'Expelled' goes easy on Darwin-Nazi link

WorldNetDaily ^ | April 24, 2008 | Jack Cashill

[RussP]

Darwin critics know Ernst Haeckel as the German philosopher whose faked embryo drawings helped generations of clueless students accept Darwinism – "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" and all that.

But there is still another problem with Haeckel, a darker one than mere fraud. Critics of the Ben Stein film, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," apparently do not know this.

If they had, they would not have savaged Stein for daring to connect Adolf Hitler to Charles Darwin. In Scientific American, for instance, editor John Rennie describes this connection as "heavy-handed." In Reuters, Frank Scheck calls it "truly offensive."

In reality, it is neither. If anything, Stein and the makers of "Expelled" understate this historically irrefutable link, and the key to understanding it is Haeckel.

[allmendream]

I don't think the people who came up with these types of posters for propaganda were motivated by Evolution, just racism and the need for propaganda for the war effort. The two are not synonymous, in fact any real understanding of Evolution is as anathema to racism as any real understanding of Christianity is. However both were used as a justification for racism. Moreover I am sure we can find apelike/inhuman depictions of the “other” the “enemy” in war propaganda put out long before Darwin published.

I am still looking for a direct quote, either written or spoken, directly linking Jew hatred with “evolutionary” rhetoric. I have supplied several (and can supply many more) that link Nazi's “understanding” of Christianity to Jew hatred. It seems the same direct link cannot be made.

A single unequivocal example of Evolutionary thought spoken or published by a Nazi leader to inflame Jew hatred among Nazi's? Anyone? A single example?

[allmendream]

The “Designer” posited by the “Intelligent Design” philosophy is a rank incompetent, not “intelligent” enough to design a system that was self-sufficient, the “designer” has to intercede to keep things running according to plan.

[Coyoteman]

But I’m not pretending anything - “Intelligent Design” says that God is Intelligent (which He is) and that God is the Designer. I’m not giving credit or credence to a term that leaves Him out of the equation.

I see you didn't get the memo.

Intelligent design is pretending that it is science, and that the designer could be space aliens or whatever. IDers are deliberately not saying that their "designer" is actually the fundamentalist interpretation of the Christian deity, even though it is clear that is what they really believe.

This dodge is necessary to get ID into schools to replace creation "science" which was removed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Edwards decision in the late 1980s.

So, you are really not supposed to admit that "God is Intelligent and that God is the Designer" because you blow the cover for those still trying to pretend that ID is science.

[Ken H]

Sorry, but if the framers were still here they could tell you that church and state were intended to be united and not divided.

James Madison:

Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history.

James Madison, Detached Memoranda ca. 1817
W. & M. Q., 3d ser., 3:554--60 1946

--http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions64.html

[DeLaVerdad]

LOL on the “memo!”

Yes, that’s actually one of the things I did not agree with in the movie. To me “ID” is a shroud to cover “creationism” or “God as creator” ... and even though I am not “supposed to admit” that God is the IntelligentDesigner I am taking a stand against the term “ID” and calling myself a “Creationist” who believes that The Intelligent Designer, God, created the universe and all that that entails. I am also supporting the movie and much of what was exposed including the connection between Darwan-Natzis. I don’t really care what the Supreme Court decided - it doesn’t mean it’s right. God has supremacy over the Supreme Court ...

[DeLaVerdad]

Our self-sufficient Designer always has to “intercede” to fix our messes. And, yes, He does keep things running according to his plan.

[DeLaVerdad]

Separation “between,” not separation “of” or “from” ...

[allmendream]

Does HE have to move the planets about their orbits or was the system of Gravity he put in place sufficient?

Does HE have to make the stars using mystical means, or is gravity and nuclear fusion sufficient?

Does HE have to hold the galaxies together? Is the “Dark Matter” postulated by Astronomers actually the mystical power of god and unexplainable by physical means?

Does HE have to change the DNA of an animal “by hand” or is the system HE put in place of natural selection of genetic variation sufficient to explain, say, the 2% genetic difference and 6% genomic difference between humans and chimps?

[DeLaVerdad]

Refer to Genesis, Job, and all applicable words in a Strong’s Concordance with a Hebrew-Greek Lexicon for more information on “He” - and then get back to me.

[Ken H]

You appear to be in dire need of a remedial course in the understanding of plain English.

[RussP]

“Can you provide a single Public quote of a Nazi leader using Evolutionary rhetoric to inflame Jew hatred?”

Unless you are completely clueless (and, frankly, I’m starting to wonder) you should know that political leaders do not explicitly cite scientific references or jargon. But many speeches of Hitler obviously talked about the “racial superiority” of the Germans and how it must be maintained and actively promoted. If that’s not as close to “evolutionary rhetoric” as a political leader could ever be expected to get, I don’t know what is.

Your refusal to admit that the Nazis were motivated in part by Darwinism and used it to rationalize their bigotry is quite telling. You call that “guilt by association,” but it happens to be the truth. Too darn bad if the truth bothers you.

