Posted on 04/04/2005 2:37:41 AM PDT by Lindykim
In "Mere Christianity," CS Lewis described how he came to believe in the God of the Bible by virtue of reason. Over a period of years, Lewis examined evidence for God and concluded that it simply made sense to believe in His existence. Thus it was neither emotion nor superstition that led him to God, but reason and logic. In other words, his faith in God was arrived at by virtue of how much sense it all made to him. Christianity answered all of his questions, such as why we're here, our purpose in life, what's wrong with this world, and where we go after we leave this life.
As he looked back upon his former 'unbelief,' he realized that it had been the result of pride, emotions, and imagination, and that it had nothing to do with reason and logic after all. He concluded that: "The battle is between faith and reason on one side and emotion and imagination on the other."
It's precisely these things: virulent hatred of God and Judao-Christianity, pride (towering self-conceit), out-of-control emotions, imagination (wishful thinking), and the seductive allure of a particular 'idea' that are the common denominators running beneath and through America's Left. As a force united, they birthed an unholy army of mankind-hating demoniacs armed with 'will to power' who have unleashed a Hellish maelstrom of madness, hatred, and destruction upon America.
Out of this seething pustule of poison emerged a two-headed hydra: a mankind despising coalition of Mengeles-type 'gods' who call themselves secular human bio-ethicists and animal rights activists.These haters of mankind envision a utopianist 'garden of eden' world that doesn't include most of 'us,' the ones they refer to so disparagingly as 'nonpersons."
These self ordained human 'gods' are adherents to Nietzsche's blood soaked nightmarish philosophy wherein he had declared...(quote)"God (is) dead......How shall we, the murderers of all murderers comfort ourselves? Must not we ourselves become gods to seem worthy of it?....the heroic individualist is no longer bound to a traditional 'slave morality," but is creating his own rules." (end quote)
What was it that led to Nietzsche's triumphant declaration? It was a provocatively seductive 'idea.' That idea was Darwin's theory of evolution, which became the depraved growth medium from which grew a new and militant atheism that devalued all values and degraded mankind to being nothing more than an accidental collision between nonintelligence-bearing matter. Thus mankind became, in the minds of madmen, something lower and baser than beasts. No longer must these 'beasts' be seen as having any intrinsic worth.
Human worth or lack of it, could now be determined by mankind's new slavemaster 'human gods." And because Darwin's "idea" had given them the green light to rid the human species of 'useless eaters' and other 'undesirables,' militant atheists embarked upon a bloodbath unlike anything ever before witnessed in this world. In their power-crazed bloodlust they have thus far exterminated over one hundred million human beings. And they are not done yet.
The ability to possess this aberrant power was what Nietzsche referred to when he jubilantly declared himself to be free from God's 'slave morality, which was his way of saying "sanctity of life," and God's other moral laws. Nietzsche himself predicted the outcome of his atheism on the world: (quote) "I am not a man, I am dynamite.....my truth is fearful; it is in the past we called lies the truth. The concept of politics is completely taken up in a war of the spirits, all the structures of power are blown up...for they are based on the lie. There will be wars of a kind that have never happened on the earth." (end quote)
Nietzsche was proclaiming that with God dead, not only did human life no longer have meaning, purpose, or value but neither did the Christian-Judao principles on which Western civilization had been built Christian-Judao moral principles and God's laws are the things he called 'lies.' Hence his 'devaluation of all values' declaration, which means in context, that all distinctions between right and wrong and justice and injustice are dead. No longer does there exist any objective standards. All that exists is the 'will to power" ruthlessly wielded by selfworshipping megalomaniacs who see themselves as being the world's 'philosopher kings" and 'gods" while simultaneously, the rest of mankind becomes reduced to being putty in the hands of these sadistic monsters.
This brings us to America's secular human bio-ethicists and animal rights activists who believe they are genetically superior to the rest of us. Thus, to their arrogant minds, it's only fitting that they have the power to determine who is a 'person' and who is not. This determination is made according to their own 'moral laws,' which are as changeable as their feelings.
One thing both secular human bio-ethicists and their animal rights cohorts are in agreement on is that simply by being a member of the human species, the human animal is not automatically accorded intrinsic worth. Hence it makes a twisted sort of sense that they are debating the merits of conferring 'personhood' on animals, whom they in their demented minds, refer to as 'nonhuman' persons.
Mankind's new 'gods' have also agreed to reject 'person' status for the unborn, newborns, people with dementia, the severely brain damaged, and any who do not measure up to their 'moral' standards. They believe the human creature must earn its moral and legal rights by displaying certain cognitive capacities.
