posted January 03, 2013 07:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:
If Hitler had not promoted Lutheran values he would not have succeeded. Christianity enabled him. That doesn't mean it was a prerequisite, but it does mean Christianity doesn't make people better or prevent violence.

---

Recall I did speak of the dangers of State and Church?

As for ones assertion about Christianity, as I also mentioned, one can teach until one is blue in the face, at the end of it all it is up to the individual to either agree and refrain, or ignore and engage in.

The question would then become, are such precepts taught in the hopes that it will have an effect, or are they merely kept silent with the hope that "higher apes" can somehow find their better natures?

posted January 03, 2013 08:27 PM            

Hitler most certainly did not represent school shooters. I suppose you'll point out how a few shooters worshiped Hitler but that's irrelevant, they do it to shock people (which is also why they embraced many other images for the same reason) and embrace a devil, not because they share Hitler's message. Hitler promoted God, at least publicly, not nihilism. And Hitler would despise the vast majority of such people (for many reasons).

And as I stated, some shooters were very Christian when they went off, plenty had a religious background. Meanwhile plenty without a religious background do just fine without religion and are as capable and loving as any Christian, even more so than many Christians.

And by the way, when I speak of Secular Humanism, THIS is what I mean by it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism

Neither Hitler nor Nazi Germany was secular humanist in either theory or practice. Nietzsche is not a secular humanist, not even in his own mind.

And the nations that have since embraced secular humanism have become less violent than the USA. That doesn't mean Christianity is absent, but it does mean things like prayer in school or the 10 commandments on the wall are not normal, and yet their schools aren't being shot up (not even by the Swiss), unlike ours, or other countries where religion is still a very core fundamental aspect of society rather than as trivial as what music one likes to listen to.

posted January 03, 2013 08:37 PM            

quote:

---

There were many inspirations to Hitler, but his liking Nietzsche no more made him a devotee to that philosophy than the many fundie politicians today promoting Ayn Rand (very anti-Christian, and a scathing critic of Jesus) atheists even as they preach their Christian values in addition and "affirm God" in legislation. Hitler's writings, speeches, medals, school programs, even public holidays promoted by the Nazis celebrated Luther and his form of Christianity, and had a lot to do with endorsing hatred of Jews & Catholics. I don't know what Hitler personally believed and neither do you, but the Germans who embraced him saw him as a gift from God and a good Christian, and saw themselves as good Christians as they tore up Europe.
Hitler most certainly did not represent school shooters. I suppose you'll point out how a few shooters worshiped Hitler but that's irrelevant, they do it to shock people (which is also why they embraced many other images for the same reason) and embrace a devil, not because they share Hitler's message. Hitler promoted God, at least publicly, not nihilism. And Hitler would despise the vast majority of such people.

---

Well, I've read their works, at least excerpt form, Mein Kampf etc.

Hitler was very much a nihilist, the school killings we see now revolve around nhilism to a large degree.

As for the European countries one mentions, keep in mind we only see the "now", 50 years from now, you or I cannot know how things will be there.

If we are higher apes, the answer will be rather clear, based on history.

As for the school killers, suspect it will continue to happen, there is no counter weight to gravity so to speak, a over weening self love matched to a rejection by the hive coupled with increasing usage of prescribed psychiatric medication will see to it.

Basically:

"why"

the nihilist answer is

"who are you to tell me not to"?

posted January 04, 2013 06:10 PM            

And if there was a way to know I'd bet money that far more people who shot up a school read the Bible and considered themselves Christian (at least at some point in their life) than those who read Nietzsche and ever called themselves a Nihilist. I bet even the few who sported a swastika and hailed Hitler (even the Native American kid) never read Mein Kampf, probably bored to tears by it if they even tried (and while they'd probably love to be seen with it to shock and scare others that's completely different from reading it and embracing its message). Offhand I can only think of one mass shooter (or at least tried to be) who likely embraced Hitler's message in actuality (though it wasn't a school he shot up, I think it might've been a museum).

Granted, there are aspects of Mein Kampf that were probably influenced by him (though other influences also existed that promoted similar messages of superiority) but that doesn't make it a Nihilist book. Lots of devout Christians today praise concepts by Ayn Rand (including concepts similar to Nietzsche) but that doesn't make them Objectivists or rejecting God despite that Ayn Rand rejects God. Heck, Rush Limbaugh says similar things at times, praising those who make a success of themselves as superior people we should all look up to and emulate to the best of our ability (assuming the person is white, otherwise they only succeeded because of "white guilt"), but that doesn't mean he's a Nihilist.

posted January 04, 2013 07:58 PM            

-As for titles, in the information age it should be apparent that one can wear whatever moniker one wishes to wear. Your actions however, show what one really "is".