[allmendream]

So you cannot provide a direct quote where a Nazi leader extorted the masses to hate Jews using Evolutionary rhetoric. Throwing in the towel on actual evidence you fall back on what the Nazi leaders secretly might have believed in their hearts rather than the actual historic record of what they said to their followers to whip up Jew hatred.

If Guilt by Association is valid, then is Christianity debased by the following comments of Hitler?

“My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was his fight against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice. And as a man I have the duty to see to it that human society does not suffer the same catastrophic collapse as did the civilization of the ancient world some two thousand years ago — a civilization which was driven to its ruin through this same Jewish people.” Adolf Hitler

Wow, how easy to find a direct quote where Hitler used Christianity as a justification to hate Jews. Where oh where is the analog's quote where he uses talk of evolution to whip up hatred of Jews?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

[rbmillerjr]

“IDers are deliberately not saying that their “designer” is actually the fundamentalist interpretation of the Christian deity, even though it is clear that is what they really believe.”

Very presumptious. Can you prove this black helo conspiracy?

Oh, you can’t prove that “truth”, but you still believe it to exist...Interesting.

[DeLaVerdad]

As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other.

James Madison, Federalist No. 10, November 23, 1787

[RussP]

You have a serious problem with your reading comprehension. I refuse to waste my time repeating myself 100 times with the hope that you will finally get the point. I’ll just say it one more time: political leaders do not cite scientific references in their speeches. They do cynically spout religious rhetoric quite regularly, however.

You quote Hitler in praise of Christianity, but you conveniently omit his quotes that vehemently denying Christianity. Now, if someone alternately praises and denies Christianity, do you really consider such a person to be a Christian? Think about it for a minute. It won’t hurt, I promise.

What I’m starting to realize is that I am wasting my valuable time with people like you (and I’ll bet my time is substantially more valuable than yours). I’m seriously thinking about just canceling my FR account so I can break this time-wasting habit.

[allmendream]

It is you who have a problem with logic.

If one is going to make a case for what beliefs motivated the Nazis to kill Jews then the PRIVATE and UNPUBLISHED thoughts of Hitler are irrelevant. What is relevant is what Nazi leaders said to the Nazi masses in order to motivate them to hate and kill Jews.

So you admit that there was no “scientific references” in Hitler’s speeches, but there was “religious rhetoric”. How then could the Nazi’s be motivated to Jew hatred by a Scientific theory that their leaders never espoused to them?

Hitlers quotes about the “Christian” justification for hating and killing Jews were made in public. The ‘vehement denials’ were all supposedly made in private and only published after the Holocaust. Hardly a justification for the Holocaust if nobody but Hitler and his secretary knew about it is it? Think about it for a second, no promises that it might not hurt.

And no, Hitler was no more a Christian than any other who claimed the name yet conducted pogroms against the Jews. Oops, there is that word again, “pogrom”. That is the historic practice of ostensibly Christian Europeans killing Jews. Lots of examples of it both before and after Darwin published his theory, yet somehow nobody gets blamed for the earlier ones, and Darwin is supposed to accept the blame for all the ones that came after.

Best of luck. You will not be missed.

[RussP]

You didn’t read the article, did you? Read the article.

On second thought, don’t waste your time. You won’t get it anyway.

Hitler talked about the master race constantly. Those weren’t “PRIVATE, and UNPUBLISHED thoughts,” genius.

See how difficult it is for me to quit wasting my time with people like you?

[allmendream]

Racism is not synonymous with the theory of Evolution.

I am not making the argument that Nazi's were not racist, just that they were more motivated (as borne out by the words of their leaders spoken to them contemporaneously) by conspiracy theories, anti-Capitalism, racism, and Jews being “Christ killers” than motivated by a Scientific theory that, as you admit, was not the rallying cry they heard as to why they should hate Jews.

And it was Hitlers anti-Christian quotes that are all taken from one suspect source that were private and unpublished (until well after the Holocaust), as you admit, I never claimed his racist views were kept private and unpublished (Mien Kamph is full of them). In public and to his other contemporaries Hitler justified the Holocaust as avenging the “Blood upon the Cross”.

You seem incapable of either making or following a logical argument.

1)The private and unpublished secret hatred of Christianity that Hitler supposedly had (according to one source)doesn't change the fact that he publicly linked hatred of Jews to his ‘understanding’ of Christianity.

2) People cannot be motivated by something they never hear, and as you admit there was ‘religious rhetoric’ in his speeches not ‘scientific jargon’.

3) What Nazi's heard at their rallies as to why they should hate Jews was all about anti-Capitalism, racism, and theological accusations of blood guilt.

4) Darwin's theory of Evolution through natural selection could have little influence on what made Nazi's hate Jews if their leaders never presented it as a justification for the mass murder of Jews.

5) If someone sometime in the future actually does justify mass murder on the basis of their misunderstanding of Evolutionary theory it will no more discredit the theory than Hitler's justification of mass murder based upon his twisted theology could discredit Christianity.

[Ken H]

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."

--James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments

20 June 1785 Papers 8:298--304

--http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions43.html

[visually_augmented]

Soliton: “It relies solely on the unproven and unsupported claim that “complex things require a designer”.”

To be more accurate, the claim would be that inherently simple things cannot become more complex without some outside influence and information.