Hitler, The Nazi Party, and Christianity

[SkinWalker]

Interesting.....you're contending that Moses, Joshua and David were each individually responsible for the slaughter and or deaths of >40 million people in their respective lifetimes? C'mon, I though you were supposed to be more rational than that.

 

Btw, didn't actually have you in mind re the comment about biblical relevance.

 

Rationally? Rationally I'm saying that wiping out an entire culture is more significant than wiping out a portion of it. Moses et al. committed genocide. Hitler committed democide, even though the numbers killed were probably higher.

 

It can also be argued that given the global populations, the numbers killed in antiquity (at least claimed to have been murdered by these supposedly pious men) were more significance if you account for the increases in population as a whole.

 

Rationally speaking, that is.

 

So, yes, I'm contending that Moses et al., if they were real people who actually did the deeds attributed to them in biblical mythology, were worse for society than their 20th century counterpart in Europe. Clearly, they would have murdered more if more were available. They just ran out of victims once every "last man, woman, child and child in the belly" were slain.

[Totenkopf]

C'mon, Skin, you able to prove any of those guys killed whole races (hence genocide, not merely attempted like in 20th century)? "Mass murder" in a localized area doesn't necessarily equate to genocide. Perhaps closer to your charges of demiocide, but you provide no numbers by which to actually judge their "misdeeds" to put any of it in true context. Just claims of "divine orders" and assumptions.

[SkinWalker]

Of course I don't think these things actually happened. Its biblical mythology. But there are those that *do* believe they occurred -these are believing Christians who read of these attrocities in the bible and believe it to be the will of their god. The act of accepting these events actually occurred implies that one believes the bible is true. Believing the bible to be true generally implies that one is a Christian.

 

If Hitler modeled his attempted extermination of the Jews on the exterminations god is alleged to have instructed Moses et al. to perform, it implies that Hitler believed the bible true. If he believed the bible true, this implies that he was, generally, a Christian at least at some point.

 

This is all I'm saying.

 

It is very possible that Hitler came up with his extermination principles on his own, however, his words refute this since he cites biblical exterminations and motivations on several occasions.

[GarfieldJL]

You know at this point if someone from an online Jewish community saw this, they'd go ballistic, they take stuff like anti-sematism very seriously.

 

I'm being serious here, comments comparing Moses or King David to Hitler is rather inflamatory and not a laughing matter. Quite frankly, it could get the administrators of Lucasforums sued. Cause Hitler used all these trumped up claims to persecute Jews and do his best to exterminate them. So they have every reason to take something like this as an attempt to justify another Holocaust.

 

 

Btw, SkinWalker a lot of the stuff in the Bible in my opinion did happen but what we don't have is the entire account. For all we know they killed everyone at point X, while they ignored the people that fled the area at the start of the fighting because they were noncombatants. Thus following that line of reasoning, the number of civilian casualties may have been relatively small. The Jewish people did have rules, and going after defenseless people that did not raise a weapon to them far from it, they were just trying to get out of the way would have been considered sinful.

 

If they were at ground zero in the middle of the camp that's one thing, but if they were trying to get out of the area at the start of the fight, they would most likely have let those individuals leave unopposed.

[SkinWalker]

Complete bollocks. There's no anti-semitism here. The offended Israelies would first need to demonstrate that these mythical characters existed to have any rational complaint to begin and that the comparisson is unfounded to round their complaint out.

 

In the first place, there's little likelihood that these fictional characters can be shown to be real; in the second place, if they were real, then a casual look at the texts that modern Israelies so irrational hold to would reveal an evil, murderous set of genocides and democides.

 

Moses, David, Joshua et al are the worst possible role models for humanity and we might as well choose Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot.

 

Finally, the Lucas Forums is in absolutely no danger of law suit and this is your simple objection to anyone criticizing a superstition which you hold to be true to the point of delusion (apparently). QED.

[GarfieldJL]

Complete bollocks. There's no anti-semitism here. The offended Israelies would first need to demonstrate that these mythical characters existed to have any rational complaint to begin and that the comparisson is unfounded to round their complaint out.

