One strength of the Communist system … is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion. (Albert Einstein,
Perhaps, some of the above posters should use, “…a God…” or use quotations around the word God, or some other form of identification. Why? In not doing so they are unconsciously affirming the very existence of a God. Elementary I’ll admit, however a corrupted lexicon corrupts a society.
If discrimination was NOT legal, there wouldn’t be a single grocery store, multiple automobile manufacturers, radio stations, blogs, clothing stores et al etc. Freedom to choose, not FreeDumb to lose.

SickBoy on February 11, 2007 at 9:10 am

Why do idiots thinks Atheists are communist. Because Stalin was a communist? I vote Progressive Conservative in Canada, it is sort of equal to Republican in the USA.
From Sam Harris:
2) Atheism is responsible for the greatest crimes in human history.
People of faith often claim that the crimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the inevitable product of unbelief. The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core and generally give rise to personality cults that are indistinguishable from cults of religious hero worship. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject religious dogma; they are examples of political, racial and nationalistic dogma run amok. There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.
3) Atheism is dogmatic.
Jews, Christians and Muslims claim that their scriptures are so prescient of humanityís needs that they could only have been written under the direction of an omniscient deity. An atheist is simply a person who has considered this claim, read the books and found the claim to be ridiculous. One doesnít have to take anything on faith, or be otherwise dogmatic, to reject unjustified religious beliefs. As the historian Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-71) once said: ìI contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.î

Bacon Eating Atheist Jew on February 11, 2007 at 11:01 am

the way i see it Christians are more on the road to becoming Muslim. Islam saya that ones who do not believe in their religion are infidels and must be done away with. granted Islam seems to take it a bit further than just telling those that dont believe in God to “shut up” but its the same sort of attitude towards people that dont believe.

John S on February 11, 2007 at 1:36 pm

ñ ìI went on to say that religion offers many guidelines that are ambiguous, contradictory, and outright immoral.î
IíM A CATHOLIC, not a member of one of the thousand competing denominationsÖthere is no ambiguity in our faith. DEFINITELY nothing contradictory and as for IMMORAL only Catholicism offers a true and noble moralityÖalthough some others come close~
ñìAtheism, which is usually characterized by an adherence to reason, has a more positive effect. By freeing our minds from the shackles of religion, secular research has provided the world with new medical advancements, technologies, and discoveries which can actually help those in need. This too, religion fights at every step.î
YOU FORGOT ìand we will boldly go where no man has gone before!î
The PROBLEM with atheists is they canít handle the Bible. They canít explain it; they canít refute itÖthey can only get mad at it!
When you read Scripture there are about 30 things going on at once BUT because youíve become so imbedded with that simplistic TV version of evangelism, your minds, now insipid, believe Pastor D. Zastorís pathetic, superficial, and incomplete interpretation of the Bible is the complete picture.
Nope.
MAYBE you canít really be blamed when you turn away in horror.
BACON EATERÖstrive for accuracyÖyouíre just an atheistÖyou threw your ìJewishnessî away a long time ago, so remove Jew from your handle~
Your PROOF links were garbage. Donít insult my intelligence with desperate pages that are neither accurate, nor compelling. Are you sure you werenít once an associate of Jack Chick?
ñìMany early Christians believed that Jesus was not God, but infused with his spirit at baptism.
ñìOther early Christians viewed Jesus as the savior from the material world who opposed the evil God of the old Testament.î
Christians should read heretics or schismatics.
I DONîT CARE about what Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus or other irregular religions including atheists believe about Jesus.
WHAT DID Jesus say about Himself?
When encountering his fellow Jews, JESUS told them, ìTruly, truly (this formulation is the taking of an oath to the truth), I say to you, before Abraham was born, I AM.î (John 8:58)
When Moses met God at the ìburningî bush (Exodus 3:13) he inquired what Godís name was. God responded, ìI am who I am.î
Tell the sons of Israel, ìI AM has sent you.î (Exodus 3:14)
For those who are not in need of the services of a DUMBULANCE, the conclusion is clear. Jesus told the crowds indirectly that He is God. Not a philosopher, moral teacher, yogi, guru, only a prophet, or even a reincarnation.
’nuff said.

The Canadien on February 11, 2007 at 3:36 pm

thing that gets me is whenever you ask a christian why anything is or what anything is or who anyone is or whatever they just respond with “the bibles tells us so”. thats the only source and not really a real answer btw. scientific community has several sources to corroborate answers. therefore things are more provable.
cops ask for corraborating stories to support alibis for murder suspects. they dont just take the accused’s word for it.
bible was written by man. it was not written by god.
oh how i would love to go back some 2000 years to see what really happened and prove once and for all that religion is all a crock of crap.

John S on February 11, 2007 at 5:30 pm

A) while you say that you recieved hate mails, i’m willing to bet most of them merely disagreed with you, but its hard to say for certain without seeing them. Its all too easy to put your biased spin on someone no one else will ever see.
B) your blog sucks. I don’t mean content (which i disagree with heartily) but visually. Its almost impossible to read. I can see you don’t employ anyone to your website (if you do, fire them. and hire someone who knows how to use photoshop to fix up your photos) but seriously! 15 minutes with a fee online page maker would this at least visually decent. It looks like the pages from the first days of the internet. Back when it was a dump truck, and not tubes yet

Tremblor on February 11, 2007 at 7:38 pm

On a side note I love how conservatives decry liberals imposing their values (usually made up, like the war on Christmas)but then demand everyone follow their beliefs. My favorite part is “liberals/atheists (they often can’t tell the difference) want to teach children about atheism! we have to force the kids to learn about Jesus (if they want to or not) so they won’t be fooled!”

Tremblor on February 11, 2007 at 7:44 pm

I wonder how much ad revenue this article has made for Debbie. I’m willing to bet she has had record traffic on this site since she made her harsh statements regarding atheists. This proves that bigotry can be profitable.

SpicyMeatball on February 11, 2007 at 9:03 pm

we’re not attacking you. just trying to help you not be so ignorant towards atheists. and im going to have to ‘go with god’ on this one: here. thanks for being blonde.
and if that doesnt link: http://www.blogofthegods.com/2007/02/08/debbie-schlussel-inspires-new-commandment-from-god/#more-35

notyourgodsgod on February 11, 2007 at 10:25 pm

“IíM A CATHOLIC, not a member of one of the thousand competing denominationsÖthere is no ambiguity in our faith. DEFINITELY nothing contradictory and as for IMMORAL only Catholicism offers a true and noble moralityÖalthough some others come close~”
I have no doubt that you sincelerly believe this. Remember though, that there are hundereds of other Christian denominations. There are thousands of other religions of the world. For each of these there have been people who would make the exact same assertion.
For each of those other religions and denominations you and I would stand together and agree wholeheartedly that they are wrong. However, for one mythology of the thousands, you say “hang on, wait a minute.. This one is right.” Unfortunately, neither you nor they have anything to prove which religion is superior beyond your personal testimony.
Why shouldn’t a person seeking faith choose one of those other religions, perhaps one with a God who is less capricious? I encourage you to read the Bible, as I have. It is rife with genocide, slavery, oppression of women, and other atrocities at the hand of a deity who is quite often childlike, spiteful, and unjust.
Of the few decent moral guidelines to be found, most are vague or are contradicted at other places in the Bible.
Certainly it would be better to just find or invent another religion that had good clear moral guidelines, like “Slavery is bad” and “Don’t rape women,” and none of those silly pointless rules commonly found in religious texts.
Or maybe, just maybe.. We don’t need any of that quaint religion stuff at all. Well, perhaps some still do, and that’s fine, just don’t force it upon those who’ve grown beyond this need.
“YOU FORGOT ‘and we will boldly go where no man has gone before!'”
This isn’t a legitimate point, but it did make me smile, so you get bonus points for that. 🙂
Judging by your response to the various views of Jesus, you misunderstood my point. Of course I don’t expect you to care or agree with how other people view Jesus, I was only reminding you that there are other ways to view him besides just “a LIAR or a LUNATIC or THE LORD.”
“Öthey can only get mad at [the Bible].”
I can’t speak for everyone, but I’ve never gotten angry at my Bible, any more than I would get angry at Aesop’s Fables, Plato’s Republic, or the Hindu Vedas. In fact, I rather enjoy parts of it, but I don’t feel compelled to elevate it (or these other books) to some divine status. What I certainly don’t like is being treated unfairly because of this.
Cheers

ChristTheRedeemer on February 12, 2007 at 12:31 am

Look at famous atheists and what happened to them? You mean Marie Curie, Sigmund Freud, James Watson, Francis Crick, Richard Feynman, Richard Dawkins, Woody Allen, Margaret Sanger, Douglas Adams, Terry Pratchett, Primo Levi, Andrew Carnegie, George Carlin, Kurt Vonnegut, and Bertrand Russel? Yeah, Islamofascists, all of them. And I’m sure Adam Gadahn would have turned out entirely different raised by religious parents. I mean, after all, Hilter was raised by Catholics and Jeffery Dahmer grew up in a Christian fundamentalist family, and we all know how well they turned out. Oh, wait…

mir on February 12, 2007 at 1:57 am

“I may not like what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
why cant a similar thing be said about religion in this country?…..
“I may not like what you believe, but I’ll defend to the death your right to believe it.”
that would be too accepting of others i guess and all religions cant be THAT accepting i guess. because all of them are brainwashed to believe that THEY are the true believers and what they believe is THE ONLY REAL TRUTH. but i ask anyone of any religion if all say that how can they all be true? its complete garbage to think that.

