Thursday, June 18, 2009

You hear what dat bum just called me?

The weirdest thing just happened. The barefoot bum just called me a fascist. A fascist? Even Dawkins admits that the only government that ever has or ever will be fascist in nature is one that is made up of darwinists. And this bum calls ME a fascist. He even said I can't post there any more. Nothing like atheists for promoting censorship and suppression of opposing ideas. Well, atheists and fascists.

13 comments:

Dana Glatt said...

Leave it to a Christian to completely take a quote out of context...

Maybe you should actually think about what Dawkins was really trying to say, rather than just taking it at face value in a feeble attempt to discredit your opposition. Can we say "Straw man argument?"

Thesauros said...

You can call it what ever you like but a government based upon Darwinism could be nothing other than Fascist.

Dana Glatt said...

Okay, since you're quoting Dawkins, tell me what he means. Because you obviously don't get it.

Thesauros said...

There's a difference is there? Don't atheists make the charge that a government made up of Christians would become a Theocratic government?

But a government made up of Darwinists would be what exactly?

Hitler's government was based on Darwinist principles because it's leader was a Darwinist. Are you saying that a new government made up of Darwinists people would somehow be different? Are you saying this new government would ignore Darwinism yet still call themselves Darwinists just because it sounds sexy?

Marcus Wellington said...

Hitler's government was based on Darwinist principles because it's leader was a Darwinist.

No it wasn't.
I am a White Christian and have read a lot of Hitler.

Hitler explicity rejected Darwinism and the evolution of man.

From Hitler's Tischgespraeche for the night of the 25th to 26th 1942 'Woher nehmen wir das Recht zu glauben, der Mensch sei nicht von Uranfaengen das gewesen , was er heute ist? Der Blick in die Natur zeigt uns, dass im Bereich der Pflanzen und Tiere Veraenderungen und Weiterbildungen vorkommen. Aber nirgends zeigt sich innherhalb einer Gattung eine Entwicklung von der Weite des Sprungs, den der Mensch gemacht haben muesste, sollte er sich aus einem affenartigen Zustand zu dem, was er ist, fortgebildet haben.'

I shall translate Hitler's words, as recorded by the stenographer.

'From where do we get the right to believe that man was not from the very beginning what he is today.
A glance in Nature shows us , that changes and developments happen in the realm of plants and animals. But nowhere do we see inside a kind, a development of the size of the leap that Man must have made, if he supposedly has advanced from an ape-like condition to what he is' (now)

And in the entry for 27 February 1942 , Hitler says 'Das, was der Mensch von dem Tier voraushat, der veilleicht wunderbarste Beweis fuer die Ueberlegenheit des Menschen ist, dass er begriffen hat, dass es eine Schoepferkraft geben muss.'

So get your facts straight before you trash Hitler.

Dana Glatt said...

No, he's talking about a government that is based on the Darwinian principle of Natural Selection. That would be a Fascist government.

In Fascism, only the strong survive. Same with evolution. That's what he's talking about. I swear, it's like talking to a brick wall!

Dana Glatt said...

It has nothing to do with whether or not the leaders are Darwinists. It has everything to do with the underlying principles of evolution. Survival of the fittest. That's what fascism is. Evolution is fascist. A government based on those principles would be fascist. It has nothing to do with the beliefs of the leaders.

Just thought I'd clarify even further.

Thesauros said...

So Ian, you believe that what we believe does not affect what we do? Then atheists really do not have anything to fear from a religious government.

Marcus: In getting my facts straight I was just going by observation. You perhaps think that Hitler killed 6 million Jews and Gypsies and Homosexuals because they didn't take out their garbage? Why don't we ask Hitler himself, a darwinist and a fascist as a result.

" If nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with stronger, she wished even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such cases all her efforts, throuhout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile.

But such a preservation goes hand-in-hand with the inexorable law that it is the stronger and the best who must triumph and that they have the right to endure. He who would live must fight. He who does not wish to fight in this world, where permanent struggle is the law of life, has not the right to exist.
Mein Kampf (My Struggle) London: Hurst & Blacket, 1939, 239-240.

Thesauros said...

"Here's a name you might know - MARTIN LUTHER."

Ok, and your point is?

Marcus Wellington said...

are you some kind of jew?

Thesauros said...

"are you some kind of jew?"

Why?

Marcus Wellington said...

and MARTIN LUTHER was another good man, if it werent for him, thered only be Catholics.

Serviam said...

"and MARTIN LUTHER was another good man, if it werent for him, thered only be Catholics."

One forgot the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox...lol

As for the censorship by atheists: it is this hypocrisy of "relativism" which does not tolerate any ideas to the contrary that reveals the self-contradictory nature of this dreadful ideology.

And to the ignorant: please refrain from talking bad about the Holy Inquisition. Thanks :)