 

You insult their faith and compare people in their religious texts to Hitler, and they don't have the right to be insulted. And I'm not saying they'd just file a complaint, I'm saying they'd probably sue Lucasforums and/or the server that hosts Lucasforums.

 

In the first place, there's little likelihood that these fictional characters can be shown to be real; in the second place, if they were real, then a casual look at the texts that modern Israelies so irrational hold to would reveal an evil, murderous set of genocides and democides.

 

It's more likely than you realize, because the Israelites did have a written language during the time of King David, the book of Kings.

 

Moses, David, Joshua et al are the worst possible role models for humanity and we might as well choose Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot.

 

There you go again.

 

Finally, the Lucas Forums is in absolutely no danger of law suit and this is your simple objection to anyone criticizing a superstition which you hold to be true to the point of delusion (apparently). QED.

 

I've seen another place get sued for something like this, (didn't have to do with religion in that case, but it's certainly similar) whether or not they'd win is anyone's guess but I guarentee you if Newsweek had made a commentary like what you have about the Jewish Faith they'd be looking at a lawsuit, and it could end up that this place ends up getting sued.

[True_Avery]

You insult their faith and compare people in their religious texts to Hitler, and they don't have the right to be insulted. And I'm not saying they'd just file a complaint, I'm saying they'd probably sue Lucasforums and/or the server that hosts Lucasforums.

No.

 

Also, what does "don't have the right to be insulted" even mean? I'll call them anything I want anytime I want and if they have a problem with it... oh well!

 

Even if they did, they have no case. Go blow hot air somewhere else.

 

It's more likely than you realize, because the Israelites did have a written language during the time of King David, the book of Kings.

You don't address the point.

 

Just because it was written does not mean it is true. Its like someone uncovering a Harry Potter book in a thousand years and claiming it to be true; just because Harry has a name and a story about him does not mean he ever existed.

 

I've seen another place get sued for something like this, (didn't have to do with religion in that case, but it's certainly similar) whether or not they'd win is anyone's guess but I guarentee you if Newsweek had made a commentary like what you have about the Jewish Faith they'd be looking at a lawsuit, and it could end up that this place ends up getting sued.

Umm, no. This is the internet. More specifically, a forum.

 

And I don't know if you are threatening us or not, but I could care less what would happen to Newsweek as this is a public forum, and the speech rules are made by those in charge. Your comparison means nothing.

 

You know at this point if someone from an online Jewish community saw this, they'd go ballistic, they take stuff like anti-sematism very seriously.

 

I'm being serious here, comments comparing Moses or King David to Hitler is rather inflamatory and not a laughing matter. Quite frankly, it could get the administrators of Lucasforums sued. Cause Hitler used all these trumped up claims to persecute Jews and do his best to exterminate them. So they have every reason to take something like this as an attempt to justify another Holocaust.

Moses and David were the Hitler's of their day, and Hitler used the Bible to justify the killing of Jews.

 

*waits*

 

Nope, not sued yet. I can make the word "Hitler" bigger and bolder if you'd like.

 

Go ahead and report us to these so called communities if you must, but drop the BS and threats. Its spam.

[GarfieldJL]

No.

 

Also, what does "don't have the right to be insulted" even mean? I'll call them anything I want anytime I want and if they have a problem with it... oh well!

 

Even if they did, they have no case. Go blow hot air somewhere else.

 

In this case they do because at least in the United States they are a minority, then you throw in the Holocaust and it could be argued that there is an attempt to incite hate crimes against Jewish people here.

 

You people compare figures from their religious texts to the monster that tried to exterminate all of them, and you're saying they shouldn't feel as though you're insulting them putting it mildly?!?!

 

You don't address the point.

 

Just because it was written does not mean it is true. Its like someone uncovering a Harry Potter book in a thousand years and claiming it to be true; just because Harry has a name and a story about him does not mean he ever existed.

 

Actually, considering parts of the Old Testament were written in the time period in which they are referring to (such as the Book of Kings), it's highly likely that King David existed. There is further evidence due to the Temple Mound, that his son Solomon also was a real person. Remember, I earlier pointed out that they had a written language during that time-period.