John S on February 12, 2007 at 2:20 am

yeah Canadien,
Hitler was Catholic in many conversations (private ones where he wouldn’t have to cover his ass) he has said and i quote “I always was and always will be a catholic” so he is actually a brother of your faith. So learn your history. He has many other accounts that were brought to light, that he has insisted that he was actually catholic. Atheists were targeted by Hitler too. Which means he obviously didn’t care. I know you’ll say sio were christians, but it was only the christians that spoke out against him. With that said, I don’t have a problem with all christians, i have a problem with the christians that actually try to force me into converting, and treat me like hell when i decline their offer. where’s jesus’s sayings when they do that? i don’t think it is if peopole don’t follow torture them to death. sol don’t lecture me, the main problem is when people like you who don’t know what they’re talking about start a debate, and refuse to admit when they’re obviosly wrong. My other problem is how a whole population of people are generalized like what Debbie said in her blog. She doesn’t take into account that many Muslims moved to Europe, and she assumes(but states it like it was a fact) that all Atheists were becoming Muslim extremists. I am sorry no one should be generalized like she did to us. I don’t care what race, belief, etc.. no one deserves to be generalized at all it feeds hate and ignorance.

publius on February 13, 2007 at 12:18 am

Point well made, publius. I have no problem with christians supporting their faith. But, support of Debbie’s comments on CNN amounts to the perpetuation of ignorance and hatred, no question about it.
And another broad misconception that her views fed into was the belief that the recent violence in europe had anything to do with the muslim religion. Those riots were born out of the same poverty and social oppression that led to the LA riots.

davensocal on February 13, 2007 at 2:10 am

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH is apostolic and an AUTHORITATIVE Church.
While you may LAY CLAIM to being Catholic, if the Pope, or the local Conference of (German) bishops EXCOMMUNICATES youÖyou are OFFICIALLY outside of the Church!
Your sins are retainedÖby you!
The German Conference excommunicated all Nazis in 1930, and that includes Hitler!
While Hitler would never lose the charism baptism bestows, his horrific orchestration of needless war, murder and Jewish genocide ALSO IMMEDIATELY INSURED his EXCOMMUNICATION, ìipso factoî. In other words his excommunication was automatic, incurred by his action(s) and doesnít EVEN NEED official Church declaration. A modern, and lesser scenario occurs sometimes when a Catholic woman, husband, or doctor, PARTICIPATE in an abortion. Murdering the unborn automatically EXCOMMUNICATES you.
Because Jesus granted the ìkeysî to Peter and transmitted the power to loose or bind sin for all, and for all time, if the Church declares your excommunication officially, or you declare it, by your actions (ipso facto) then you are no longer a Catholic, regardless of your claim otherwise!

The Canadien on February 13, 2007 at 5:03 am

Debbie said THREE THINGS on CNN:
FREEDOM OF RELIGION doesnít mean freedom FROM religion.
The Real Discrimination is ATHEISTS against Americans who are religious.
They (atheists) are the ones who are intolerant against Christians.
ALL 3 statements are 100% accurate.
Additionally, ATHEISTSÖthat’s how all Catholics and other Christians I know PERCEIVE YOU and your anti-Christian lobbying, lawsuits, whatever.
So EVERYTIME you are SCANDALIZED by a Christmas tree or THUNDERSTRUCK by a Merry Christmas sign in a public arena CHRISTIANS see you! AS HOSTILE!! And AS BIGOTS!!!
FYI.
So YOUR ACTIONS incur any hostility you encounter ~

The Canadien on February 13, 2007 at 5:14 am

I meant to say YOUR RECTIONARY, INTOLERANT ACTIONS incur any hostility you encounter ~

The Canadien on February 13, 2007 at 5:23 am

GOON,
I’d like to ask you if your name is Goon Koch to write me your opinion concerning religion by e-mail. So we can discuss thorughly! Thanks a lot!

