It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hitlerisms

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Dang, that thir paragraph really made a lot of good points. I'm only 26, but I'm a big history buff and know a lot about both the social and military history of WW2. However, most my age and younger probably do see Hitler as Strong Bad appears in the olde tyme movies on Homestarrunner.com.

Great point!




posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:10 PM
link   
DE, I would have to use religion as my "crutch" for saying why that's wrong, because from a secular standpoint it's totally acceptable. To quote Third Day:


I believe what I believe
It's what makes me what I am
No, I did not make it
No, it is making me


My faith defines me. If you see that as a crutch, that's fine; I see it as my legs.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
My faith defines me. If you see that as a crutch, that's fine; I see it as my legs.


that's fine... be what you want, when you want. But "God tells me this is right" does not qualify as a rational argument for or against anything.

DE



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Not when argueing with someone who doesn't believe, this is true. However, I believe God created us and knows what works and doesn't for us. It wasn't a crazy power trip he had in saying it was wrong, there are huge social implications of not only saying this is acceptable but lashing out and calling anyone who disagrees a horrible person. I guess I don't really feel there is no secular backing for saying that behavior is wrong.

I also think deamonizing that sin above all others is wrong, as well, though. Being actively gay is no worse than me pirating software. However, me pirating sotware is no worse then Dahmer killin' folks.

In the eyes of God, that is.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Not when argueing with someone who doesn't believe, this is true. However, I believe God created us and knows what works and doesn't for us.

I am not so willing to pass up my choice and indepedence to somethign which may or may not exist. You faithful can be led like sheep if you wish, but I see no reason for something as simple as people being together as a major catastrophe that will ruin society.

It wasn't a crazy power trip he had in saying it was wrong, there are huge social implications of not only saying this is acceptable but lashing out and calling anyone who disagrees a horrible person. I guess I don't really feel there is no secular backing for saying that behavior is wrong.

There are secular objectors, yes. But the fact of the matter is I'm not calling you a horrible person. I disagree with you, and when you offer up the argument that "Gods says THIS.", it sorta doesn't cut mustard.

I also think deamonizing that sin above all others is wrong, as well, though. Being actively gay is no worse than me pirating software. However, me pirating sotware is no worse then Dahmer killin' folks.

In the eyes of God, that is.

See, therein lies the problem. Because of your faith, are you supposed to operate accordign to different rules than the rest of us? What right do you have to force your views on us?

DE




posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   
hehe interesting that you would use mustard as your metaphor.

Iknow it doesn't hold water with you, what I believe God mandated. Yet you ask me what right I have to force my views on someone? I don't, I state them. If I was forcing them on you, you'd be agreeing with me now.

If you're refering to the law, and what right does government have, I can very simply reverse the question on you. What right do you have to force your views on me? That's the joy and pain of a democracy. The majority rules, and the minority has the majority's views imposed on them. There are always winners and losers with democracy. That's what right you and I have for forcing our views on one another through the law.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:42 PM
link   
JungleJake maybe "hitlerism" is just occuring in your area, and it will probally pass. And if young kids are comparing things to hitler their just probally refreshing their minds from what they learned that day in history



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Thing is, I'm not stopping you from doing anything, while you are forcing others from doing something. There is a big difference between you depriving someone of their rights because of your religious views, and me enforcing laws that deprive BOTH of us.

thus, we have the harm principle. You are doing harm by denying someone a right, while I am not by giving it to them.

DE



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
Thing is, I'm not stopping you from doing anything, while you are forcing others from doing something. There is a big difference between you depriving someone of their rights because of your religious views, and me enforcing laws that deprive BOTH of us.

thus, we have the harm principle. You are doing harm by denying someone a right, while I am not by giving it to them.

DE


Abortion.

In my view, it's legal murder. In yours (I'm guessing) it's a woman's right.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Abortion.

In my view, it's legal murder. In yours (I'm guessing) it's a woman's right.


Yeah, generally it's a woman's right not to die because they tried to abort a kid with a coathanger, right? It's a lesser of two evils. Abortion may be bad, but so are the deaths of those desperate women AND their babies.

