God does NOT exist!

[f0rd]

"Richard Weikart explains the revolutionary impact Darwinism had on ethics and morality. He demonstrates that many leading Darwinian biologists and social thinkers in Germany believed that Darwinism overturned traditional Judeo-Christian and Enlightenment ethics, especially those pertaining to the sacredness of human life. Many of these thinkers supported moral relativism, yet simultaneously exalted evolutionary "fitness" (especially in terms of intelligence and health) as the highest arbiter of morality. Weikart concludes that Darwinism played a key role not only in the rise of eugenics, but also in euthanasia, infanticide, abortion, and racial extermination, all ultimately embraced by the Nazis. He convincingly makes the disturbing argument that Hitler built his view of ethics on Darwinian principles rather than nihilistic ones. From Darwin to Hitler is a provocative yet balanced work that should encourage a rethinking of the historical impact that Darwinism had on the course of events in the twentieth century."

 

http://www.csustan.edu/history/faculty/weikart/fromdarwintohitler.htm

 

Oh hello, from the author himself:

 

http://www.csustan.edu/history/faculty/weikart/response-to-critics.htm

 

"The two most common criticisms of my book by scholars run something like this:

 

Weikart incorrectly argues

 

that all forms of Darwinism lead to Nazism (sometimes this charge is couched as: Weikart is imbalanced in his presentation, because he doesn't discuss Darwinists and forms of Darwinism that didn't lead to Nazism);

 

that all of Nazi ideology and policies derive from Darwinism (sometimes this charge is presented as: Weikart is imbalanced in his presentation, because he doesn't discuss all the other factors that produced Nazi ideology and practices).

 

I have read these criticisms with some bewilderment and consternation, because not only did I not make these arguments in my book, but I overtly denied them."

 

 

"Concerning the second charge (that Nazism depends entirely on Darwinian thought), I specifically confronted this issue in my book, too, stating: "The multivalence of Darwinism and eugenics ideology, especially when applied to ethical, political, and social thought, together with the multiple roots of Nazi ideology, should make us suspicious of monocausal arguments about the origins of the Nazi worldview." (p. 4) I further clarify: "I would also like to make clear from the outset that, while stressing intellectual history in this work, I recognize the influence of political, social, economic, and other factors in the development of ideologies in general and of Nazism in particular--but these topics are outside the scope of this study."

 

"What I demonstrated in detail in my book is that many leading Darwinists themselves argued overtly that Darwinism did indeed undermine the sanctity-of-life ethic, and they overtly appealed to Darwinism when they promoted infanticide, euthanasia, racial extermination, etc. I specifically noted that not all Darwinists took this position, but those who did were leading Darwinian biologists, medical professors, psychiatrists, etc. They were not some fringe group of ignorant fanatics; they were mainstream Darwinists. Also, I did not simply show that leading Darwinists supported eugenics, infanticide, euthanasia, and racial extermination; I showed that they appealed overtly to Darwinism to justify their position."

 

Kudos, again you pick a book that doesn't support what you say in the slightest.

[f0rd]

A Christian cannot tell lies and be a Christian.

 

.

 

And by the vast amounts of lies this thread which you have spewed (which you have still not addressed) we can conclude you are not a Christian.

[Grahame]

Imagine Grahame, a xtian, sitting down at his computer and seeing a post about how Hitler personally murdered, or endorsed the murder of, thousands of men, women, children and cattle. Grahame is shocked and declares that "No xtian would do such a thing." The next day he sits down to his computer again and this time finds a post about Yhvh, whose brutal actions make Hitler seem almost gentlemanly. This fact shows that Grahame was wrong in his opinion but is he going to admit this? Not likely. This time he says:..........................?

 

What does he say, Grahame? You haven't told us yet.

 

No God-fearing Christian would do such a thing. Christianity is about not killing and love of neighbour.