Robert Josifoski on February 13, 2007 at 5:41 am

The Canadien said:
“The Spanish Inquisition numbers…don’t compare with the 20+ million Stalin slaughtered under his religion of Atheism…c’mon guy…be serious!”
This was in response to someone else. However, I must point out that atheism itself is responsible for zero murders. The reason Stalin murdered people wasn’t the “religion of Atheism” [one of the dumbest oxymorons I’ve ever read], but the system of Communism! People like Stalin and Pol Pot are just as deluded as Christians — they strive to use force to bring about a utopia just as Christians do.
The Canadien said:
“And what if God lets millions die HORRIBLY but rewards them forever, just beyond the “corridor of death”? Really, what permanent harm has actually been done? None.”
In that case, if God forgives Stalin, after millions die horribly, what justice has been done? None.
The Canadien said:
“Sdanielmorgan…thanks for your responding post, BUT according to your own blog you debunk Christianity.”
Um, so? Did you mean to finish this clause with some “THEREFORE” conclusion?
The Canadien said:
“I haven’t seen any debunking…only a lot of anger, frustration and confusion.”
Care to be specific?
The Canadien said:
“When you dialogue about religion especially Christianity…well, you are WAY OUT of your league, friend!”
Again, I’d love some specific point where I stepped “out of my league”, qualification-wise or whatever…And as for you? Are you an M.Div.? Th.M.? Ph.D.? No, I didn’t think so.
The Canadien said:
“Please just stick to chemistry…stick to something you know about–”
And what about you? What is your degree in? Are people only allowed to comment in the area of their specialty, and not outside it? Well then, I suppose Peter should’ve only pontificated on fishing, and Jeebus on carpentry…
The Canadien said:
“IF you want to refute Jesus, and the claims of Jesus, and the work of Jesus, your chemistry knowledge is of no use!”
Um, I never said I used chemistry to do any of those things. You’re a dolt.
The Canadien said:
“You haven’t really even looked at the evidence supporting Jesus.”
And you conclude this based on what? And you know this…how…again…?
The Canadien said:
“Would you even know where to start?”
Depends on what I was trying to do, doesn’t it? Insofar as the general debunking of Christian claims goes, philosophical technique is about all I need to employ — basic premises and deductive conclusions.
The Canadien said:
“Jesus Himself, the Apostles and the Church have detailed very intricate, and complex arguments, supporting all His assertions and claims and thus refuting all objections.”
That’s interesting. I was under the impression that the authors of the gospels were not the Apostles, and that Jesus never wrote a book. It’s also interesting that you don’t specify any particular objection.
The Canadien said:
“JESUS is either a LIAR or A LUNATIC or THE LORD. It’s that easy!”
Perhaps to a mentally-disabled person it’s that easy. To a person with a modicum of intelligence, there’s a fourth option which is even more likely than all those: that the people who followed him had an oral tradition about what he said and who he was that was distorted over time and mishmashed with other pagan mythologies and then eventually written down (30-40 years later). And so it’s impossible to say what Jesus *really said* and what his followers *really believed*.
The Canadien said:
“And you don’t understand Sacred Scripture AT ALL…you don’t even have a clue! Because that is the only arena you can refute from!”
? What is the “only arena you can refute from”? What don’t I understand? Why don’t I have a clue? Do you just love to spew rhetoric without support? You must be a preacher!!!!
All you do is hurl insult after insult. You sound like the Pharisees. Those guys were the *only* people that Jesus ever threatened with hellfire. Go find me an exception, you pompous ass, since I don’t now crap about the Bible.
The Canadien said:
“Besides, how can you refute something you only possess a kindergarten level knowledge of?”
I’d love to know how you can assess my own knowledge of Scripture, you pompous ass. Besides, didn’t you own Jesus say that you had to have the mind of a child to enter into God’s kingdom, you worthless asshole?
The Canadien said:
“You can run around, wringing your hands, calling down the rabid “dogs” of the ACLU on misspelled Ten Commandment monuments found in the public arena…but what have you accomplished, really?”
Preventing theocratic imbeciles from ruining our secular government and using it as a weapon to advance their religious doctrines.
The Canadien said:
“What you REALLY should be asking yourself is: why does the sight of anything religious seem to engender such a harsh response from me?”
It doesn’t. I drive by crosses and churches every day, and don’t break a sweat. It’s only when I encounter foaming-mouth fundies with no brains and lots of presumptions that I get angry.
The Canadien said:
“sdanielmorgan said:’In the end, we all decide our own values, and from that, our own meaning.’
Wow…do I disagree with you here!”
Oh, so you don’t choose whether or not to believe? To follow? To obey?
The Canadien said:
“That statement isn’t even logical. There is right and wrong. Always. Is a murderer’s opinion and purpose as valid as mine, a law-abiding citizen?”
You must have the reading comprehension level of my St. Bernards. I never said all values, or opinions, or purposes, are equally valid, you retard. I said we all choose our values. There’s quite a difference there.
The Canadien said:
“So there you have it…you see the simpler moral issues but can’t comprehend the value of the higher ones, the Church’s stance against abortion, or euthanasia or artificial contraception etc. Try instead to understand the Church’s teaching on these issues and so many others and attempt to learn how even this mildly imposed morality is a form of divine communication and a revelation of God’s very being.”
Um, no. The church has a belief based on old mythical books written by people, just like you and me. No one has divine communication. Sorry. People that have “divine communication” are called lunatics and we lock them up for all of our safety.
The Canadien said:
“As a man of science, being open-minded and not pre-deciding is probably a good thing.”
Depends on what you mean. Being *so* open-minded that you don’t put natural constraints on your experiments, or use theoretical modeling, would mean that science would end. I could explain the same observation using various theories — supernatural ones involving magic fairies, for example, or natural laws and processes. If I don’t “pre-decide”, or presuppose, that there is a natural explanation for some data, then I won’t have made any contribution to science by determining what that explanation is.
Now if I take a cup of sugar and put it in my hands…alongside a cup of potassium nitrate, and apply a flame to the compound…not a good idea right? Kind of foolhardy. That’s the truth right?
The Canadien said:
“So if you live your life without acknowledging God, but then it turns out there really is a God, wouldn’t that also kind of foolish?”
Pascal’s wager warmed over. What if you live your life acknowledging the WRONG gods?? Perhaps you’ll be punished more for worshipping a false god than I will be for not believing at all. What if there is a god that hasn’t revealed itself to humans at all, and you’re being stupid and wasting time trying to please this god, when it doesn’t need anything from you at all?
And, how can you make yourself believe something solely out of fear?
The Canadien said:
“How would you cover off that default?”
? I think you are asking me how I cover my ass in case I’m wrong. First, what kind of god would be pleased if I only believed in it out of fear? Is that why you believe in Yahweh? Perhaps he thinks cowards like you deserve hell, and people like me who want evidence before believing, and refuse to cower in fear, are worthy of heaven.
The Canadien said:
“What would happen if you repeatedly ignored the requests and expectations of your boss?”
Depends. If my boss sent a moron to tell me what he wanted, and I didn’t trust that moron, I would call the boss myself, or ask him to send me a direct communication. Instead, your “boss” asks me to trust his “ambassadors” — ill-equipped brain-drainers with no obvious credibility over my own.
The Canadien said:
“You [sdanielmorgan] said, ‘You may have decided yours is to follow this or that conception of god. Mine is to live well and leave the world a little better. Perhaps both of us end up DOING the same thing, just MOTIVATED by different “purposes”.’
I don’t think we’ll both end up doing the same thing…your aims are purely at a humanistic level. They serve only Man. Mine are also at a spiritual level.”
So when you take a dump, how does that serve God? When you feed your fat face? When you get in your car and drive to work (assuming you even do work)?
If I’m not terribly mistaken, your Jesus is reported as having said that the way that people treat the poor, sick and naked is the way that they treat him — and that those who treat them well are favored, and those who treat them poorly are shunned: sounds pretty humanistic to me.
The Canadien said:
“YOU CAN do good works, yes…but they aren’t part of the Redemption.”
Really? I thought Jesus said, “If you love me, keep my commandments” and Mt. 25:31-45,
“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. And all the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on His left. Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’ Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You drink? And when did we see You a stranger, and invite you in, or naked, and clothe You? And when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’ Then He will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’ Then they themselves will also answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?’ Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
Sounds to me like those things matter a lot to Jesus — notice he didn’t say here whether or not those people “on the left” had *believed*, only how they *behaved*.
See http://www.zompist.com/meetthepoor.html for more verses on the Bible and poverty.
The Canadien said:
“That’s how Mother Teresa once put it so well.”
And do you live like she did? Have you given everything up in order to serve God? Are you a monk? She may have said that her works weren’t part of the Redemption, but she obviously thought Jesus’ commandments about the poor were important enough to obey and follow and live. Do you, hypocrite?
The Canadien said:
“HEY, you could always become a MUSLIM…”
Why would I want to believe in human-made conceptions of gods? Whether the Jewish version, Christian version, or Muslim version…they’re all “man creating god in man’s own image”: a petty, bloodthirsty, vengeful, misogynistic, slavery-endorsing, pathetic ghost in the sky.
The Canadien said:
“That’s the other perfectly FALSE religion…if you don’t want to think for yourself~”
That makes a lot of sense. I am an atheist, and I don’t think for myself. You belong to a church that tells you what to do, and read a book to get instructions on daily living, and you *DO* think for yourself? That’s some hilarity right there — and some bitter irony.
Dude, go grow a brain.

sdanielmorgan on February 13, 2007 at 8:54 am

Unfortunately, sdanielmorgan keeps returning to the same tired out pleas, the same wilted arguments hoping to bolster his errant, atheistic stance.
He canít stand religion, or Christianity because he just doesnít understand it.
He has proven that with this last vexatious and exasperated post.
Oh dear.
IF HIS mind wasnít already closed, I could tell him about the rich, young man who boasted to Jesus about doing all the right things, obeying all the commandments but in the end was rejected (Matthew 19:16 ñ 28).
Jesus first zeroed in on the manís failure to recognize the identity of JesusÖthe man only called him teacher. The man never gives Jesus the salutation He was looking for. Jesus then tells him if he wants eternal life he must obey the commandments. After the man asks which ones, Jesus responds by naming ONLY the commandments that apply to his interactions with his fellow man.
Jesus remains silent about the first three, which order your relationship with God.
The man affirms to Jesus he has done all these. Nevertheless, the man senses he lacks something and asks Jesus what it is.
Jesus tells him to give all he has to the poor, that he will then have treasure in heaven, and then come, and follow Him. The man leaves sad because he is not able to comply and become perfect. The manís wealth was his god and owned him in the end. While the remaining text talks about higher sacrifice to God, and higher reward, that is not our concern here.
You see, sdanielmorgan there are obligations to both God and manÖnot just to man.
Please read the Bible, in context.
Donít try and reinvent the exegesis ìwheelî, and there are standards for biblical exegesis you must comply with, or you come across as a simpleton or worse, a Penecostal. If I was called to speak about chemistry, I would do my homework and not dispense with the known fundamentals and just try to wing it before the crowds.
The Bible is not a book about morality, but is primarily a REVELATION about God, Himself.
There would be no way you could ever know ANYTHING about God UNLESS he chose to reveal Himself to you!
The record of the BIBLE is the WRITTEN WAY He has chosen to reveal Himself to mankind.
The Bible has ALSO recorded Godís interaction with mankind.
So pick up the Book.
(Put down your science books, drop your guard a little, and you just might get a glimpse of God. We are only sane, in so far as we see the truth!)
HAVE THE COURAGE to seek the TRUTH!
And youíll never figure that all out with your mind. God is beyond our human understanding. God has revealed Himself to us in four ways: in NATURE, in your CONSCIENCE within, in the Bible, and most perfectly in the PERSON and LIFE of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
From Genesis to Revelation the Bible is actually, really, all about Jesus.
Why donít you enroll in a CCD or RCIA program at your local Roman Catholic Church? You may not agree at the end of the journey, but youíll at least know why Catholics believe as they do.
Or check out Catholic Answers for reasonable explanations of the Faith.
If your live your whole life and donít finally secure friendship with God by your lifeís end, you will then have missed the mark, and the whole point of that GIFT, which was your life!