These disaffected youth who go on sprees are exhibiting nihilism, only instead of talking about, they are actually doing it.

As for Nietzche, it is fairly obvious PJ, is thinking runs throughout youth culture, and avaricious officials like those in OH who were more than willing to overlook a GHB induced gang rape of a teenaged girl b/c they were good football players.

As for Limbaugh, his ideas are corpses, they once had life, they died a long time ago yet, Lenin like, they are trotted out and worshipped, it's not at all about white guilt it is all about a failure to adapt.

And allow me to add, the so called "beltway snipers" were a great example of Politically Corrected thinking run amok, the murderers were in fact, black, the police told the media they were white simply to avoid a imagined backlash.

A clear case where the public's help was needed, and yet, they simply could not tell the truth of the matter.

posted January 05, 2013 03:21 AM            

You should also know that Nihilism is ultimately radical skepticism (as opposed to an endorsement of the Manson family, and actually even a murderous Nihilist would reject Manson's unverifiable claims of mystical enlightenment or quality). Plenty of Nihilists don't even accept Nietzsche as one of them as he was more concerned with surviving the nihilist age to discover new values where some Nihilists believe Truth is more important than finding more subjective values (that is, old lies should not be discarded simply to adopt new lies). But I refuse to get into "who's the real Nihilist" just like I refuse to get into "who's the real Christian." If they can list the basic philosophy that rejects a lot of subjective ideals, and preferably can name at least one Nihilist philosopher or author, then they're a Nihilist in my book (just like Catholics, Baptists, and Westboro are all Christian in my book, and I don't care if they're modern with a liberal take or are extreme old school who even prefers mass in Ancient Greek or Latin, serve in a hospice, act like Ned Flanders, preach the prosperity gospel, kill abortion doctors, they're all Christian).

Now I understand you're going by actions, but that's cheating in my book. It arbitrarily identifies someone by an action than belief that motivates (or at least fails to stop) the action, so when a Christian becomes a mass murderer then they're Nihilists, and that's not fair to the actual Nihilists who are good, kind, and often insightful people. It also sounds like a No true Scotsman fallacy.

It also isn't "obvious" that people who become mass murderers are automatically Nihilists if you know the philosophy. Nihilists may reject moral absolutes (though they can still be kind if it's their nature), but that doesn't make them suicidal. From what I see the mass murderers aren't applying radical skepticism, they're suffering a chemical imbalance for the most part, and those who aren't are generally just angry and bitter, like that Christian who shot up a gym right after posting about being with Jesus soon on his blog. In any case, a Nihilist isn't going to give a free pass to rapists based on if they're on a sports team or not...even if a Nihilist decides rape is ok that "license" isn't going to be restricted to football players, their philosophy would be anyone had the right (at least the right to try...). Contrast with the churches (even the Vatican) that aid & abet sexual predation by their clergy (but condemns everyone else wh partakes, while also condemning the victims who report the clergy who abused them). (Boy Scouts, too, who make a big deal out of morals through belief in a Higher Being.)

posted January 05, 2013 03:52 AM            

Granted, they were mostly teens (many minors) so it wasn't that well thought out for the most part, and there was also a lot of variation in both major camps, though interesting enough even when the variations conflicted, they still saw each other as allies against the other major camp. And the Anarchists and perhaps outright Nihilists just did not get along with those who worshiped Hitler at all. And it seemed to me that the skinheads and other White Supremacists were much more likely to resort to crime & violence than the anarchists (and even when the anarchists did, it was sometimes for a good cause like helping the poor or dispossessed, that is while the skinheads were mostly bullies the anarchists were mostly kids who stood up to bullies, even if they believed all lawful authority to be bullies as well).

posted January 05, 2013 04:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:It also isn't "obvious" that people who become mass murderers are automatically Nihilists if you know the philosophy. Nihilists may reject moral absolutes (though they can still be kind if it's their nature), but that doesn't make them suicidal. From what I see the mass murderers aren't applying radical skepticism, they're suffering a chemical imbalance for the most part, and those who aren't are generally just angry and bitter, like that Christian who shot up a gym right after posting about being with Jesus soon on his blog. In any case, a Nihilist isn't going to give a free pass to rapists based on if they're on a sports team or not...even if a Nihilist decides rape is ok that "license" isn't going to be restricted to football players, their philosophy would be anyone had the right (at least the right to try...). Contrast with the churches (even the Vatican) that aid & abet sexual predation by their clergy (but condemns everyone else wh partakes, while also condemning the victims who report the clergy who abused them). (Boy Scouts, too, who make a big deal out of morals through belief in a Higher Being.)

