The Undeniable Truth: Hitler was a Leftist

Click on the links and educate yourself, BUTTHEAD!

Try reading my posts and actually responding to them, bloody idiot.

Hitler may have moved slightly to the right of his original program, after he disposed of his number two man, Ernst Rohm, the Homosexual street thug. But he remained a Socialist--never became even a middle of the roader.

When he and Stalin got together in 1939, they were both more comfortable with one another, than either ever was with any Western leaders.

For a detailed analysis of where Hitler and the Nazis were in the poltical spectrum, see The Lies Of Socialism. In every respect, Hitler lived and died on the Left.

William Flax

no one here set up any “system” It was “set-up” by the Judeo-Christian ethic millennia ago

Whatever your reason, you do admit that the life of any human fetus has more value to you than the life of any adult.

Just keep the reach of your bloody ideology away from my wife in case she should have a complicated pregnancy or delivery. I don't want your cult groupies crying for the sacrifice of, or increased risk to, my wife for the sake of the fetus. My wife means MORE to me than our unborn child.

Be sure to get your priorities straight. Many many more embryos and fetuses die from spontaneous abortions than die from elective abortions. What do you propose to do about that?

Skimming your links I could not find how they were relevant to or contradict any of my points. Maybe you will tell me in your own words, if you have any.

*******************"Fascism was better described by Mousolini as the partnership between corporations and government, or corporatism."******************************************************************************

Fascism is an ideology in which government doesn't own the property but controls it through laws. What do we have today in this country?

GET A TEENAGER TO HELP YOU READ!

GET A TEENAGER TO HELP YOU READ!

Such as yourself perhaps? Now if you could just find someone to help you think...

beavus, you state: “Whatever your reason, you do admit that the life of any human fetus has more value to you than the life of any adult.” That is the furthest thing from the truth; they DO NOT have more value—only equal value.

You also say: “Many many more embryos and fetuses die from spontaneous abortions than die from elective abortions. What do you propose to do about that?” That is called NATURE beavus (as long as they are not caused by the abortifacient effects of many forms of chemical birth control—i.e. the pill) and we don’t have a problem with God’s design of nature. Haven’t you heard beavus, miscarriage and elective abortion are two completely different things; don’t try to cloud the issue.

See http://www.prolife-mcfl.org/refjrnl/abrotifacient.htm
about IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT BIRTH CONTROL CHEMICALS – they can and do cause abortion of babies—your babies.

Lastly, you say: “Maybe you will tell me in your own words, if you have any.” Go to CHRISTIAN PATRIOTS FOR LIFE they are all “my words,” beavus, I am the founder.

beavus, I have one question for you. On your post # 32 you said, “Elective abortion is appalling. Perhaps it should be illegal.” In context with everything else you have written, could you please clarify for me your position on Roe & Doe etc? I really do want to understand how you view this.

duh

I believe Remedy did respond more than adequately to your post, but since you feel more is required I will give it a try.

You equate the killing of an adult with the killing of a fetus? You equate the evoked terror, termination of a character, a personality, a creature with awareness of its mortality and the suffering and end it is to endure with the killing of a tabula rasa, unaware of its own suffering or even existence?

This is an argument for legalizing infanticide. Infants have not developed any character, they are essentially amoral beings, and to some extent they are not fully self-conscious, in that they do not yet have a well developed self image separate from their mother. This off course does not mean they are not conscious, which they surely are, as science and premature births have proven, third trimester fetuses are also conscious and experience pain. Parts of your argument can also apply to the legalization of the killing of the unconscious. Unconscious adults are not self aware, they are not moral beings while unconscious, they exhibit no character, they do not experience pain and they are completely unaware of their future whether positive or negative. Using your argument, should it not be legal to kill an unconscious person, who has a chance of regaining consciousness, simply beacuse they are at the moment unconscious? I think, not. Regarding the tabula rosa idea, it has been largely discredited by modern psychology. Much of who we are personality wise is determined by genetics. Yes we still make choices and are influenced by our environment, but a significant part of who a zygote will become is determined by its unigue genetics, which consequently have potential to add something very unique to society.

You value a creature who's innocence is a result lack of will, lack of ability to know, choose, or act, over an an adult who is somehow considered less valuable because its fallible experience and understanding has led it, invariably, to make some bad decisions and thus drop into the less valuable, defiled category of the sub-innocent?