DE



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I'm not talking about life or death abortions. I'm talking have the baby up to its neck then jab a knife in its brain abortion. I'm talking I don't want this baby abortion. I'm talking unprotected sex mistake abortion. I'm talking I can't let mom and dad find out about this abortion.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 10:09 PM
link   
So, you don't think those would make women desperate enough to try the hanger way out?

DE



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Heh, there's another option: adoption. In those situations, if they took the hanger way out, they're committing the second greatest act of selfishness there is. They're murdering an innocent because they find it inconvienant. The first being suicide. Just put the child up for adoption if you don't want it. If you're banging in an unprotected manner, you will have to face the consequences.

If we're going to protect women from themselves like this, we should make sex illegal so they don't die from an STD. More women died from STDs than did and do from abortions, and you're saying we need to protect them from themselves.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Not protect them from themselves, give them an alternative to a desperate, last ditch attempt at salvaging their life in such a brutal way. There is still a stigma attached to single mothers, PARTICULARLY those from a religious background. Anyways, in a lot of cases single motherhood ends up being social suicide. They must work constantly to ensure just the basics for their child, all while ostracized by both their family and friends.

You sound like YOU support forcing women not to have sex, because if they didn't have sex, they wouldn't have to murder their children.

DE



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Hitler was a bad, bad, bad man. No one in a place of power has come near achieving his level of evil, and even those who may have enough checks and balances to prevent them from doing so that it won't happen. Especially in America unless 75% of the population supports the regime.

I am still laughing.

Where to begin?

(I'll leave the 75% bit until later- - -)

In no particular order, people (groups) at least as bad as Hitler and most far worse-
    Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Tamerlane, Andrew Jackson, Indonesia,* Britain, (British) East India Company, Dutch India Company, American Army in the Great Plains** and Southwest, Pizarro, Portuguese Napoleon, American expansionism, Genghis Khan, Nipponese Imperial Army/Navy, Turkey,*** Rome, etc.

    Minor murderers in comparison:
    Inquisition, Teutonic Knights, Rwanda, Kosovo, Crusaders (both Christian and Moslem), Central and South American Death Squads, etc.


    *U.S. arms were used in all that and continue to be used today. There is a degree of complicity here by the U.S. that I really find to be quite disturbing.
    -- Rep. Donald Fraser, March, 1977
    ** At Sand Creek on November 29, 1864, John Chivington led the Colorado Volunteers in a dawn attack on Black Kettle and his band, who had been told they would be safe on this desolate reservation. Two hundred Cheyenne men, women and children were slaughtered, and their corpses often grotesquely mutilated, in a massacre that shocked the nation.
    This is often argued as the match that light the Great Plains Wars.
    ***Red Fez
    This originates from 7th century Arabia when the Moslems, under the leadership of Mohammed, slaughtered all Christians who would not bow down to Allah. Allah, by the way, was not another (generic) name given to God by Mohammed; Allah is the tribal deity --the moon god-- of Mohammed; it was the name of the god in the tribe that Mohammed was born into. That is why every mosque today has a crescent moon on the top of its spire.
    Others too numerous to list


75%- where this number comes from is unknown. I personally don't believe much over 30% acceptance would be needed. One third in agreement, one third are 'non-involved,' so the remaining one third is marginalized by government.

.

.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Let's look at things here:

We get a random terrorist, and we give him/her and odd quirk....let's go with going "Bubba Gump" on ice cream. Let's say they absolutely destroyed the whitehouse. From that point on, peopel would worry about there being conspiracies in their writing on the icecream..."it must be code!"...and then every Ice Cream lover will have to hide for the next 10 years...for fear of a connection.

Look what America did after Columbine. Better yet, look what it did to one of my friends. I have an artisic friend with a wickedly sharp toung, and I suspect he also has circulation problems, because he's always cold...he wears a black trenchcoat in southern Louisiana. This guy plays video games and talks about blowing things up (most often in reference to a game). He also has a very dark sense of humor. Police Harass him, for no reason...have been since Columbine. He's never left alone, enough to drive someone with a weaker will to violence.

