Nazism against Catholics?

[T.R.Searle]

Just wondering as I forget this, If you break one or more of the ten commandments is that an automatic ticket to hell?

T.R.Searle

[Scott Smith]

Sending catholic priests to concentration camps doesn't seem very christian to me.

Political priests don't seem very Christian to me. As an atheist, I see nothing wrong with whatever it takes to secularize society short of murder and the Gulag. But anyway, why should the truly pious be interested in monastic wealth and secular power? Separation of Church and State is a Christian idea not normally found in other cultures. And why would German priests be interested in collaboration with Germany's enemies in wartime? Do God's Vicars make treason okay? The were not put into concentration camps because they were Catholics, anymore than the wannabe Reichsbishop Niemöller was in a KL because he was a Lutheran. For Catholics, if the choice is Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia the answer is clear, and that philosophy was recognized by "Hitler's Pope" in Rome. Polish nationalism was inextricably linked to Roman Catholicism but that, again, is a separate issue.

[Caldric]

Did Hitler not use religious saying a lot in his speeches? Such as Devine, By Gods hand, God on our side, etc.

[Karl da Kraut]

Scott Smith wrote:

As an atheist, I see nothing wrong with whatever it takes to secularize society short of murder and the Gulag.

Religious freedom is a basic human right.

You state that religious communities shouldn't "interfer" on a political level at all. We might quarrel over this, but I hope you agree that if a state comitts countless crimes ANYBODY should protest (especialy institutions that claim to uphold moral values).

To call Pius XII. "Hitler's Pope" is a little simplifying, don't you think?

[Karl da Kraut]

Sorry, only the first line of my quoting actionally was a quote. My fault.

[Scott Smith]

As an atheist, I see nothing wrong with whatever it takes to secularize society short of murder and the Gulag.

Religious freedom is a basic human right.

Then I would say that freedom FROM religion is also a basic human right, and religious apparatus intimately wound-up in politics and the machinery of the State is a bad mix, a breeding-ground of zealotry and intolerance. Such conflicts are how the idea of a separation of such spheres originated.

You state that religious communities shouldn't "interfer" on a political level at all. We might quarrel over this, but I hope you agree that if a state comitts countless crimes ANYBODY should protest (especialy institutions that claim to uphold moral values).

Whose moral values? I might not agree that euthanasia, for example, is always a bad thing. And there is a big difference from passive resistance or nonviolent protest (to the extent that such is lawfully possible) to treason and actual adherence to a nation's enemies. To incarcerate mere conscientious objectors like the JW's was, IMHO, shameful; to put the political priest/pastor on ice, however, I'm not so sure about that.

In general, "political crimes," or what Americans might call the "suspension of Habeas Corpus for the duration of the emergency," is a slippery-slope to tyranny.

To call Pius XII. "Hitler's Pope" is a little simplifying, don't you think?

Not my phraseology but the Vatican is so criticized. Some would argue that "collaboration with the Nazis" is just an attempted shakedown of the Church by/for the Holocaust Industry. On the History Channel it was even observed that Pius XII's body was improperly embalmed and actually stank in its sepulcher, an implied poetic justice.

[Karl da Kraut]

Scott Smith wrote:

Then I would say that freedom FROM religion is also a basic human right

I agree that a secular state is a necessity - Germany is - and was - a secular state. I object your understanding of "human rights" though. The fact that you don't like the political party XYZ or the organization ZYX doesn't allow you to repress them because they speak their mind. I also agree that offending laws is normally wrong - but not in the case of Nazi laws. You may approve some sort of "euthanisia", but I guess not the way the Nazis conducted it.

Well, we're getting off-topic.

[Marcus]

Let's get back on topic.

/Marcus

[Scott Smith]

Scott Smith wrote:

Then I would say that freedom FROM religion is also a basic human right

I agree that a secular state is a necessity - Germany is - and was - a secular state. I object your understanding of "human rights" though. The fact that you don't like the political party XYZ or the organization ZYX doesn't allow you to repress them because they speak their mind. I also agree that offending laws is normally wrong - but not in the case of Nazi laws. You may approve some sort of "euthanisia", but I guess not the way the Nazis conducted it.

Well, we're getting off-topic.

Karl, I agree that the ability to nonviolently petition the government for redress of grievances is a basic human right. That is not what I mean by my terminology of the "political-priest." And I am not saying that Nazi Germany did not have political prisoners, i.e., held by the State on account of their presumed antisocial beliefs and not for statutory crimes, which (as I said) is a slippery-slope to tyranny.

The reason that I put so much weight to political religionism is because they employ psychologically-powerful propaganda called the Word of God which is beyond rational proof. Who are they to tell me what to believe? And what is moral? But the government must listen to such prattle because the people have a basic need/want to hear it; it feels good and soothes existential fears common to most self-aware animals called humans. And Fear is very dangerous, IMO. Moral philosophy is a perfect method of social control, an abomination to intellectual diversity. Just give it a little secular power for some bark and bite and you have mental enslavement. In my worldview, theocracy is the worst form of government.

Therefore, I'm inclined to be a little less than sympathetic to some religionists being put into the concentration camp. We are not necessarily talking about harmless nonconformists who won't work or fight. In any case, some were downright treasonous--at least if we are to believe the now-vogue rhetoric of the mythic German Widerstand.

[Karl da Kraut]

I think it'd be better if I retire from this "discussion"...

[Scott Smith]

I think it'd be better if I retire from this "discussion"...

Probably wise for us both.

Best Regards,
Scott