitude of people (not just iceNsteel) are trying to suggest that he faked thirty years of speeches and actions.

That harkens to the crux of this argument. Has religion led to an inordinate number of genocides or would these people "find another reason to hate" as others have suggested?

While understanding there can be psychos on all sides of this debate, the huge difference between atheists/agnostics and those who are religious is the radical element of the religious feel they have the Ultimate Validator justifying their actions. At most, a psycho who doesn't believe that God exists is killing people to prove his own warped points -- perhaps against an overly strict religious upbringing, which I'm not saying meanly. He's not trying to make points for "all of atheism."

I've said it before, but the rest of the atheists don't have a political agenda other than not wanting religion foisted upon them.

(By the way, on the argument of "finding another reason to hate," considering many racists cite passages of the official books as requiring them to be racists, it wouldn't shock me if polls showed that there are a lower percentage of racists among atheists.)

I'm not so sure that is true. There are an awful lot of atheist groups out there including, ironically enough, the First Atheists Church of Reason.

[Jason Harris 31]

Regardless whether there are atheists that have banded together, the majority simply want to have freedom from religion. But that encompasses more than not having someone knock on their door on a Saturday morning. It means not having medical research blocked because some religious adherents don't want stem cells used. It means not having to say "Under God" in the Pledge. It means not having counties try to put the Ten Commandments in public buildings.

Here's the thing. I'm NEVER tried to convert anyone to atheism, but I've had people try to convert me countless number of times. In fact, I do everything I can to avoid religious discussions so as to not offend those who are religious. You've read enough of what I've written to know I have very strong opinions which I'm quick to express, but I always keep religious affiliation to myself. The only reason I brought it up here is we had another thread a couple of years ago where it made sense to give full disclosure, so those who read these types of topics would have already known. But the way I look at it is you are very happy in your beliefs, just like I'm very happy in mine

Regarding atheist groups, I've never joined one nor even realized they existed before the internet, but I'm glad they allow people to connect with others who share similar beliefs.

[chippa13 1844]

The movie in my head of what the meetings for those groups must be like makes me chuckle...........

"This meeting of the [insert group name] will now come to order."

"Anyone believe in God?"

Group: "No."

"Meeting adjourned, see you all next week."

I kid. Just like you, I don't like to push my beliefs or lack thereof on other folks. It is part of the drinking discussion rule, the three things never to discuss with friends while drinking; politics, religion, and music, three things that you will likely never change someone's mind about and almost always lead to arguments rather than discussions.

[chk hrd 164]

Here's the thing. I'm NEVER tried to convert anyone to atheism, but I've had people try to convert me countless number of times. In fact, I do everything I can to avoid religious discussions so as to not offend those who are religious. You've read enough of what I've written to know I have very strong opinions which I'm quick to express, but I always keep religious affiliation to myself. The only reason I brought it up here is we had another thread a couple of years ago where it made sense to give full disclosure, so those who read these types of topics would have already known. But the way I look at it is you are very happy in your beliefs, just like I'm very happy in mine

I agree, religious people love to advertise thier beliefs, be it on thier car, homes or in conversation. It seems as an atheist if we advertise our beliefs we get religious people condemming us. As a christian, jew, muslum, etc you can put religous tags on your plate like GODLVR butyou cannot put anti religious statements DVLLVR or NOGOD because it "Expresses contempt, ridicule, or superiority of race, ethnic heritage, religion, gender, or political affiliation." (quoted from the Nevada DMV). Even though I like to talk about relegion I try not to because many people cannot do it civilaly. It seems the less knowledgable a person is the harder they will argue and not listen to your side without contempt to the point of getting extremely angry.

My view is if it makes you a better person, great, but please don't try to push it on me.

[chippa13 1844]

What you have to realize is that a person's beliefs are very personal and they of course will battle to defend those beliefs, regardless of how irrational or illogical it will sound to you. Heck, look at how bitter the Ovechkin/Crosby discussions become and that is just about a couple of hockey players. Imagine if those same folks decided to argue their core religious/non-religious beliefs.