 

Umm, no. This is the internet. More specifically, a forum.

 

And I don't know if you are threatening us or not, but I could care less what would happen to Newsweek as this is a public forum, and the speech rules are made by those in charge. Your comparison means nothing.

 

Actually it is a valid comparison because the home server and the administrators are largely located in North America and Europe. Since this place also has to do with Lucas Arts, it would give Lucas Arts a black-eye from a publicity standpoint.

 

I'm not making threats, I'm pointing out that if a Jewish person wandered into this thread, this place could end up being sued.

 

 

Moses and David were the Hitler's of their day, and Hitler used the Bible to justify the killing of Jews.

 

Again, you post highly inflammatory commentary here, it wouldn't be you necessarily that would be sued, it would be the admin team. I'm not Jewish so I couldn't make the lawsuit, but I imagine there are a few members here that are, and I'm advising that you stop before this place ends up in a lot of trouble.

 

Go ahead and report us to these so called communities if you must, but drop the BS and threats. Its spam.

 

I'm not threatening, I'm informing that the comments being made by SkinWalker and yourself are way out of line. I am pointing out that if it keeps up, odds are this place will get a lot of unwanted negative publicity for starters and could end up with the reputation as being the gathering place for anti-semites (sp?) at the very least. It's entirely possible this place cound end up in a lawsuit.

[Achilles]

You insult their faith and compare people in their religious texts to Hitler, and they don't have the right to be insulted. And I'm not saying they'd just file a complaint, I'm saying they'd probably sue Lucasforums and/or the server that hosts Lucasforums.

Good luck getting that to fly. I'm pretty sure every lawyer in the U.S. is at least familiar with a little something called the First Amendment.

[GarfieldJL]

Good luck getting that to fly. I'm pretty sure every lawyer in the U.S. is at least familiar with a little something called the First Amendment.

 

Are you aware of a little thing known as a Hate-Crime? Furthermore because you didn't use certain key words there is a case here.

[Achilles]

Why don't you do a google search for "protected free speech" and then get back to us?

 

Also, you might want to google "hate crime" while you're at it so that you'll know what it is (and is not) before you invoke it.

[jrrtoken]

If the KKK is allowed to hold public rallys in a downtown square, then I'm sure it's also legal to supposedly defame Judaism on the Internet.

[EnderWiggin]

I'm not making threats, I'm pointing out that if a Jewish person wandered into this thread, this place could end up being sued.

[...]

It's entirely possible this place cound end up in a lawsuit.

 

 

Wow, way to make it obvious that you have no idea how the legal system in the United States operates.

 

Didn't you once post that you had taken a constitutional law class? Don't make me laugh.

 

Impressive bull**** though.

 

_EW_

[True_Avery]

I believe you have the law entirely backwards Garfield:

Freedom of Speech:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/freedom%20of%20speech?o=100074

–noun

The right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion, etc.

First Amendment:

http://dictionary.reference.com/dic?o=100074&q=first+amendment&search=search

-noun

An amendment to the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing the right of free expression; includes freedom of assembly and freedom of the press and freedom of religion and freedom of speech

 

Hate-Crime:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hate+crime&o=100074

-noun

a crime that violates the victim's civil rights and that is motivated by hostility to the victim's race, religion, creed, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender

 

-----

 

The key word being "Crime". Speaking is not a crime except when it is threatening violence towards (and even that has to be to the person's direct face most of the time), which no-one here has done. Posting on an Internet forum is not a crime, and neither is saying anything that breaks a law.

 

Now, if you are implying that we are suggesting another holocaust happen then I would:

 

1) say that we're still protected under law to say that

2) say that you should retract that idea as it is now accusing staff of racism

 

Saying that some biblical figures that are worshiped are like Hitler is not a crime, and it certainly is not racist.

 

In this case they do because at least in the United States they are a minority, then you throw in the Holocaust and it could be argued that there is an attempt to incite hate crimes against Jewish people here.

Guess what? My freedom of speech gives me the right to say "the holocaust was the best thing to happen to the world"

 

Do I believe that? Should I say that?