The Canadien on February 13, 2007 at 10:39 am

According to the Bible, the Kingdom of Heaven is in our heart. It is not at the end of the world, but in our heart. In what sort of abode does the heart dwell? It does not dwell in a place that harbors all the elements of death, but rather one that can overcome them and dissemi?nate life.
The Kingdom of Heaven cannot be found in the physical world ? it is not of this world. As such, it starts from the point where we actualize the visions of our heart. Finding that one place enables us to welcome the Kingdom of Heaven.
That being so, the Kingdom of Heav?en is not coming through the end of the world, but rather through us establish?ing that starting point in our heart; it is like the fulcrum for balancing a pair of scales. The purpose of a scale is to become level, but it starts out tilting towards the right and not the left. It begins with a tilt to the right.
So, the Kingdom of Heaven begins from the heart. From where in the heart does the kingdom originate? It originates from the place where it can conquer the world. Even if the Kingdom of Heaven were to come externally, if our hearts were evil and could not harmonize with it, then that kingdom would be useless. Accordingly, the basis upon which we can welcome the Kingdom of Heaven is not something external, but rather, it is ourselves. We are the problem. The pil?lar ? the fulcrum ? that can support the Kingdom of Heaven is not our external environment, but our heart.
Jesus? disciples did not understand the reality of his teaching. In working to prepare a foundation of happiness for the coming Kingdom of Heaven, they had self-centered concerns for their position. Seeing this, Jesus fundamentally demol?ished this fallacy and taught that the Kingdom was in one?s heart. Those who do not create the Kingdom within their hearts would be unable to contribute to Heaven even if placed in its environ?ment. An irresolute heart cannot pro?duce perfect action; perfect action arises only through absolute resolve.
Therefore, what matters is how much our mind yearns for goodness. While yearning for and striving to follow the path of historical goodness, we must overcome our circumstances, no matter how bloodstained and tearful they are. However lonely the path of our struggles, we must not avoid the path. Rather, we must instead unswervingly blaze a trail with a mind to break through and move on. God?s Kingdom begins from our res?olution and determination to open up an environment for our body to unite with such a mind. Where the actions of the mind and body are separated, the Kingdom does not exist. Advancement towards the Kingdom begins where the mind and body are united. When they act separately, it will not come about.
In this sense, Jesus was teaching that the Kingdom would come about when we attain the self-governing character to advance with mind-body unity while ridding ourselves of the circumstances that would cause us to veer to the right or left.
The Kingdom does not come through the efforts of others but by our own efforts. Being fallen people, you must deny yourselves. If I cannot bring about the Kingdom by myself, it will then be done by someone else. If that happens, then I must unite with that person in order to reach the Kingdom. I would have to follow and keep in step with him. If he were to go east, I would have to follow. We should not think of going west if he goes east, or judge his actions. There should not be any criticism.

Robert Josifoski on February 13, 2007 at 12:45 pm

Hey Debbie, maybe you should learn something about net etiquette yourself before complaining about someone TYPING IN ALL CAPS.
You see, by posting a giant url (aka web address) you end up stretching the web page to fit the width of the text.
This makes the page very difficult to read, as the width of the page would usually match that of the browser window, formatting the text to fit that width.
If you had been a courteous human being, you would’ve gone to tinyurl.com and shrunk your gigantic url down to only a few characters, something that easily would’ve fit the width of the page rather than stretch it as you have managed to do.
Well, congrats on showing your true colors as well as further demonstrating your ineptitude when it comes to the internet, as you don’t seem to know how to operate a search engine either, since I saw your CNN appearance with little difficulty (albiet through the hard work of others who had previously linked to it, I’m sure if I were to try I’d be able to find the link quite quickly on google)
Anyways, just to repeat myself: GO TO TINYURL.COM WHEN POSTING LARGE WEB ADDRESSES ON A WEB PAGE TO PREVENT IT FROM BECOMING AN UNMANAGEABLE MESS AS THIS PAGE HAS NOW BECOME.
OR, IF YOU WANT TO SIMPLY VANDALIZE HER SITE, GO TO GIANTURL.COM AND HAVE THAT SAME LINK TURNED INTO A EXTREMELY LONG URL, PERHAPS EVEN LONGER THAN WHAT IT WAS BEFORE, JUST TO BE ANNOYING LIKE DEBBIE.

Chicken2nite on February 13, 2007 at 8:01 pm

Well, CanadiEn, you again failed to muster an response to anything I said. However, you did comment further more on Debbie’s patently ignorant statements, which are really an insult to all decent people of religion. I will address those, which you claim to be “100% accurate”.
but first..
“ATHEISTSÖthat’s how all Catholics and other Christians I know PERCEIVE YOU.”
I know many Catholics (including friends and family members) who disagree with you. Even if it were true, it doesn’t really matter how you perceive us. Nobody cares. Just don’t trample on our rights.
“So EVERYTIME you are SCANDALIZED by a Christmas tree or THUNDERSTRUCK by a Merry Christmas sign in a public arena CHRISTIANS see you! AS HOSTILE!! And AS BIGOTS!!!”
LOL, You assume way too much about atheists. I’ll remember these words and laugh next Christmas as I am sitting around the tree celebrating Christmas with my family. Hostile, indeed.
“FREEDOM OF RELIGION doesnít mean freedom FROM religion.”
100% INACCURATE
This is false Christian rhetoric and contractictory to the concept of individual rights. This is why, in light of the extensive history of oppressive religion, the First Amendment clearly states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It takes a great feat of self-delusion to interpret that as saying meaning “You must have a religion.” But in case you’re really that ignorant of the facts, note that freedom from religion has been confirmed, such as in Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 which confirmed that the “government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion.”
“The Real Discrimination is ATHEISTS against Americans who are religious.”
100% INACCURATE
Real Discrimination? REAL discrimination!?
Real discrimination is the fact that there are many US states with LAWS FORBIDDING atheists from running for office or even being a witness in court. THAT is discrimination. Sometimes these laws forbid even all non-Christians, yet Christians are being discriminated against? Let me guess, you want to tell me there was no holocaust next?
They (atheists) are the ones who are intolerant against Christians.
100% INACCURATE
This is basically the same thing as the last statement, and just as WRONG.
You saw the CNN special, I assume, you saw the family ostracized. When was the last time you saw an American Christian family mistreated in that way, and forced to move? You haven’t. In fact, this isn’t even a one-time deal. There have been other families like this on the news, including Jewish families, also forced to move because of Christians.
The degree to which some people can delude themselves amazes me. Christians cram their beliefs down everyone else’s throat, and whenever someone says “leave me alone” they cry intolerance.
I suppose I should count myself lucky. These days the progress of secular society has watered led to the watered down Christianity sufficiently that you only want to trample over my individual rights. A few centuries ago, you would probably murder me, in accordance with your “moral” religion.
A word on the original topic, CNN recognized that the treatment of atheists in the show by the unqualified panel was inappropriate. Last night they revisited the issue and gave it a more fair treatment, so I commend them for recognizing a mistake and correcting it.