I don't believe Remedy ever said any such thing. Why shouldn't a baby have the same right to make decisions and enjoy life, as an adult does? A murdered adult, has at least had the opportunity to enjoy life up until the point of the murder, whereas the aborted baby has not even been allowed to breathe his or her first breath. Why is it that we mourn more for the death of a child than we do for the death of an elderly person? It is simply beacuse the elderly person has had a chance to experience life, while the child hasn't. The same applies even more so to aborted babies.

You set up a value system whereby any human fetus is of greater value than than all adults because of relative innocence. Such a system would lead to situations where a mother would be sacrificed for the benefit of the more innocent fetus. It would mean the tragedy and terror of a vast worldwide deadly plague--worse than any the world has known--is less than the tragedy of the widespread spontaneous abortions that women who wish to get pregnant have always experienced--often without even knowing. It would mandate enormous resources to stopping the "scourge" of the spontaneous abortion.

Here you make a good point, but it does not forward your case. It is true from the pro-life perspective, that spontaneous abortions are a tragedy, and many women who experience them would agree they are tragic and traumatic. Should we spend milions of dollars, if not billions, trying to end miscarriages. Yes of course and we are already doing so with premature C-sections and operations on fetuses in the womb. But this has nothing to do with aborion, which is a decision to unnaturally end a fetus's life, making it a preventable death,simply by making the correct choice. This is obviously, the same distinction between a plague we are unable to stop and the choice of the Nazi's to kill Jews and others.

Such a system would lead to situations where a mother would be sacrificed for the benefit of the more innocent fetus.

This sentence deserves special attention. Parents often risk their life for their children, and sometimes voluntarily give up their own life to save a child. To some this seems unnatural, but other call it unselfish love.

Elective abortion is appalling. Perhaps it should be illegal. But it is sick to compare it to the Nazi holocaust.

I agree elective abortion is appalling. It should be made illegal. If we can agree, that 3rd trimester abortions are essentially wrong and equivalent to murdering an infant, then abortion since Roe vs Wade is comparable to the Holocaust. If only 5% of all abortions are in the 3rd trimester, then there have been 2.25 million 3rd trimester abortions in the US since Roe vs Wade. This is probably a fraction of the worldwide number of 3rd trimester abortions during the same period. Sadly, abortion is comparable to the Holocaust.

Just keep the reach of your bloody ideology away from my wife in case she should have a complicated pregnancy or delivery. I don't want your cult groupies crying for the sacrifice of, or increased risk to, my wife for the sake of the fetus. My wife means MORE to me than our unborn child.

I'll avoid the temptation to name call and simply say this. In this day and age, the chance of any woman, having a life threatening pregnancy is miniscule, with the exception of a tubal pregnancy, in which case the baby has no chance of living, without further advances in medicine. So you are willing to look the other way while millions of babies are murdered mostly for convenience, simply to keep open the abortion option in the highly unlikely case that your wife happens to have a life threatening pregnancy, where an abortion is the only way to spare her life. Since you like hypotheticals so much, here's one. Your wife has an incurable liver disease, and the only way to save her is a liver transplant. She is far down on the waiting list, so she decides to get pregnant so she can bear a child that will be a liver donor to her. Is it moral? Surely her life is more valuable than the baby's, at least in your reasoning.

12 weeks from conception is the age range of most surgical abortions beavus. These babies feel pain more intensly than toddlers or adults. Are you fine with the fact that since 1973, 42 million reported surgical abortions have occured in the US alone (1 BILLION plus globally since 1973)

THIS IS OLD NEWS..LIKE ABOUT 10 YEARS OLD.

they DO NOT have more value—only equal value.

My apologies. I deliberately assumed that relative value had to do with innocence. Others have used such reasoning to justify the death penalty, or killing in self defense. I assumed you were of the same belief.

So to you, all humans have equal value. I presume you oppose the death penalty. How do you then settle the predicament of 'for-the-life-of-the-mother' situations?

I readily admit that some people mean more to me than others. My kids mean more to me than other kids. My wife more than other women. My life more than other mens'. Again, my wife means more to me than our unborn child.

That is called NATURE beavus (as long as they are not caused by the abortifacient effects of many forms of chemical birth control—i.e. the pill) and we don’t have a problem with God’s design of nature. Haven’t you heard beavus, miscarriage and elective abortion are two completely different things; don’t try to cloud the issue.

So you are not concerned about people who die in plagues or natural disasters? You would not do anything to stop that? Heart attacks, cancer, infections, earthquakes--these are all natural. You oppose any effort to fight them?