 

It doesn't matter, because I can say it (for the moderator looking, no I don't). The rules that apply to this forum are those enforced by the forum rules and staff with only a handfull of actual laws going beyond that. But, seeing as we are not seducing minors or sharing child porn I can hardly see what is illegal here.

 

You people compare figures from their religious texts to the monster that tried to exterminate all of them, and you're saying they shouldn't feel as though you're insulting them putting it mildly?!?!

Hahaha

 

Says the guy who is insisting that Hitler is on the atheist side. Should I go get some crazy atheists to come sue you for insulting them?

 

You've been fighting in this and other threads that the Nazi's and Hitler were an atheist group, and so was soviet Russia. You don't think that is insulting at all?

 

I gotta say Garfield, you have quite the impressive bias and quite an impressive pair to accuse me and skin of -anything-.

 

So what if I compare Jewish figures to Hitler? I think the Christian god is just as bad, and Jesus the L. Ron Hubbard of his day. I'll accuse any religious figure of whatever I want, and you can continue to call atheists Nazis.

 

Deal?

 

Actually it is a valid comparison because the home server and the administrators are largely located in North America and Europe. Since this place also has to do with Lucas Arts, it would give Lucas Arts a black-eye from a publicity standpoint.

 

I'm not making threats, I'm pointing out that if a Jewish person wandered into this thread, this place could end up being sued.

Proving you've got the law backwards.

 

If some Jewish group sees this thread and sues us, ether the judge will throw the case out or... funnily enough we could sue them back and have a better case!

 

Because they are then trying to stop our ability of freedom of speech, which, ironically, could also be seen as a hate crime of sorts.

 

Again, you post highly inflammatory commentary here, it wouldn't be you necessarily that would be sued, it would be the admin team. I'm not Jewish so I couldn't make the lawsuit, but I imagine there are a few members here that are, and I'm advising that you stop before this place ends up in a lot of trouble.

David and Moses were the Hitler's of their day.

 

I'm not threatening, I'm informing that the comments being made by SkinWalker and yourself are way out of line. I am pointing out that if it keeps up, odds are this place will get a lot of unwanted negative publicity for starters and could end up with the reputation as being the gathering place for anti-semites (sp?) at the very least. It's entirely possible this place cound end up in a lawsuit.

I laugh at this.

 

Why?

 

http://www.kkk.com/

 

Now go do something productive like, say, take a class on constitutional law instead of pretending you took one. Maybe you did, but your above posts put that heavily into question.

[SkinWalker]

In this case they do because at least in the United States they are a minority, then you throw in the Holocaust and it could be argued that there is an attempt to incite hate crimes against Jewish people here.

Complete and utter poppycock. You might actually consider educating yourself on the legal definition of "hate-crime."

 

You people compare figures from their religious texts to the monster that tried to exterminate all of them, and you're saying they shouldn't feel as though you're insulting them putting it mildly?!?!

 

Hmmm... figures in the bible are mythical to begin with. So "insulting" them is about like insulting Paul Bunyon and the followers of Babe. But, if the characters in the bible were real, they would indeed be "monsters" comparable to Hitler.

 

"And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain." (Deuteronomy 2:34)

 

"And we utterly destroyed them, as we did unto Sihon king of Hesbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city. But all the cattle, and the spoil of the cities we took for a prey to ourselves." (Deuteronomy 3:6-7)

 

"And they utterly destroyed all that [was] in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword." (Joshua 6:21)

 

"Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword." (Deuteronomy 13:15)

 

"Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." (I Samuel 15:2-3)

 

"And he brought forth the people that were therein, and put them under saws, and under harrows of iron, and under the axes of iron, and made them pass through the brickkiln: and thus did he unto all the cities of the children of Ammon. So David and all the people returned unto Jerusalem." (II Samuel 12:31)

 

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." (Numbers 31:16-18)

 

"Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished." (Isaiah 13:15-16)

 

This is but a few of the atrocities, mass murder, and genocide documented in the bible. Luckily, its probably all myth and legend anyway, but all myths and legends have some basis in truth (or so it seems). If Moses, David, Joshua, et al. were real, the above is evidence that they are every bit as "monstrous" as Hitler if not more.