And Nietzsche isn't exactly how kids talk or think or act. Most of them are generally better and less violent than the generations before them actually, and give me hope for the future. Of course I'm actually around kids rather than yelling at them to get off my lawn while listening to hysterical and often untrue news stories that paint a very false picture (which I can give examples, if desired, of willful lies told by the media and then repeated by everyone else, as well as point out how society has done that for thousands of years)..[/B]

---

-The nihilism comes from an extreme self actualization realized through exerting power ie, killing people to avenge some perceived societal or familial wrong.

-I find the allusion to the Vatican interesting, on the one hand "we" are told not to judge, on the other, "we" do judge

Which is it?

-Today's youth, I'm speaking of young adults here, are directionless in my experience, the ones I deal with are more than willing to engage in violence, sometimes surprisingly willing, on the other hand they do try to be ethical with no real under pinnings for those ethics. A sort of ambivalence pervades.

-I've seen Christian relief efforts for those suffering, I've yet to see an atheistic effort of any magnitude.

I wonder why that is..

Society, the one I see, is infatuated with technology in replacement of spiritual acknowledgement. This to me is one of American societies issues.

posted January 05, 2013 05:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
-I've seen Christian relief efforts for those suffering, I've yet to see an atheistic effort of any magnitude.

I wonder why that is..

---

posted January 05, 2013 06:23 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
-I've seen Christian relief efforts for those suffering, I've yet to see an atheistic effort of any magnitude.

I wonder why that is..

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lexxigramer:
I suppose it is because
Atheists do not get the tax free status that Christian groups do, nor the donations.
People and government are far more likely to help a Christian group get help to make things happen to help ease suffering.

---

posted January 05, 2013 07:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
The nihilism comes from an extreme self actualization realized through exerting power ie, killing people to avenge some perceived societal or familial wrong.

---

False.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
I find the allusion to the Vatican interesting, on the one hand "we" are told not to judge, on the other, "we" do judge

Which is it?

---

I don't even know what this has to do with anything. Are you referring to the Bible verse about judge and be judged?

(ETA: Wait, maybe I just figured it out: are you still operating under the delusion that people who aren't religious operate without morals, and thus should be ok with acts of psychopathy and sexual predation? )

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
here, are directionless in my experience, the ones I deal with are more than willing to engage in violence, sometimes surprisingly willing, on the other hand they do try to be ethical with no real under pinnings for those ethics. A sort of ambivalence pervades.

---

You really should get to know kids better.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
I've seen Christian relief efforts for those suffering, I've yet to see an atheistic effort of any magnitude

---

If you don't count sending Bibles to people who can't read and are more interested in using the Bibles as fire starter or toilet paper (which is why there's always more Bibles to be sent) then it's not that much. Beyond that there's also a lot of ulterior motives (btw, Nazis were known for their soup kitchens as well), and also heavy conditions placed on it (like a lot of homeless shelters won't accept gays). Christian orphanages and hospices are sometimes places of horrific abuse. And, of course, plenty of Christians have learned to profit personally while getting their sheep to do the actual work (a food bank I used to volunteer at was shut down after funds were embezzled and everyone suspects the preacher who had been fairly corrupt the entire time he was "helping," though nearly everyone who did any actual work to his credit was members of his church acting on his orders).

And let me think...I can recall (after a gun range signed me up to several right wing spammers) being asked to contribute to a Christian charity that fought gays, but never to feed to homeless (not unless you count those bell ringers at Christmas). Likewise, a great many in Africa are more concerned with stopping condoms despite that this leads to more AIDS and more poverty than with stopping gang rapes and "ethnic cleansing." And, of course, in killing gays (but not rapists, not even baby rapists, which are rampant there). The pope even gave his blessing to an Ugandan promising to pass the "kill the gays" bill passed done with the crucial help of American evangelicals (one of which, Scott Lively, is being charged with crimes against humanity in America for it, btw). (Btw, this matches here in the USA like a church near me that didn't care about sex trafficking and rape by its members but DID care about gays not part of their church marrying each other. Hell, they couldn't even be arsed to clean up dog crap if it was a few inches off their property.)