ChristTheRedeemer on February 14, 2007 at 12:36 am

Canít you atheists go off on your ownÖlike the Amish?
It would be better for us, and better for you!
NOW, hereís a quote for you!
ìThomas Nagel, the philosopher, recently pointed out that if we are to believe evolutionary explanations, and therefore that the necessary seed material existed at the time of the Big Bang, we have to realize that there is no scientific explanation for the existence of that material in the first place. A complete understanding of evolution would involve answering a question as complex as evolution itself: “How did such a thing come into existence?” We have done nothing but push the problem one step back.
Or, as Stephen Hawking put it, “Why does the universe go to the bother of existing?” On that point we are all ignorant — and only a little closer to knowledge than our ancestors who believed that sacrificing a goat would bring good crops. The profound intellectual failure of atheists lies in their fundamentalist-like aversion to the words, “We don’t know.” Robert Fulford, atheist
The additional problem with atheism is that it doesnít offer a credible or inspiring purpose for individual human existence. People are always look for meaning to their lives! Why is that?
ìOh, are souls were meant for thee, LordÖand we shall find no rest, until we rest in Theeî ~ St. Augustine
Glad to see you like the advance of secular societyÖand the watering down of Christianity. You and your Muslim brothers can cheer together here!
We have seen the HATE and MURDER automatons active in NAZI GERMANY against the Jews, in the FORMER Soviet Union against the Ukrainians, and through enacted law in the United States against the UNBORN.
Why donít you try to go see a live SECOND TERM abortion at your local hospital, or the bodies remaining thereafter?
ìHush nowÖplay niceÖwe canít allow you to see those things!î
See ATHEISTIC MURDER is always done outside of the public view, behind closed doors in the “silence” of atheism!
ONLY an ATHEIST would stand there, deny there is a life and then snuff out that life, O Man of the Secular City!
But what the CATHOLIC CHURCH has said is the only truth;
ìWhat is becoming human, is human already.î
Thatís okay, MOCKER of Jesus and His bestowed title, you keep your atheistic world with all its ìkaleidoscope of ongoing horrorsî.
No thanksÖI donít want any part of itñ
Iím glad your family is ìokayî with your trivializing of Jesus and the redeeming work that was done on the cross. They must be like those silly pagans with only ìpatches of Catholicismî, that I routinely ignore at MassÖall the time.
You know the onesÖthey havenít left the Church yetÖyou just wonder why theyíre still there, I meanÖthey never participate in the MassÖexcept in a rather lifeless, mechanized way~
No wonder you’re an avowed atheist!
ënuff said ~

The Canadien on February 14, 2007 at 1:04 pm

It is dishonest to try and sneak in that quote portraying Robert Fulford as if he were some atheist spokesperson recanting of atheism. In fact, he is a journalist with creationist leanings who routinely makes baseless attacks on atheism.
Whether you agree with him or not, you certainly cannot claim he speaks for us. You really need to stop idolizing media nuts like Schlussel and Fulford.
You bring up the Nazis again, why? It only shows your ignorance. How much self-delusion does it take to convince yourself of this stuff? Do you really mean to say that Nazis were atheists and they decided to kill jews because there is no god? So why just the jews and few others? Wouldn’t a supposedly “atheist holocaust” have included all religious people?
How about the KKK, are we to believe they are atheists too?
What about the Inquisition and the Crusades, damn atheists were probably behind those too, or maybe you claim they just never happened? How about the Salem Witch Trials, were atheists there lighting the fires to burn teenaged girls? No, I didn’t think so.
Oh wait, when religious people kill people its okay, because then it is “God’s will” and if the victims really were righteous, they’ll be in heaven anyway, so no harm done.
Bringing up an abortion is like the last cry of someone who has nothing left to stand on except a desparate appeal to emotion. Again, you are assuming WAY too much about atheists and trying to force your assumptions on us, as you would force your religion on us. The fact is, there are atheists who oppose abortion and there are Christians (including Catholics) who are pro-choice.
We agree that many of the people in mass are not really into it. More and more people are realizing they do not need religion to live a moral, productive, and rewarding life. That’s a good thing.
I also give credit to the Catholic church for the few contributions it has made in helping people become more open to reason and science and to make ammends for moral wrongdoing by Catholics in the past. Pope John Paul II wasn’t perfect, but he did take some important steps for Catholicism and religion in general.
Among Pope John Paul II’s Good Works:
– Updating the Church’s position to accept the theory of evolution.
– Publicly apologizing for inactivity and silence during the Holocaust
– Publicly apologizing for the persecution of Galilei, who said the Earth orbits the sun
– Publicly apologizing for Catholic involvement in the African slave trade
– Publicly apologizing for the Church Hierarchy’s role in burnings at the stake and the religious wars that followed the Protestant Reformation
– Publicly apoligizing for the injustices committed against women in the name of Christ, the violation of women’s rights and for the historical denigration of women.
– Publicly apoligizing for missionary abuses in the past against indigenous peoples of the South Pacific
– For the massacre of Aztecs and other Mesoamericans by the Spanish in the name of the Church.
Catholicism has always been an easy target for ridicule (sex scandals, anyone?), but I think the structure of the Catholic church is a good asset, because the Papal system gives an individual the leadership power necessary to do such things.
There is more to be done of course, but these are important steps, and it was good of Pope John Paul II to recognize the need for him to take them.
Contrast this with some OTHER Catholics, who prefer to just always blame atheists and non-Catholics, and insist that “only Catholicism offers a true and noble morality.”

ChristTheRedeemer on February 14, 2007 at 8:27 pm

excerpt of an article i am reading about the Dumbing down of America………….
“However, within that of the Christian fundamentalist community (one that did so very much to enable Bush-Cheney to be elected), there has been a deliberate attempt to discount what we have learned from science (as in global warming), as well as that of rational thought (that the world was created in a period of one week’s time).
These folks believe that their religious beliefs are absolutely independent of anything and everything else in life, that their beliefs about God are more valid, and should be allowed to supersede every other source of knowledge. It doesn’t matter to them if what they believe makes no sense at all or if what they believe is in absolute conflict with that of scientific evidence. To them, there is no gray, nothing but black and white, no critical thinking, nor even a willingness to listen to “the other side.” There is just us (the good guys) and them (the bad guys), and, regardless of what you say, I am right and your are wrong, and if you do not agree with me, then you are going to go to Hell… and that is that! Probably the best example of such is an abject unwillingness on the part of so many folks in our country to face the mounting evidence that such a Godly country (The USA) led by such a fine Christian man (George Walker Bush) could have led our country into such an atrocious war while, along the way, having perhaps committed an amalgam of crimes against humanity. You see.. to hell with logic and scientific evidence, the truth (reality) is simply a matter of what I want it to be!”

John S on February 15, 2007 at 1:16 pm

Yes, I have read that article, I disagreed with nearly all of his conclusions.
As for the “dumbing down” of America, I think liberals are just as much, but likely more to blame because of their advocation of subjectivism and constant push to make Americans dependent on the welfare state.
A few months ago, Robert Tracinski wrote an article “The Secular Right” about this, from exactly the opposite stance of your article.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/08/the_secular_right.html
At any rate, this just further illustrates why religious people should not make assumptions about atheists. Atheist describes what someone is not, not what he is.

ChristTheRedeemer on February 16, 2007 at 2:55 am

HUMAN EMOTIONÖthe sworn enemy of the atheist.
Except the ìotherî TINMAN, that one from Oz at least suspectsÖthat there is something he lacksÖyesÖyes ñ a heart!
But not the ATHEISTÖnoÖO CAPTAIN of ìThe Secular Cityî.
ABORTIONÖGENOCIDEÖmurderÖthe logical, acceptable and PREDICTABLE result of an atheistic worldÖan atheistic mindset, an atheistic heart!
WHATEVER crimes the Catholic Church may have been guilty of in itsí last 2000 years, ATHEISM has caught up with (just considering abortion only even)Öand mightily surpassed all those ancient numbers ñ real or dreamed upÖsmashing all previously held records, in look!Öonly so short a span, of just 60 years!
CHRISTIANS salute you atheismÖafter we look at youÖwe can proudly look OURSELVES in the mirror again, and our past doesnít seem so bad, after all!
We thought we were roguesÖbut youÖYOU, are the true rogueÖthe true spawn of all that is dark, malicious and categorically evil.
YesÖCHRISTIANITY sleeps well tonight and our conscience is now clearñ
Thank-you.
WE ARE FORGIVEN and well you, you are nothingÖlike youíve always been.
Pope John Paul II apologized for our failingsÖof course Atheism, although the murderous author of so much bloodly and cataclysmic horror WORLDWIDEÖis far too brazen to stoop to that!
As thousands of abortions are committed daily, behind closed doors, for a generous fee of course, and womb after womb becomes another tomb, donít worry Freethinking Tinman you have won!
BUT WHEN that lie that about abortion finally strikes home with those guilty women, and God accuses them in the silence of their souls, that place where others are not privy to, and where even your indoctrination canít reach them, the Church will be there to pick up the pieces.
JESUS saves.
Always.
You said, ìÖbut I think the structure of the Catholic Church is a good asset, because the Papal system gives an individual the leadership power necessary to do such things.î
WowÖsounds like someone wants a return to those days of the Holy, Roman Empire!
While everyone knows a closet queer or twoÖhere is something new friendsÖa CLOSET CATHOLICñ
???!!!
+++