 

Actually, considering parts of the Old Testament were written in the time period in which they are referring to (such as the Book of Kings), it's highly likely that King David existed.

 

Which parts and what evidence do you have to show this? Just out of curiosity, are you aware of the oldest dated Jewish text? Jewish mythology is no different than any other in that it evolves and changes with the zeitgeist of the moment. The priestly cast and religious elites in control of oral traditions and religious documents lie and cheat like any other human being. They change details to fit the story as they want it told. Plain and simple.

 

There is further evidence due to the Temple Mound, that his son Solomon also was a real person. Remember, I earlier pointed out that they had a written language during that time-period.

 

I don't know where I'd be without you pointing out they had "written language." (Tip: thats actually call script). Evidence of temples and personalities hardly qualifies all the supernatural and magical mumbo-jumbo of biblical mythology. Any more than the existence of Nantucket or even the fact that there really was a German ship called Jungfrau in the period Melville wrote Moby Dick proves that Ahab had a love-hate relationship with an ocean-born mammal.

 

it would give Lucas Arts a black-eye from a publicity standpoint.

 

Doubtful. We've had many intense debates about religious superstition in this very forum in the past. You being a newcomer, these wouldn't be in your memory, but there were no attorneys knocking at the door. None are that idiotic.

 

I'm not making threats, I'm pointing out that if a Jewish person wandered into this thread, this place could end up being sued.

 

You're trying to make a threat. What you're trying to do is bully and intimidate (the way the superstitious are good at doing when they object to anyone criticizing or questioning their superstitions) to get people to just shut up. Moreover, you're being hypocritical. You don't mind harshly criticizing liberals and democrats or even your own president, but as soon as someone does the same to a superstition you hold, you object. Sorry, pal, it doesn't work that way. All human endeavors are open to critique, criticism, inquiry, and question.

 

Again, you post highly inflammatory commentary here, it wouldn't be you necessarily that would be sued, it would be the admin team. I'm not Jewish so I couldn't make the lawsuit, but I imagine there are a few members here that are, and I'm advising that you stop before this place ends up in a lot of trouble.

 

My comparison and critique was both fair and accurate. I used the biblical mythology to make a genuine and legitimate point: Hitler was likely imitating the Christian role models he was raised to believe, namely Moses, David, Joshua et al. These mythical characters committed atrocities (according to the myths) that were mirrored in Hitler's actions. If they were genuine motivations and inspirations for Hitler's democides, then it can be deduced that Hitler believed these mythical characters to be real. If this is the case, then we can conclude that it is very likely that Hitler was a Christian.

 

I'm not threatening, I'm informing that the comments being made by SkinWalker and yourself are way out of line.

 

Only in your uninformed opinion.

[Tommycat]

Actually, While Garfield does not have a legal leg to stand on, there is SOME validity to what he's talking about. If Lucas were to hear about Anti-Semitism on this board, HIS lawyers might be able to intervene as this board by extension is representative of his works. The Family Guy episode Blue Harvest was told NOT to include a line about Jewas because it could be damaging to the brand.

[SkinWalker]

Luckily there's no "anti-semitism" going on on this board. One cannot claim that legitimate, intellectual and academic criticism of a religion equates to "anti-semitism," which is an intense dislike and prejudice against the Jewish people. I'm not criticizing the people but, rather, their religion.

 

Anti-semitism / hate-crime claim = FAIL.

[True_Avery]

Actually, While Garfield does not have a legal leg to stand on, there is SOME validity to what he's talking about. If Lucas were to hear about Anti-Semitism on this board, HIS lawyers might be able to intervene as this board by extension is representative of his works. The Family Guy episode Blue Harvest was told NOT to include a line about Jewas because it could be damaging to the brand.

Senate and Kavars exist to keep comments and threads on hot topics in only two spots on the forum, both of which sorta have warnings on serious discussion.

 

While most completely serious brand forums are missing a serious discussion forum, I'd take a bet that the staff at LA are competent enough to realize the need for them and the kind of discussions that can take place.