Luckily, non religious charity are doing REAL help, such as Save the Children, Amnesty International, and Doctors Without Borders (I think the Red Cross counts as not being religious in nature, too). Then there's Food Not Bombs in America (who are sometimes shut down by the police) and even ops like Occupy Sandy. And there are more:
http://humanistcharities.org/

Plenty of others as well.

posted January 05, 2013 08:50 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:
If you don't count sending Bibles to people who can't read and are more interested in using the Bibles as fire starter or toilet paper (which is why there's always more Bibles to be sent) then it's not that much. Beyond that there's also a lot of ulterior motives (btw, Nazis were known for their soup kitchens as well), and also heavy conditions placed on it (like a lot of homeless shelters won't accept gays). Christian orphanages and hospices are sometimes places of horrific abuse. And, of course, plenty of Christians have learned to profit personally while getting their sheep to do the actual work (a food bank I used to volunteer at was shut down after funds were embezzled and everyone suspects the preacher who had been fairly corrupt the entire time he was "helping," though nearly everyone who did any actual work to his credit was members of his church acting on his orders).

---

quote:

---

Luckily, non religious charity are doing REAL help, such as Save the Children, Amnesty International, and Doctors Without Borders (I think the Red Cross counts as not being religious in nature, too). Then there's Food Not Bombs in America (who are sometimes shut down by the police) and even ops like Occupy Sandy. And there are more:
http://humanistcharities.org/

Plenty of others as well.

There'd be more still if Christians didn't reject them (for example, rejecting atheist money).

---

Compared to say the Salvation Army? In my community we have several rescue ministries and food banks.

If we wish to speak in general terms anything can be painted with a broad brush, once again where I live the local atheists clean a street (and have the sign) otherwise..no where to be seen.

Don't know about the Red Cross tbh, they do have "cross" in their name but never investigated it.

As for the Roman Catholic Church, I find it amusing that their stance on homosexuality is reviled, as is the Boy Scouts, when they have bitter experience in dealing with homosexuality among their leadership, once again, like "judge not" the double standard is puzzling.

As for AIDS, not engaging in sexual relations tends to be very effective in slowing the spread of the disease.

And to thrust of my point, nihilism, in my view an over weening self image is at the cause of the mass killings. Some slight, perceived or real, usually matched to extreme internet usage has been found since the Colombine massacre.

posted January 06, 2013 01:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
When I worked at homeless shelter it literally was the last resort for many of those who came through the doors, not a atheist in sight in fact.

---

That you know of. It's not like atheists are likely to advertise the fact they're atheists. Of course any atheists could've been made to feel acutely uncomfortable there, too.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
As for AIDS, not engaging in sexual relations tends to be very effective in slowing the spread of the disease.

---

But not everyone is going to abstain, and it's evil for a church to say, "Have sex and die." Especially when there are MUCH BIGGER problems deserving of their attention there.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
Or the churches in my community that gather volunteers every summer, mostly teens, to repair senior citizens homes b/c they are to poor to put a new roof on their dwelling.

---

That's nice. Doesn't mean atheists are uncaring, however.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:
As for the Roman Catholic Church, I find it amusing that their stance on homosexuality is reviled, as is the Boy Scouts, when they have bitter experience in dealing with homosexuality among their leadership, once again, like "judge not" the double standard is puzzling.

---

Since you get your morality from the Bible I suppose it's only natural that you don't realize that pedophilia is wrong. Let me try to explain how the rest of us see it (and those Christians who don't limit their morality to the Bible):

Children are especially vulnerable to predation and manipulation, not likely to be able to effectively express themselves or set limits with adults even when they do understand the sitch, their judgment isn't likely to be trustworthy (there's a reason we don't let them sign contracts or have the full rights of an adult), there's almost no common ground to be had between adults & children and their psychological development is geared more for bonding with peers (and adults are more role models, for better and for worse, that is to say the adults have too much power even if they didn't want it and don't have any particular authority over the child), and often harmful with lifelong trauma (including physically in some cases). And to top it off scout masters, priests, and the like hold additional power & authority over the child and even for adults it's considered wrong (unethical at best) to sexually pressure even other adults you have authority over, and in the case of children that's even more of a consideration as well as a betrayal of the parent's trust (I'm going to go out on a limb and assume the priests, scout masters, etc, didn't have the kids they abused to get their parents to sign a permission slip first).

Most homosexuals, like heterosexuals, despise those who prey on children. Atheists have no problem understanding the difference as well, and also understand why it's wrong for those organizations to cover it up. In short, it's the predation on children (and enabling the abuse) that has the rest of us riled up, but if say a Russian Orthodox priest (who can marry) were to marry a man or if a Scout master was gay with another man (who could even show up at Scout meetings, btw), we would be ok with that. Perhaps if the Bible spent more time condemning pedophilia and less homosexuality then it would be understandable to you as well as to the Christian organizations that cover up pedophiles and protect them from justice as well as enabling them to strike again.

posted January 06, 2013 03:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:
Since you get your morality from the Bible I suppose it's only natural that you don't realize that pedophilia is wrong. Let me try to explain how the rest of us see it (and those Christians who don't limit their morality to the Bible):

---

Odd assumption, care to elaborate your use of a generalitiy here?

quote:

---

Children are especially vulnerable to predation and manipulation, not likely to be able to effectively express themselves or set limits with adults even when they do understand the sitch, their judgment isn't likely to be trustworthy (there's a reason we don't let them sign contracts or have the full rights of an adult), there's almost no common ground to be had between adults & children and their psychological development is geared more for bonding with peers (and adults are more role models, for better and for worse, that is to say the adults have too much power even if they didn't want it and don't have any particular authority over the child), and often harmful with lifelong trauma (including physically in some cases).