The Canadien on February 16, 2007 at 9:57 pm

Excuse me, Canadian. Could you please change your sign in name. I would hate to think people might get the impression that we are all brain-washed indoctrinaires. Thank you.

ekrubtap on February 17, 2007 at 7:43 am

you are all such hipocrites in that you kill and say its “God’s Will” yet wasnt it God who gave Moses the 10 COMMANDMENTS including “THOU SHALT NOT KILL” how can you say its “God’s will” if he condemns killing in the first place???????
Atheists never get on their high horse and think they are better than anyone and all that just cause of what they believe.
WHY cant you people just accept that there are others on this planet that do not believe what you believe and leave it at that and not discriminate against them? making them lose their jobs, thir homes, basicly their lives theyve worked for just cause they dont believe the same thing you do. that doesnt seem very damn christian of you now does it?????

John S on February 17, 2007 at 8:21 pm

Pat BurkeÖmy family has been in Canada since 1674 and I’m a Canadien NOT a Canadian. Since I have a small percentage of Native blood in me, one might say Iím eternally Canadien.
So when foreigners LIKE YOU try to tell me what is or isnít CanadianÖreally, you just need to shut up.
Youíre exactly the type of smug, self-satisfied, ìAmerica bashingî Canadian most Americans rightfully loathe. Canadians like you are a national embarrassment and the reason I must constantly explain to Americans I encounter that Iím not like you think I am.
Debbie herself said it bestÖwhen she called Canadians like you ìCanadian whoresî!
Hey Pat, the LIBERALS are trying to play ìKyotoî againÖso run along and play, play, playÖlike all the other disenchanted, cultureless Anglos around Ontario seem so eager to doñ

The Canadien on February 17, 2007 at 9:50 pm

LOL. Canadien your last reply to me was just a bunch of babbling. Can you not back up a point with facts? Don’t just give your unfounded opinions based on assumptions about a group of people that you clearly know nothing about.
Look at my posts and posts by some of the other people here. I make a point and then expand on it, then back it up with facts. Try it some time.

ChristTheRedeemer on February 18, 2007 at 3:04 am

And stop repeating false claims that have already been proven wrong unless you have something new to contribute as to why they are right.
You spout random remarks based on bigotted stereotypes as if they are supposed to be taken on your authority, despite the fact that they’ve already been discounted. Sorry, we’re not buying it.

ChristTheRedeemer on February 18, 2007 at 3:14 am

ChristTheRedeemer,
thats what religious people do. they just want you to take their word for it, take it on faith, and not look into things too closely cause if you do you will see its false and a lie.

John S on February 18, 2007 at 6:28 am

1907 ñ America: Christian society + Christian morality in America = No lives lost to abortion
2007 ñ America: Blended society of Christians, Jews, Secular Humanists, Agnostics and Atheists = Millions of lives lost to abortion since February 1971, first in America, but then the rationalization spreads worldwide. 12, 000, 000 Americans were slaughtered through legalized abortion by 1981, making this ìwarî on Americans the largest ever, and with more lives lost than all previous wars put together!
The ATHEIST Dr. Bernard Nathanson (by his own admission in the book he authored ìAborting Americaî and independently in ìAbortion: the Silent Holocaustî) organizes a political action group (NARAL) conjuring up facts and figures and home-made propaganda to support repealing abortion laws and cleverly targets the Catholic hierarchy through his own special brand of anti-Catholicism and manipulates the co-operative, and sympathetic media by ìpaintingî the pro-life movement as a Catholic issue only.
Itís (womanís right to an abortion) the law of the land in America. So was slavery once. Neither was right. Slavery is now goneÖbut abortion remains.
ñ ìDo you really mean to say that Nazis were atheists and they decided to kill jews because there is no god? So why just the jews and few others? Wouldn’t a supposedly “atheist holocaust” have included all religious people?îñ
Adolf Hitler was alienated from the Church by his extreme political views and excommunicated in 1930, ìipso factoî.
Hitlerís brand of anti-Semitism stemmed from popular German street mythology about behind-the-scenes Jewish societal dominance of that country. There is also some evidence that Hitler as a young painter was excluded from an art exposition and his average paintings dismissed by three Jewish art critics who were connected with the event. This in turn, then solidified his own horrific brand of anti-Semitism.
THERE YOU HAVE it, two modern atheists with acknowledged records of aggressive and successful large-scale genocide that will be forever credited to them.
Both atheists, to achieve their genocidal goal described their targeted victims as ìnon-personsî, both overtly and covertly, through an extensive propaganda machine and political maneuvering.

The Canadien on February 18, 2007 at 11:26 am

if Hitler was excommunicated from the Church then he isnt an atheist. he still believes the same stuff you do. so that still would make him a Christian.
the whole excommunication thing sounds pretty juvenile anyway to me. its like little bobby down the street telling little mikey he cant be in his club for whatever reason.
also Canadien you can try to distort facts to fit your THEORY of what happened back then all you want but you cant prove anything. you cannot say WITHOUT A DOUBT he did all that BECAUSE he was a supposed Atheist or not. he did it and you are saying he is an atheist cause of the excommunication but that doesnt make one the cause of his actions.

John S on February 18, 2007 at 5:38 pm

Yeah, you are really doing those of us in the pro-life movement a disservice by spreading false information. Did it never occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, the lower number of abortions in the early 1900s has to do with the fact that modern abortion techniques didn’t reach notariety in the US and Britain until the 1960s? To be sure, women most certainly did practice other methods before then, contrary to what you imply.
You still haven’t shown what abortion has to do with Atheism. In your bigotted mind you just assume they go hand in hand. They do not.
Some example secular Pro-Life organizations:
Libertarians 4 Life http://www.l4l.org/
Atheist & Agnostic Pro-Life League http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html
More Non-Traditional Pro-Life Organizations http://www.gargaro.com/abortion/alt.html
And what do you know, there are Christians (including Catholics who are pro-Choice.. go figure):
Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice http://www.rcrc.org/
Catholics for a Free Choice http://www.cath4choice.org/
Further, a Study released in 2000 by the Center for Reason, and mirrored in similar studies, show that Christians are just as likely as others to have abortions. Incidentally, Catholics are found to actually have a much higher abortion rate than average.
So I think we can finally lay that one to rest, eh?
I can’t belive you’re still bringing up Hitler. The best source for information about what Hitler believed is Hitler himself, and he made it quite clear that he believed in God and considered himself a Christian in his book, “Mein Kaumpf.” You never answered the question “Why only the Jews?,” which you even quoted.
Nothing I have read indicates that Hitler was ever individually and officially excommunicated. Please provide a source if you have one. The lists I’ve read included people ranging from Joe Dimaggio to Martin Luthor, but curiously no Hitler. Go figure. Also, of note, Hitler’s book “Mein Kaumpf” also never appears on the Church’s Librorum Prohibitorum (Prohibited Books), though many other benign works of fiction and nonfiction certainly were. How odd.
Either way, it doesn’t matter. We can forgive the Church for standing idly by while one of its own baptized members were committed such atrocities, just don’t try to throw some pretense of higher morality in our face.
And yes, as John S correctly said, even if he had been excommunicated, it doesn’t change the fact that he was a believer, and certainly not an atheist. Now, I know you don’t have much left in your corner, but could you stop with these silly straw man argument? They only expose your ignorance.