Yet another proposal being discussed is whether to use cognitively disabled people as a source for organ harvesting. The terminology used in referrence to the mentally impaired was "natural resource." But why stop with organs? If these 'nonpersons" can be viewed as 'natural resources" for the harvesting of organs, then why not for eyes, blood, and skin as well? If they are no longer human and not deserving of life, then why not strip their bodies of parts just as junker cars are stripped of theirs ?
John Harris, the Sir David Alliance professor of bioethics at the University of Manchester, England, stated: "it is necessary to establish criteria for personhood so as to identify those sorts of individuals who have the highest moral value......(it should be a) life of such quality as to bring individuals into the same moral categories as ourselves.....exploration of who is a person must include animals.... " Tom L. Beauchamp, co-author of one of the most influential bioethics textbooks, "Principles Of Biomedical Ethics," declared: "it is safe to assume that a creature is a moral person if....(1) it is capable of making moral judgements about rightness and wrongness of actions, (2) it has motives that can be judged morally."
Bear in mind that these conceited 'gods' are speaking of us as 'creatures' and 'its' and that the moral values they refer to are of their own devising. It's obvious that they're speaking of creating a 'superior race.' Those of us not deemed 'moral' will either be humanely starved, used as 'parts' factories, or perhaps we will serve as slaves in their much fantasized about paradise?
From "Roots Of Human Resistance To Animal Rights: Psychological And Conceptual Blocks," Steven J. Bartlett, 2002, we have this exalted 'wisdom:' "Throughout.....history, nonhuman animals have had no rights. Scholars have distinguished two....reasons for this.....both are homocentric. One has a theological basis, the other is a secular expression of species pride." Mankind's 'sin,' according to these insane 'gods' is homocentrism, born out of 'specieism' and of belief in that despotic anthropological God of the Bible who placed the human species above all other species.
The 'sin' of homocentrism is defined as "the exhaltation of the human species by directing attention to uniquely human characteristics." Homocentric 'nonpersons' are guilty of committing "human-level narcissism,' 'genetic selfishness,' and 'conceptual pathology' as well as being 'parasites' in relation to the world's ecosystems. How hateful, unfair, and discriminatory is that, I ask you? We need to repent and atone for our sins by allowing our 'betters' to humanely euthanize us out of existence right away!
Among legal luminaries of the 'nonhuman animal persons' equality movement are civil rights attorney Alan Dershowitz and Constitutional law attorney, Lawrence Tribe, the guy who representeded Gore against Bush in the 2000 election. Tribe believes that there should be no "insistent reference to human interests," at the expense of "plant and animal life and things of beauty." We need "biological modesty on the part of man to acknowledge that his species has no intrinsically superior value..."
Dershowitz, "Animal rights or animal legal courses.....(are) being taught.....in something like 26 US law schools, and more being added every year......we are also seeing chapters of animal rights law in.....(some)state bar associations.....as well as......within the American Bar Association..." (end quote)
Just as with Nietzsche, all of these atheist secular human 'gods' and 'philosopher kings' ground their mankind-hating reasoning in Darwinian theory. To them, the difference between species is not one of distinct categories, but simply one of degree. And there is absolutely nothing in this degree of difference that justifies the human species as having dominion over the other species, or over the earth. In other words: "How dare homocentric 'nonintelligence-bearing matter" expect to have a right to life?!?" Your life is no longer sacred. Your God is "dead" and your 'new gods' do not give you an automatic right to life.
In the Hastings Center Report, 1993, Daniel Callahan, one of the founding fathers of bioethics, made it ominously clear whose purpose bioethicists serve "...the final factor of great importance in bioethics success was the emergence, ideologically, of a form of bioethics that dovetails nicely with the reigning political liberalism of the educated classes in America." (end quote)
Just as the poison of socialism has managed to thoroughly infect America from top-to-bottom, so too have these secular human Mengeles infested America. They've become among society's most influential members. They sit on federal and state public policy commissions; they author health codes; condition the minds of America's next generation of doctors, lawyers, business leaders, and govenment policy makers; they are HMO consultants;they are employed as directors of nursing home and hospital ethics committees where they decide matters such as when to withhold treatment from premature babies, stroke patients, etc. They are called upon to serve as expert witnesses; create the 'do's and don'ts' of organ procurement, and serve as overseers of medical experimentation on human beings.
Pinnelas County, where Terri Shiavo was "humanely starved' has a nest of these vipers.
(quote) "......the essential vice, the utmost evil, is Pride....it was through Pride that the devil became the devil: Pride leads to every other vice; it is the complete anti-God state of mind." (end quote) ~~~~CS Lewis, "Mere Christianity"
Pride is a vice that afflicts everyone to some degree or another. But in some people, pride is of such towering proportions that it manifests itself in diabolical ways. And when someone's overblown conceit of himself and his own ideas leads him to view his fellow man as though he were nothing but, "its, creatures, nonpersons, and natural resources," then pride has demented his mind and become diabolical. Evil has taken total possession of his mind and soul and he has become a danger to us all.