---

Oh I agree.

quote:

---

And to top it off scout masters, priests, and the like hold additional power & authority over the child and even for adults it's considered wrong (unethical at best) to sexually pressure even other adults you have authority over, and in the case of children that's even more of a consideration as well as a betrayal of the parent's trust (I'm going to go out on a limb and assume the priests, scout masters, etc, didn't have the kids they abused to get their parents to sign a permission slip first).

---

All the more reason to disqualify homosexuals from being in those posts of leadership wouldn't you agree?

quote:

---

Most homosexuals, like heterosexuals, despise those who prey on children. Atheists have no problem understanding the difference as well, and also understand why it's wrong for those organizations to cover it up. In short, it's the predation on children (and enabling the abuse) that has the rest of us riled up, but if say a Russian Orthodox priest (who can marry) were to marry a man or if a Scout master was gay with another man (who could even show up at Scout meetings, btw), we would be ok with that. Perhaps if the Bible spent more time condemning pedophilia and less homosexuality then it would be understandable to you as well as to the Christian organizations that cover up pedophiles and protect them from justice as well as enabling them to strike again.

---

quote:

---

That you can't tell the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is very disturbing (or were you just trying for an association fallacy?). Just out of curiosity, do you consider say a 40-year-old priest or teacher preying on a 10-year-old girl in his care morally & ethically the same as a man & woman in their 20s getting together as well?

---

Since one did bring up the RCC priest molestations, it is incumbent to point out of all of the charges only 1 involved a young girl, the vast majority involved man w/young boys.

Why is homosexual pedophilia, other than for world view reasons, an impossibility?

It is the reality of the situation, it may be unpalatable, it is what happened, and once again one cannot have a "don't judge" ethic then expect judgment as well that is a double standard at best, a mental device at worst.

posted January 06, 2013 07:17 PM            

I think the Bible has made it difficult for many devout Christians to see something that's plain for everyone else, so let me explain it this way: what's ok and not ok for a right handed person is the same for a left handed person. For example, regardless of "hand orientation," it's ok for someone to gesture appropriately, write, shake hands, etc, while it's NOT ok to make rude gestures, hit or grab someone in a demeaning manner, or be lewd with one's self in public. It does not matter if the person is right handed like the majority or left handed like the minority, the SAME standards exist for BOTH.

I know it's hard for you, but try to apply that concept to sexual orientation. What's ok for one is ok for the other, what's wrong for one is wrong for the other. That is, marrying and holding hands is ok for both, but public sex or molesting children is not, be the nature of the pedophilia heterosexual or homosexual. SAME STANDARDS, also known as equality.

And those of us who don't live by the Bible don't go out to read Nietzsche or de Sade to "figure out what's acceptable" we instead use reason to figure out how we can make life mutually beneficial to the most people (at least those of us who desire some form of fairness and justice, which would be most of us). And reason is better than bronze age superstition because it's more relevant, for example the Bible does not condemn pedophilia which is very harmful, it actually encourages it in some instances, while it does condemn homosexuality which isn't harmful (and this also leads to suicidal teens when they realize they're gay and believe God has cursed them or are otherwise vile, another reason to discard that part of the Bible). As an added bonus to being superior to Biblical morality it can also appeal to people no matter what religion (or lack thereof) they have, which is one reason why most Christians are against slavery and pedophilia, not because of the Bible, but because of reason.

And what's especially twisted about your "reasoning" is that you're saying the church is against gays who are loving and beautiful to each other having equality and even being able to comfort each other in the hospital because of child rapists in their own ranks, yet they're not getting rid of those child rapists, they're protecting them. (Perhaps Matthew 7: 4-5 applies?) It goes further to show their moral inferiority that they're opposed to equality of people who don't prey on children AND aren't members of their own church while at the same time protecting child molesters that they have the ability to fire and help prosecute, but maybe that's because the Bible condemns homosexuality and not pedophilia. Or maybe it's because the Bible fails to make people better.