I thought the issue was about the value of human life, not just about how people treat each other. Apparently a fetus only has value if another person is making efforts to harm it.

Lastly, you say: “Maybe you will tell me in your own words, if you have any.”

I have limited time to sift through a mountain of links to find the specific answers you have to my questions. Perhaps you'll convince me by your personal responses that it is worth the time.

In context with everything else you have written, could you please clarify for me your position on Roe & Doe

I do not follow the logic of the RvW argument. Not only do I not see how a right to privacy makes abortion a universal right, I do not see how the USC gaurantees a right to privacy (only limitations on search & siezure). Furthermore, I don't see how the USC leads to any trimester cut-offs. In short, I'm either very stupid, or RvW is very bad law.

Outstanding job on your # 50!

Please visit my site: CHRISTIAN PATRIOTS FOR LIFE , and let me know what you think.

One way for conservatives to deal with this is not get defensive when the liberals or communist/socialist call then Nazi. Education in this country has focused far more on Hitler's evil deeds while ignoring the horrors of Stalin.

Conservatives themselves allow the leftists to back them down with such idiocy.

This is for me like watching SNL skit hearing a German socialist call President Bush Nazi like. The communist/socialist/liberals should be laughed at when they think the worst thing they can call someone on the "RIGHT" Hitler/like or Nazi/like.

Think about it liberals in this country never refer to anyone, Stalin/like or communist, but to call them communist, raises the hair on the back of their neck, and they scream McCarthyism.

The truth for liberals is not the issue, they are liars, always have been and always will be. The issue is conservatives not being offended with insanity and have the backbone to call liberals what they are, communist no matter how loud they scream McCarthyism.

Thanks for the link to your website. I agree with your views on the need for prolife curriculum in Christian schools. I would add, that churches (including Sunday Schools) should be preaching prolife arguments. Too many churches are afraid of the IRS and are thus silent about the evils of abortion. Keep up the good work.

beavus, I will say at this point that I would like to correspond with you as a friend.

Your last paragraph speaks volumes: I know that you are not stupid at all. I know and you know that Roe & Doe are “VERY BAD LAWS” You and I have a tremendous amount in common in the context of this paragraph. This is a monumentally complex situation that our world has put itself into, and requires much time to start to fully appreciate it’s magnitude. (many years for me—and I still pull my hair out!)

As a Christian, I am called to care about all of God’s children (EVERYONE), so regarding your “I thought the issue was about the value of human life, not just about how people treat each other. Apparently a fetus only has value if another person is making efforts to harm it.” I will answer thus: God creates—parents pro-create. God gives us everything (Most importantly our immortal souls) He makes us in His image and likeness (with intellect and will) we are each a Masterpiece in the eyes of our Creator, so much so that A pastor once remarked that Heaven is so enthralled with each of us, God’s unique masterpieces, that angels walk before us crying “Behold, a child of God!” I believe this includes U.S. citizens waiting to be born!

The reason that I am a “pro-lifer” and tend to focus on the fetus (Latin for “Little Child”) Is that they are the most in need of assistance. They are not “more important” than toddlers or anyone else; HOWEVER, they are the only people being systematically butchered by a global killing machine that is getting bigger on a daily basis (truly a cancer). If we don’t destroy it, it will destroy us—all of us, born and unborn when we get in it’s way, or are not to it’s liking. EXACTLY like Adolph Hitler. "They came for the Jews but I didn’t say anything because I wasn’t a Jew. They came for the Gypsies but I didn’t say anything because I wasn’t a Gypsy. They came for the homosexuals but I didn’t say anything because I wasn’t a homosexual. They came for the mentally retarded but I didn’t say anything because I wasn’t mentally retarded. Finally they came for me and no one said anything because no one was left to speak." I don’t want to have to say the same thing about myself with regards to today's culture of death as that Lutheran pastor said about the Nazis.

Now that you know me a tiny bit, perhaps my website could prove somewhat helpful (also you can communicate with me if you would like)

Your friend

Very nice responses. Thank you. I would not, if I were you, defend Remedy who appears to be rude prepubescent with the understanding of a ground squirrel. He did not respond to my points. You did.

I would hope that your value for the fetus is not a mere product of consciousness or response to pain. Not unless you are a vegetarian. Humans are different from other animals in many ways, but in those two regards, they are the same.

This is an argument for legalizing infanticide...legalization of the killing of the unconscious.