ChristTheRedeemer on February 19, 2007 at 1:14 am

“The National Government regards the two Christian confessions Catholicism and Protestantism as factors essential to the soul of the German people. … We hold the spiritual forces of Christianity to be indispensable elements in the moral uplift of most of the German people… I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.” – Adolf Hitler, March 23, 1933

ChristTheRedeemer on February 19, 2007 at 1:26 am

ìCenter For Reasonî sounds like it was spawned from the same abyss as NARALÖand reeks of ATHEISTS with an anti-Christian agenda.
I can say with 100% certainty that not a single Catholic had an abortion last year, or in any year.
If you are a Catholic and you procure or participate in an abortion or public policy favouring abortionsÖyou are no longer a Catholic. THERE ARE no Pro-Choice Catholics. That censure also applies to other grave, public sins and to those sinners as well (Adolf Hitler).
You obviously have attitudinal barriers to accepting an authoritative Church that can suspend or remove membership within its religious community.
Will you ever understand that point?
Keep reading.
If you want to talk about Protestant theology and Protestant membership guidelinesÖgo find a Protestant.
But Iím sure your quippy responses are found to be entertaining for the other atheists reading and raucous in their laughter, who sadly are just as lost as you are, and just as unable to reason through to the right conclusion.
Will you ever be able to pin the tail on the Catholic donkey?
I know you desperately want all those sinners to be CatholicÖI know youíll feel better with thatÖsuperior.
I will however accept the designation, ex-Catholic.
But I know that takes away the fun because you want to bash CatholicsÖbashing exñCatholics just isnít rightÖtheyíre already kindaí down and outÖsad, alone, uselessÖ~
The BEST SOURCE of information about Hitler IS NOT himself. Hitler believed a lot of thingsÖlike through a grade school understanding of Catholicism he could remain a Catholic just cause he wanted to, even though, through his own horrific actions that membership was OFFICIALLY (1930 – the German Conference of Bishops excommunicated all Nazis) and AUTOMATICALLY (Jewish genocide, needlessly attacking Poland etc.) revoked.
So that assertion was grandiose Öeven for Hitler.
Hitler also believed that radio addresses about imagined German battle success was just as real as actual battle wins. General Patton disagreed.
The Church did not idly stand by during WW II at all. Make that assertion and this dialogue with me is over. I have no time for liars! But thatís been my experience with atheists thus farÖas distorters of the truth.
How the Church helped is well documented. The Church very quickly found Herself surrounded as Europe had entirely fallen. Come to think of it, the Canadians had already been fighting for two years before a single American showed up in battle!
Where were you, mighty America?
Iíll tell you. Held up by blind, indecisive and uncertain DEMS in Congress!
DEMS who thought that running and hiding was far better a course, than helping a nation friend, or fighting a foe whose newest acts of barbarism could be viewed by every American, at every movie theatre nationwide, every single week, for the two years of your complacent inactivity!
In Rome it was discussed and debated whether or not to issue a direct excommunication to Hitler, and again to all Nazis. That would have only resolved an issue of pride, however. Vatican neutrality would have been lost, and all churches razed. Saying nothing allowed the Vatican to have the appearance of neutrality while individual parishes could help smuggle people, documents, information out etc.
YOU KNOW kindaí like the ìneutralî Americans who smuggled fighterplanes and bombers into Canada to aid the Commonwealth war effort, before America could ìofficiallyî (lack of public support) join the cause.
Pope John Paul II who lived through WW II changed tactics when Communism was challenged in the 80s.
After Polish priest, Father Jerzy was captured and then murdered by the Polish Communists, Pope John Paul II was outraged by the lack of strong, local Church leadership and the ineffective Polish community support for the priest, wondering, ìwhy did nobody help him?î
So Pope John Paul II issued a direct order to all Polish clergy that they were to help out the Solidarity Movement, to the best of their individual ability ìunder pain of sin.î Anyone aiding the Communists was ìex-communicato.î
So it was entirely clear to the clergy, and also to the parish community where the Church stood and that Communist sympathizers were not to be tolerated within the tightly knit Polish community.
The Church had learned from its mistakes in WW II.
The WHOLE ABORTION INDUSTRY was created by an atheist (Dr. Bernard Nathanson).
Since you canít throw him outÖhe is still one of yours.
He still remains an unbeliever. Although, he is now a Pro-Lifer.
Hitler believed somethingÖhe followed astrology manically.
So I grant he was a composite. Unbelief is known by its ìfruitsî as is Christian belief.
I see no action of Hitler that is strong evidence and which indicates that he ever was a Christian.

The Canadien on February 19, 2007 at 2:00 pm

First off, do your research. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, after becoming pro-life, became a Catholic in 1996 (presumeably through the efforts of a member of Opus Dei, though I haven’t confirmed that). He was previously a member of the pro-choice movement, and performed abortions himself, but he hardly “created the whole abortion industry.” That’s like pointing at someone and saying they created the whole dentistry industry.
Hey, if you don’t like that study, there are others. Off-hand I recall studies by the Alan Guttmacher Institute and Planned Parenthood, but there are many more, and they agree. For whatever reason, Catholics have a higher abortion rate than other other Christians. I guess its some worldwide conspiracy against Catholics, huh?
You can say they are no longer Catholics. How convenient is it that you can play pope and just call any Catholic who disagrees with a you a non-Catholic. Unfortunately, I don’t think they care what you think. You’ll have to take it up with them. What we certainly CAN say is that they aren’t atheists. This coupled with the fact that that there are many atheists who oppose abortion leads to only one conclusion: Whether or not one believes in God has no bearing on whether they are pro-choice or pro-life. So you have no point.
And no, I don’t care whether they are Catholics or whatever, it’s just more fun to find examples of Catholic hypocrisy and immorality, because you seem to deem Catholicism and its followers as incapable of immorality, and that every non-Catholic is some immoral cutthroat. Suffice to say, you are wrong.
Contrary to your delusions, the reality is, as said by Australian Cardinal Edward Cassidy, “we like […] to speak of the saints and take joy in the fact that there are people like Mother Teresa in our church, but we also have to be realistic and say that there are many people today, as at any stage in any church, in any community, who fall very short.”
Again, with your remarks against Democrats, you show how much you rely on stereotypes. I am not a Democrat, and in fact, I agree with every word you said about the Democrats and how they always want to run and hide or call for appeasement. I voted for Bush both times, and I don’t regret it. I think that national security concerns far outweigh the matters in which I would disagree with Bush, such as his Faith Based Initiative. Are you beginning to see how you let stereotypes influence your judgements about atheists? If nothing else, that is what I want you to learn from this discussion.
The Church DID stand idly by during the holocaust. – The pope was informed as early as 1941 by members of his own clergy about deportations of jews, but the pope did nothing.
– In September, 1942, Monsignor Montini (who would become Pope Paul VI) sent Pope Pius XII a letter telling him that “the massacres of the Jews reach frightening proportions and forms,” but the pope did nothing.
– That same month, US representative in a statement supported by representatives from the UK, Brazil, Uruguay, Belgium, and Poland, warned that the Vatican’s moral presitige was being injured by the pope’s silence.
– When Harold Tittman, US delegate to the Vatican, asked if the pope could issue a proclamation condemning genocide, Luigi Maglione (Cardinal Secretary of State) replied that the church was “unable to denounce publicly particular atrocities.”
– In January 1943 Berlin Bishop Konrad von Preysing and exiled president Wladislaw Raczkiewicz requested that the pope publically denounce violence against Jews. Again, the pope refused.
– In October 1943, the German Ambassador to the vatican say the pope isn’t getting “carried away” by reports of the holocaust, into “making any demonstrative statements against the deportation of the Jews.”
These are just a few of the many examples of how the Vatican clearly did sit idly by during the holocaust. To be sure, he did provide a lot of money for such things as visas for fleeing jews, and encouraged convents and monastaries to help hide Jews in trouble, but never did he himself come out, take a stand and condemn the holocaust.
The question is why. Well, you yourself acknowledged it. In its desire for neutrality, the church forbade itself from publicly condemning the Nazis. The problem is that the Pope is supposed to be a moral authority, or at least one who speaks on behalf of a moral authority. Thus, there is no place for neutrality, it should always be outspokenly on the side of good. A TRULY moral authority would not hesitate to condemn genocide, for any reason.
I still think its hilarious how Joe Dimaggio was excommunicated in 1954 for bigamy, yet Hitler kills 6 million Jews and the Church is silent. I guess the Church only handles the easy cases and is too cowardly to stand up for its beliefs, or worse, they let political concerns interfere with moral judgement.