 

Also, why is the fact we're talking about the Jewish faith such a sudden hot spot? We've been talking about gay marriage, abortion, presidential elections, religion, etc for years now but suddenly the Jews are off limits?

 

No offense, but there have been attacks on Christians, Atheists, Muslims, etc in both Kavars and Senate and in none of those times can I recall someone throwing "this could get the forum sued!" into the discussion.

 

Although, it has just been Garfield doing it and he's proven in a few threads that hes very pro-israel so this is probably less of a problem of getting attacked by lawyers than it is just the ramblings of someone without an argument.

 

Luckily there's no "anti-semitism" going on on this board. One cannot claim that legitimate, intellectual and academic criticism of a religion equates to "anti-semitism," which is an intense dislike and prejudice against the Jewish people. I'm not criticizing the people but, rather, their religion.

Exactly.

 

The beliefs of the religion have been placed into question, and so has the morality of figureheads of faith in said religion. I don't recall anyone saying "I hate jews!", and if they did I'm sure ET, Skin, Jae, or some other mod would have something to say about it.

[Tommycat]

Yes yes, You're not being anti-semitic. However you are being VERY insulting to the Jewish. I mean you're only equating to the heroes of their faith to Hitler.

 

Hey Maybe Hitler was a Jew, since none of that takes place in the New Testament.

 

{ninja edit}

And True_Avery, I thought I said that in my first line... the whole Not having a legal leg to stand on part. But if the board is perceived to be anti-semitic, it COULD cause problems.

[True_Avery]

Yes yes, You're not being anti-semitic. However you are being VERY insulting to the Jewish. I mean you're only equating to the heroes of their faith to Hitler.

And Garfield has said that atheism is the cause for the holocaust and the soviet union deaths, which makes us even as far as expressing our ideas goes I think.

 

Would you prefer if I compared their genocidal heroes to another genocidal figurehead? Hitler is the easiest to come to mind, but hardly the only one.

 

But, frankly, if they don't want the figureheads they worship to be compared to a mass murderer... well, they shouldn't be worshiping figureheads that committed mass murder.

 

Maybe that is harsh, but if you don't want people to call you wet you probably shouldn't of jumped in the pool in the first place.

 

But, again, I ask why this is a hot button now that we're talking about the Jewish faith. I seem to recall comparing the Christian god to mass murderers in a few threads and not getting this much heat.

 

Why are we treating the Jewish faith like a fragile vase when everything else seemed to have been fair game?

 

Hey Maybe Hitler was a Jew, since none of that takes place in the New Testament.

Possible, but he does seem to have a soft spot for Jesus. Didn't he call him an Aryan savior in Table Talk or something?

 

And True_Avery, I thought I said that in my first line... the whole Not having a legal leg to stand on part. But if the board is perceived to be anti-semitic, it COULD cause problems.

And the abortion, gay marriage, presidential election, etc threads were all fine but mentioning that some jewish figureheads are/were/possibly mass murderers is wrong?

 

Wasn't the original point of this thread claiming that Hitler was a Christian and that the Nazi's were predominately Christian? Where was the anti-christian lawsuit claims there?

 

If dissecting the faith of a single religion in a serious discussion forum is enough to get lawyers on our back then... wow.

[SkinWalker]

The truth is that it bothers Garfield to have his beliefs criticized, examined, and questioned. Since there's no rational rebuttal that he can muster (he's clearly out of his element when the discussion isn't simply trading political rhetoric back and forth), he choses to play the "hate-crime" & "anti-semitic" card in an effort to just get everyone to shut up. Its a dishonest and pitiful tactic.

[Tommycat]

But, again, I ask why this is a hot button now that we're talking about the Jewish faith. I seem to recall comparing the Christian god to mass murderers in a few threads and not getting this much heat.

 

Why are we treating the Jewish faith like a fragile vase when everything else seemed to have been fair game?

Meh, It's because of WHO and what that psychotic SOB did to the Jews. But honestly.. in today's letigious society, would it surprise you?

 

Possible, but he does seem to have a soft spot for Jesus. Didn't he call him an Aryan savior in Table Talk or something?