Hitler is one of those people that spoke out of both sides of his mouth, which means that if he has some phrases that match anyone with any particular political leaning, he's got some that will match whomever you see as the origianally chosen's counterpart.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
Not protect them from themselves, give them an alternative to a desperate, last ditch attempt at salvaging their life in such a brutal way. There is still a stigma attached to single mothers, PARTICULARLY those from a religious background. Anyways, in a lot of cases single motherhood ends up being social suicide. They must work constantly to ensure just the basics for their child, all while ostracized by both their family and friends.

You sound like YOU support forcing women not to have sex, because if they didn't have sex, they wouldn't have to murder their children.

DE


Like I said, there's always adoption if they don't want to be a single mother. What about the pyschological effects? Then there's also the great unknown factor, how many women die or are mamed? Finally, why does Planned Parenthood not talk about these complications? I thought they were supposed to be looking out for the mother.


Norma McCorvey has changed her view on abortion and now directs the Crossing Over Ministry, a nonprofit anti-abortion organization. Last year she filed a motion with the U.S. District Court in Dallas requesting that Roe v. Wade be reversed, and more recently a federal judge agreed to hear her arguments.


Norma is the infamous Roe for those of you who didn't know. Though she won her case, she was still stuck having what she considers the greatest treasure in her life.

As to the Mao and 75% comments, I'll have to address those when I get to work this afternoon.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
So, flyersfan, how shall we analogize your
country's slide into fascism without the most
obvious parallel? Would you prefer Pinochet,
perhaps Mussolini?


Excellent. Thanks for providing an excellent
example of ignorant and senseless
anti-American bigotry. You non-Americans
spouting anti-American rhetoric are so
pathetic. Sad really. But thanks for the
show.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Think I may have to adjust the subject line to compensate for Deus and my sidetrack. I read through that since I have about 10 minutes b4 I go and that was pretty funny how the conversation moved to abortion.

JoeDoaks, I'm a little shocked at your assertion. You think Andrew Jackson was worse than a man who brought the whole world into a war trying to both commit massive genocide and control the world? Hitler had world domination in mind, removal of all religion, and genocide of non-aryans. He tried to bring the apocalypse but was too early so he failed. He almost didn't, though, had Japan been able to leave Hawaii alone.

Andrew Jackson was fighting total war. He wasn't right in doing so, but his goal wasn't the extinction of a people, it was to cow the Native Americans into submission through terror, much like the Palistinians are doing to Isreal. It's wrong, but Hitler was worse.

And yes, Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao were very, very bad men, too. They just didn't drag an entire planet into a war, though they did kill far more than Hitler had the chance to before he went and got dead. I'm sure, however, Hitler had some grand plans before everything started turning south on him.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
However, Bush hasn't followed "Facism for Dummies" close enough, he seemed to have forgotten the chapter on "Executing the Opposition" since John kerry is still free to go wind surfing and get his nails done.

Well, Kerry doesn't need to be executed if he is "in bed" with Bush.
They are cousins, allthough remotely. Such an execution would be to obvious. Also they are Skull and Bones brothers, the oath they take is above all others.
Why execute the opposition if you control the process?

I think mindless Hitler = Bush is the most ignorant statement one can make.
Remember that Hitler was Time Magazines Man of the year in 1938.
The same year of the occupation of Austria, and the Kristallnacht.
For thouse who don't know Kristallnacht was (the "Night of Broken Glass"), over 191 synagogues were set afire, with 76 destroyed. More than 7,500 Jewish businesses were looted and over 800 ruined. Almost 100 Jews were killed or seriously injured. As many as 30,000 Jews were rounded up and sent to concentration camps. The Jewish communities of Germany were assessed one billion marks to pay for the damage claims of non-Jews.

Now I'd say that Bush does NOT = Hitler.
But the ever increaceing police state is obvious to me, and many others outside of the US. Not to mention congressmen Ron Paul.
www.house.gov...
www.house.gov...

don't be blinded by your hatred of ignorant 'bush bashers' and open your eyes to what is happening.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join