ChristTheRedeemer on February 19, 2007 at 11:41 pm

pretty interesting poll. more people would ratehr vote for someone who practices something the bible condemns (homosexuality) rather than someone who just doesnt believe in god.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/gallup_20070219_diversity.png
whole article:
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/02/black_president_more_likely_than_mormon_or_atheist_/
personally it doesnt matter to me what someone is or what they practice as long as they will do something good for the country not just for certain percent of the country or their own agenda. i would prefer someone to run this country that does take facts into consideration rather than just have faith things will work out or go their way cause thats not taking an active role in the outcome and actually getting htings done.
id personally rather vote for an athiest than a religious person no matter what religion they are. cause they will more likely be more of a realist and see things for what they are.

John S on February 21, 2007 at 7:50 am

John S, I’m obviously not against voting for an atheist, but I would never vote for an atheist just because he’s an atheist.
Knowing that a candidate doesn’t believe in God tells me nothing about them; it’s like saying that someone is “not a Mormon.”
What concerns me more is the fact that many states have laws that outright prevent atheists from even running.
No doubt these laws will be declared unconstitutional when/if they are challenged, but the mere fact that such legislated bigotry exists is outrageous. And then morons like Debbie Schlussel have the nerve to say we are on the attack, or that we are discriminating against them.

ChristTheRedeemer on February 21, 2007 at 12:04 pm

National day of mourning in Canada on the 20th, and yesterday was Ash WednesdayÖso i couldn’t really respond til’ now
Was Hitler a Christian etc.? What was the the Catholic response to Nazism??
For a little more thorough and intellectual response, see here: http://www.relapsedcatholic.com/

The Canadien on February 22, 2007 at 11:15 am

National day of mourning in Canada on the 20th, and yesterday was Ash WednesdayÔø?so i couldn’t really respond til’ now
Was Hitler a Christian etc.? What was the the Catholic response to Nazism??
For a little more thorough and intellectual response, see here: http://www.relapsedcatholic.com/

The Canadien on February 22, 2007 at 11:16 am

A MORE PRECISE link: http://www.opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110009697

The Canadien on February 22, 2007 at 11:24 am

No problem, I figured you would be occupied.
I am familiar that article. In fact, I know Mr. Hay from when I attended MSU.
I agree that there is nothing to be gained by replacing Judeo-Christian religion with any other religion, or by replacing God with some “secular deity” such as a dictator, the state, or any other “higher power.” I’d say environmentalism would also fit into this category as well, to give a modern example.
The solution is promoting individualism and reason.

ChristTheRedeemer on February 22, 2007 at 3:40 pm

Uhm…one thing is the discrimination against atheists going on over there in the US, but what’s up with all this Euro-bashing?
Since when did the whole of Europe become first atheistic and then converted to Islam (I fail to see the correlation.
You’re going to have to explain that one to me. How does a failure to believe in any gods or an active belief in the non-existence of any gods make you believe in one.
Especially one that is basically the same as the Christian one?) and more importantly why did it become a place to condemn American “Heretics” to go? Yes, I am an atheist and a European and no I was not ordered to respond on this website by anyone. I found the video by coincidence on youtube and decided to find out who this woman who apparently equates Islamic terrorists and atheists is. And let me tell you right now, Europe in general (as if it was only one country?) is neither more atheistic nor more Islamic than The States are. I live in Denmark and unlike the States Christianity actually IS mentioned in the Danish constitution. I come from the Faroe Islands where it is even worse. There the Christian fundamentalists managed to stop The Da Vince Code from being shown and have condemned all homosexuals to Hell, prominent politicians speaking against them saying they’re the cause of every calamity possible, while others are beating them up.
Don’t be fooled. Almost all Western societies (this includes Europe) are more or less bigoted Christian fundamentalists and what I am wondering is: if these nations truly are, as claimed, Christian nations based on “Christian values.” (What? The value of discriminating against everyone who thinks different while claiming they’re the one doing the discriminating?) then why on Earth aren’t they acting like it? Can anyone truly claim to recognize even a remote glimpse of “love thy neighbor” and “do onto others…” in all of this? Did Jesus force people to believe as he did? Did Jesus mix his religion with the state? (“Give Ceasar what Ceasar’s is.”) Did Jesus beat up homosexuals and call them “Satan’s Ill-weeds” causing them to flee the country? Did Jesus ever compare peace-loving people who just want to be free to make up their own minds to terrorists?
I’m just asking. When will self-proclaimed “christians” truly become Christian, with tru Jesuan values instead of using Jesus as an excuse for their hatred?

Sketch Sepahi on March 4, 2007 at 2:35 am

Sketch SepahiÖyou know youíre only seeing the ìMEDIA JESUSî when you rave about all the ìniceî things Jesus said. The media quotes all those nice ìlove quotesî and then bashes Christians over the head with these very quotesÖas if thatís all there was.
What about the many, many HARD SAYINGS of JESUS?
He called religious hypocrites, ìwhited sepulturesî.
He called the SadduceesÖîyou brood of vipers.î
He said to the common populace, ìas evil as you are, you do know how to give good things to your childrenî.
What about the ìwoesî Jesus declared upon those who have ìtheir fillî now etc.
JUST BECAUSE Debbie Schlussel or Kathy Shaidle here in Canada are not the ìposter children of nicenessî for the Jewish or Catholic faiths does not invalidate their messages!
The APOSTLE PAUL said a bunch of things about the underling John Mark being basically ìuselessî for the Apostolate but later tempered his tone when Paul observed consistent and positive change in his understudy.
The reason Debbie repeatedly harpoons some of the same people, is because no change is forthcoming.
And the stakes are very high, friend!
POOR Homeland SECURITY means some Islamic crazies could sneak nukes onto US soil!!
And we know whatíll happen next.
Further, HOMOSEXUALITY has been called an ìabominationî in the Old Testimony.
Jesus spoke so severely about the crucible of marriage, the necessity for the highest of standards to be upheld, we can easily conclude He views homosexuality as an abhoration, an affront to His Fatherís Creation and the natural order.
SoÖlooking forwardÖQUOTE the COMPLETE JESUS not YOUR VERSION of JesusÖplease.

The Canadien on March 6, 2007 at 7:04 pm

Once again, Debbie, you have some great points.
“Over here, as I pointed out on CNN, atheists are on the attack against religion and G-d only when Christians and Jews are involved, not when Muslims and Islam are.”
The so-called atheists are completely idiotic – and vicious – when it comes to Islam. Consider how much horror Islam has caused, as well as the grotesque nature of Islamic teachings that strictly follow the Koran and hadiths – yet, these “atheists” actually have the audacity to defend this nightmare creeping up on our shores.
As a critic of organized religion in general, I too have been assailed by these dunderheads you describe. It’s quite shameful that they consider themselves “thinking” individuals, frankly.
In case anyone hasn’t seen them yet, take a look at these Quotes from the Koran: http://www.truthbeknown.com/islamquotes.htm
Keep up the good work on this issue, Debbie.
Acharya S
http://www.TruthBeKnown.com

Acharya S on May 22, 2007 at 7:45 pm

iQGuy wrote:
————————————————–
As for the facts of history:
————————————————–
“… the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion”
-Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11, written during the administration of George Washington, signed by President John Adams, and ratified unanimously by the United States Senate.
Does it get any clearer than that? *unanimous*
**********************************************
The Canadien wrote:”You guys are such out and out liars. You twist words and leave out a huge deal of quotes that support the religious views of the founding fathers.
First of all, the Treaty of Tripoli said “the government” was not founded on the Christian religion. They did NOT state this wasn’t a country founded on Christian principles.”
**********************************************
Nice. baseless name calling. If I have asserted something as true that is not true, then blast away with the liar accusations. Until then, you’re name-calling is just mindless slander.
You’re right, the Treaty of Tripoli said that the United States **government** is not founded in any way on the Christian religion. Yes, the United States is a government. What is special about the United States, and unique at the time of its founding, was that it was a government defined by laws, not people. I.e. the United States government is defined by a constitution – not by a monarchy or oligarchy of leaders which are above the laws of that constitution. And nowhere in the United States Constitution are there any laws that could be exclusively characterized as Christian, nor are there any respects paid to Jesus, Christian principles as such, or any other higher authority. Yes, a majority of citizens in the U.S. are Christian and many of the founders of the United States were Christian, but Christians are not granted a special status by the constitution which defines the United States. In fact, any special treatment that a citizen of the United States would try to claim for themselves because of their Christian or other religious affiliation is explicitly prohibited by the United States.

iQGuy on December 5, 2007 at 12:47 pm