Pity more people haven't actually read the contents therein. They seem more willing to battle over semantics of non-related issues than actually read a reference material on the subject. And some are even willing to shift the focus completely away from the conversation at hand into legal realms. Realsm which I might add are purely futile at best.

 

And incidentally, Hitler acknowledges the existence of Jesus, that does not make him Christian. Muhammad acknowledges Jesus too. That doesn't make Muhammad a Christian. Hitler claims in Table Talk that Jesus was an Aryan, then the Jews created Christianity around him. That to me sounds an awful lot like someone who is not a Christian.

 

And the abortion, gay marriage, presidential election, etc threads were all fine but mentioning that some jewish figureheads are/were/possibly mass murderers is wrong?

Meh, I'm just more or less going by what was expressed about being nicer to the Jews than all of the other groups that might have been upset at Blue Harvest. Seemed to be more willing to protect their interests. Then again, It's still thin at best, and totally off topic.

 

Wasn't the original point of this thread claiming that Hitler was a Christian and that the Nazi's were predominately Christian? Where was the anti-christian lawsuit claims there?

 

If dissecting the faith of a single religion in a serious discussion forum is enough to get lawyers on our back then... wow.

 

Again, in this society more willing to throw lawyers at people than actually read, would it surprise you? Incidentally I would rather this returned to the topic. Claims of lawsuits bore me to tears....

[GarfieldJL]

The truth is that it bothers Garfield to have his beliefs criticized, examined, and questioned. Since there's no rational rebuttal that he can muster (he's clearly out of his element when the discussion isn't simply trading political rhetoric back and forth), he choses to play the "hate-crime" & "anti-semitic" card in an effort to just get everyone to shut up. Its a dishonest and pitiful tactic.

 

For the record, I'm not Jewish, if I was once you went on that comparisonfest of yours, quite frankly, I wouldn't have bothered to point that out publicly here, I would have sent a letter of complaint to Lucas Arts and inform them of the situation and let George Lucas' lawyers deal with the situation.

 

Quite frankly you pretty much violated the board's own rules in some of your comments, which were highly inflammatory, and since you're a moderator it makes it look like the staff of this board endorses your views, that opens them up if a Jewish Group decided to take legal action and they'd have every reason to file a lawsuit. And if you think they don't how about you look up the holocaust on wikipedia or something.

 

As far as not having a rational argument, you should really look in the mirror, all I'm going to say is that you crossed the line in your latest bashfest of people who aren't atheist.

 

And if you want to know why I'm so furious, it's because I have friends THAT ARE JEWISH, and I know how hurtful and angering your latest rant would be.

 

Meh, It's because of WHO and what that psychotic SOB did to the Jews. But honestly.. in today's letigious society, would it surprise you?

 

Well the fact he compared key figures in the Old Testament to Hitler whom tried his best to wipe the Jewish people out, the fact this occurred less than 100 years ago and some holocaust survivors are still alive makes his comments no laughing matter, and some people quite honestly the comments being made are such in my opinion they'd have legit grounds to sue.

[SkinWalker]

Complete bollocks. Your Jewish friends (and mine) have nothing to worry about. For the umpteenth time, I've not said a bad word about Jews or the Jewish. I've criticized their religious superstitions which is my right. My views no more reflect those of LF or LA any more than if I criticized Democrats and Liberals or Global Warming. Anyone who would think they do or perceive it to, is either being dishonest or they're just ignorant.

 

The fact that you're not Jewish has no relevance in your unfair expectation that religious criticism is off-limits and questioning or criticizing superstition is off limits because someone might get offended. You don't worry when you criticize liberals and democrats... they have beliefs too, you know.

 

You're being dishonest and cowardly in your approach to intellectual discourse. I suggest if you dislike discussions that are willing to critique religion and religious beliefs, you might avoid the Senate Chambers.

[Totenkopf]

You forgot to mention he probably doesn't care when he "insults" atheistic beliefs as well. (yes, yes, I know you'll likely reitereate your oft stated claims that athiests have no beliefs...............bollocks ).