My point was simple. The murder of an adult human is worse than the murder of a fetus. Perhaps this could, with a few additional assumptions, be construed to mean that an adult with no hope of future consciousness has less value than a conscious adult. In fact, this latter argument appears to be a societal norm. 'Pulling-the-plug' is often legal. My points did not stop at the primitive animal traits of consciousness or response to pain. I would not degrade humans by reducing them to the level of a swamp rat. My points did have to do with those qualities that cause me to value another creature as human--not to ignore those traits that make rights relevant. A creature with the ability to make judgements and act upon them is directly relevent to rights. A creature with the knowledge of its own existence can suffer with the anticipation of ending its existence--a suffering that perhaps no other animal can grasp. And a personality and history of choices allows me a personal valuation for another human.

All of these things a fetus never had. It has yet to define a character. It is not worthless. It is not okay to destroy them. However, they cannot be equated with a living adult that brings with him his whole character-defining history and the awareness of his mortality.

You may consider me tasteless for ranking the relative tragedy of elective abortion and adult murder, but those who *equate* the two are engageing in the same unpalatable practice.

Unconscious adults are not self aware, they are not moral beings while unconscious, they exhibit no character, they do not experience pain and they are completely unaware of their future whether positive or negative.

Of course a person's history of choices, his waking desire to remain alive and agreement to not violate other's rights do not go away because of any temporary sleep state.

Regarding the tabula rosa idea, it has been largely discredited by modern psychology. Much of who we are personality wise is determined by genetics. Yes we still make choices and are influenced by our environment, but a significant part of who a zygote will become is determined by its unigue genetics, which consequently have potential to add something very unique to society.

Tabula rasa has not been discredited. Furthermore, DNA molecules do not have personality. The result of mental development and capacities are *affected* by genetics, not implanted by them.

This is obviously, the same distinction between a plague we are unable to stop

Most spontaneous abortions, particularly of embryos, go unnoticed. You say we are unable to stop this? Show me how we have even tried. Look at all the money spent on cancer and HIV research. Aside perhaps from fertility treatments in the developed world (the motive for which is not to save lives, merely to induce pregnancy), I don't know of any ongoing reseach to stop the death of the hundreds of millions of embryos each year. No one is trying despite it being one of the leading causes of human death. I assume that is because no one cares.

Parents often risk their life for their children, and sometimes voluntarily give up their own life to save a child. To some this seems unnatural, but other call it unselfish love.

The LAW is not about people making these decisions for themselves. The law would force this decision on the unwilling. It would *require* the mother rather than the fetus die in those cases where a choice is available.

If we can agree, that 3rd trimester abortions are essentially wrong and equivalent to murdering an infant, then abortion since Roe vs Wade is comparable to the Holocaust.

We cannot agree. It denigrates not only the infinitely greater suffering of the holocaust but also all those qualities that distinguish humans from other creatures.

Your wife has an incurable liver disease...so she decides to get pregnant so she can bear a child that will be a liver donor to her. Is it moral? Surely her life is more valuable than the baby's, at least in your reasoning.

You are right about the small frequency of life-of-the-mother situations in the developed world. But hypotheticals, that are possible, are extremely important in understanding an idea.

Your hypothetical goes beyond my point. Yes, my wife means more to me. It is a worse tragedy for my wife to die than for her newborn to die. Now, you ask if I would *intentionally create* a lesser tragedy to alleviate a greater one. The act of creating a tragedy adds to the tragedy itself. The combination of the two would create a personally paralizing situation for me. However, I would not stand in the way of my wife choosing to save her own life.

12 weeks from conception is the age range of most surgical abortions beavus. These babies feel pain more intensly than toddlers or adults.

You have been misled. The subjective perception of pain requires communication by the perceiver. Even adults able to communicate their perceptions do not necessarily show a correlation between physical movements in response to pain and their own subjective rating. In short, whoever told you they could make such a comparison was deceiving you.

Even more important, however, is the *suffering* associated with painful stimuli. All vertebrates respond to pain. Are you suggesting that inducing pain in all vertebrates be made illegal, or that it should be legal to kill fetuses provided it causes no pain?

The problem with this argument is that it sadly ignores those qualities that make humans unique from other creatures. You stipulate a higher appreciation for humans, but only in the context of their similarities with other animals. But it is those uniquely human qualities that makes human suffering exceed that of other animals.

Are you fine with the fact that since 1973, 42 million reported surgical abortions have occured in the US alone (1 BILLION plus globally since 1973)

No. But it is a travesty to diminish the suffering of the holocaust by equating them.

"Road to Serfdom" Bump