[EbonyBranch]

"Richard Weikart explains the revolutionary impact Darwinism had on ethics and morality. He demonstrates that many leading Darwinian biologists and social thinkers in Germany believed that Darwinism overturned traditional Judeo-Christian and Enlightenment ethics, especially those pertaining to the sacredness of human life. Many of these thinkers supported moral relativism, yet simultaneously exalted evolutionary "fitness" (especially in terms of intelligence and health) as the highest arbiter of morality. Weikart concludes that Darwinism played a key role not only in the rise of eugenics, but also in euthanasia, infanticide, abortion, and racial extermination, all ultimately embraced by the Nazis. He convincingly makes the disturbing argument that Hitler built his view of ethics on Darwinian principles rather than nihilistic ones. From Darwin to Hitler is a provocative yet balanced work that should encourage a rethinking of the historical impact that Darwinism had on the course of events in the twentieth century."

 

http://www.csustan.edu/history/faculty/weikart/fromdarwintohitler.htm

 

AFAIK, Weikart is a discredited asshat, but if you insist on scraping the barrel: can you tell us what part of Darwin’s theory the Nazis are supposed to have employed?

 

Darwin’s books were burned as contrary to the National Socialist idea, as were many others. Evolution itself was generally flat on its back by 1900, and there is little evidence of any revival of it by 1925 in Germany. Evolution theory does not support genocide in any way. Plus, Darwin's books were on the banned lists in Nazi Germany:

 

Guidelines from Die Bücherei 2:6 (1935), p. 279

 

6. Writings of a philosophical and social nature whose content deals with the false scientific enlightenment of primitive Darwinism and Monism (Häckel).

 

So that's that idea dismissed. Didn't take long at all. Next fallacy, Grahame?

 

 

 

 

 

Anyone detect a pattern?

[EbonyBranch]

No God-fearing Christian would do such a thing. Christianity is about not killing and love of neighbour.

 

So yhvh is not a christian?

[Grahame]

AFAIK, Weikart is a discredited asshat, but if you insist on scraping the barrel: can you tell us what part of Darwin’s theory the Nazis are supposed to have employed?

 

Darwin’s books were burned as contrary to the National Socialist idea, as were many others. Evolution itself was generally flat on its back by 1900, and there is little evidence of any revival of it by 1925 in Germany. Evolution theory does not support genocide in any way. Plus, Darwin's books were on the banned lists in Nazi Germany:

 

Guidelines from Die Bücherei 2:6 (1935), p. 279

 

6. Writings of a philosophical and social nature whose content deals with the false scientific enlightenment of primitive Darwinism and Monism (Häckel).

 

So that's that idea dismissed. Didn't take long at all. Next fallacy, Grahame?

 

Anyone detect a pattern?

 

Survival of the Fittest has influenced American economic policy, immigration law, and political thinking up to today, while its variants have influenced everything from Hitler's eugenics to various state-sponsored incidents of ethnic cleansing.

 

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/sci_cult/evolit/s05/web1/mheeney.html

 

.

[Grahame]

So yhvh is not a christian?

 

We are not YHVH.

 

.

[redrobbo]

Has anyone else spotted that Grahame amended his original post after f0rd challanged him to substantiate this claim?....

 

Original post -

Bible slaves were well looked after and protected and their lifestyle can in no way be compared to modern slavery which Christians stopped while the atheists argued for keeping slavery.

 

Amended post -

Bible slaves were well looked after and protected and their lifestyle can in no way be compared to modern slavery which Christians stopped while it was the non-Christian atheists who argued to keep people in enslavement.

 

In his original post, Grahame also claimed -

I do not tell lies F0rd.

 

Despite the change in text, the meaning is still the same. If we are to believe Grahame that he does not tell lies, it really is time to put up the evidence for this claim.

 

We are still waiting Grahame. Or are you a liar?

[devil6]

A Christian cannot tell lies and be a Christian.

 

.

 

In your eyes maybe, but what makes you right? What is a lie? We all tell little white lies all the time, it helps people get on. Have you not ever been asked a question about someones outfit or shoes, and claimed to like them, even though you think they are horrible?

[Grahame]

Bible slaves were well looked after and protected and their lifestyle can in no way be compared to modern slavery which Christians stopped while the atheists argued for keeping slavery. [Graham]

 

Bible slaves were well looked after and protected and their lifestyle can in no way be compared to modern slavery which Christians stopped while it was the non-Christian atheists who argued to keep people in enslavement. [Graham]

 

Both posts say the same thing. Are you feeling all-right?

 

.