So far they are treading lightly for fear of discovery. Despite their dementia and the state of denial they wrap themselves in, they do know how wicked their intentions towards us are which is why they are doing their utmost to operate under the radar. Therefore, let us use the power of the internet to expose them and their evil schemes to the light of day. Inform everyone in your family and all who are your friends. Spread the word far and wide. Truth and exposure to them is as Black Flag is to filthy roaches.
Aleksandr Solszhenitsyn said of their kind: "They flee from Christ like devils from the sign of the cross."
Sources: 1..Washington Area Secular Humanists (WASH)
2..Common Sense Americanism.....The Humanist Manifesto II
3..Michigan State Univ. College of Law: Animal Legal and Historical Web Center, "Roots of Human Resistance To Animal Rights: Psychological and Conceptual Blocks"
4..Association of American Medical Colleges Reporter: "Personhood' Redefined: Animal Rights Strategy Gets At The Essence"
5..Hastings Center Report
Copyright 2005 The Sierra Times Permission to reprint/republish granted, as long as you include the name of our site, the author, and our URL. www.SierraTimes.com All Sierra Times news reports, and all editorials are © 2003 SierraTimes.com (unless otherwise noted) SierraTimes.com™ A Subsidiary of J.J. Johnson Enterprises, Inc. http://www.sierratimes.com/05/04/03/209_240_205_63_97396.htm
That was a selective response. You said:
"The slaughter was left to Nietzsches adherents."
What slaughter do you mean?
> If you truly do not think God exists what is the point of worrying about those who do?
If you truly do think God exists what is the point of worrying about those who don't?
"Conditioned minds" are everywhere. They actually believe there is a moral high ground that exists between man having the power to determine if another person is a 'nonperson deserving of death' and mankind not having that power. Where is a middle ground that isn't based in conveniance and a desire to no no longer be held morally responsible for another human being?
Atheism is the highest form of arrogance.
If they don't want to believe in a higher being, fine. But beyond that, why should atheists push their beliefs on anyone else.
Re: "If you truly do think God exists what is the point of worrying about those who don't?"
Am I my brother's keeper?
Find the story that this line is taken from and you will find your answer.
snip...why should atheists push their beliefs on anyone else.
For the militant ones, it's all-consuming selflove. Pride that says:
"I'm better than you.....I'm the smartest, most brilliant person in the whole world"
ttt
Because they can't stand being contradicted; it rubs against their delusion of being their own highest moral authority. They'd rather not be reminded of the One they're rebelling against.
If atheists are their own highest moral authority, how do you decide who is morally correct between two good Christians who believe in the opposite thing in a moral dilemma?
I reckon that leaves you out, Tom!
He may have a point. I have house plants I'd sooner run into a burning building to save than Lawrence Tribe.
You decide on the basis of Christian principles, which derive from the Bible.
That's a great book. I haven't read it in a while, but I encouraged one of my old managers to read it. He was an atheist and thought I was really weird, but after he read Mere Christianity and using reason and logic, he became a believer.
After that I helped him translate Mere Christianity into Korean. Of course I don't know Korean and he mentions that in the book, but I was able to help him with some of the concepts. And now more folks have the opportunity to read Mere Christianity, which I highly recommend to anyone looking into the truth.
That question is a non-sequitor. The notion that atheists consider themselves to be the highest moral authority does not speak to the situation of two Christians (by definition non-atheists) struggling with a moral dilemma. Two atheists, if confronted with that same moral dilemma, have no recourse except that one of them must prevail. Since they acknowledge no higher moral authority, then there appears to be no intellectual structure to reach a solution to their dilemma. Therefore, they will likely try to resolve the conflict through coercive means.
The Christians, on the other hand, both sharing a sense of a higher moral authority will both attempt to frame their dilemma in terms of that morality. That framework is more conducive to finding a resolution and that resolution is less likely to include coercion.
You still haven't answered my question. The late Pope believed that contraception was evil, yet many great Protestant leaders do not.
Who is right?
But there are many Christians who disagree on it's interpretation.
The catholic church accepts evolution, and yet many other Christians do not. Who is right?
"In their power-crazed bloodlust they have thus far exterminated over one hundred million human beings. And they are not done yet." Actually, the number is so much higher and growing my multiple millions each year counting the alive sensing and alive not yet sensing unborn human beings.
Who are the "they"?
Those who systematically dehumanize the unborn, the handicapped, the elderly, the retarded. Want to join their club?... All you need do is dehumanize one group of humans or another and get really p!ssy about it ... 'they' will welcome you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.