Pages:
Author

Topic: Health and Religion - page 6. (Read 210888 times)

legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
December 04, 2019, 08:04:09 PM

Propaganda?  Did you read the book?  Read the book not what others say about this book.

Hitler would be a socialist, maybe even a communist. He hated what his father did for a living.  He was not a very bright anarchist, a very religious man, and foremost a nationalist; from the get-go....


Calling Hitler a very religious man is oversimplification. Hitler was a pantheist.

Adolf Hitler Was Neither Christian Nor Atheist
https://mosaicmagazine.com/picks/history-ideas/2017/02/adolf-hitler-was-neither-christian-nor-atheist/
Quote
In Hitler’s Religion, Richard Weikart thoroughly examines the evidence of the Nazi leader’s religious beliefs. Gary Scott Smith, calling the book a “fascinating, meticulous study,” summarizes its conclusions:

Hitler repeatedly affirmed the existence of God, but his conception of God differed substantially from the Bible’s. He rejected Christ’s divinity and frequently mocked Christianity. Hitler, Weikart points out, was a baptized, confirmed Catholic raised in Austria, a predominantly Catholic country, and he retained some vestiges of Christianity. Nevertheless, he repeatedly repudiated Christianity (especially privately) as “a Jewish plot to undermine the heroic ideals of the Aryan-dominated Roman Empire.” Hitler denounced Christianity as a poison, outmoded and dying, ridiculed its teachings, and persecuted Protestant and Catholic churches alike during the Third Reich [in cases when they refused to do his bidding]. Nor was Hitler an occultist, [as some have claimed], since he explicitly repudiated key occult convictions and mystical practices.

Weikart argues that Hitler is best understood as a pantheist, one who believes that nature is God and that the cosmos provides principles to guide human conduct. He frequently deified nature, referring to it as eternal and all powerful. . . . While presenting God as the creator and sustainer of the Volk—the German people—Hitler and the Nazis used religious symbols, terms, and passion in their speeches, rallies, and ceremonies to create an alternative faith. Hitler fully expected the Nazi worldview to replace Christianity in Germany and transform its culture and life. Moreover, Nazi propaganda depicted Hitler [himself] as a messianic figure, a savior chosen by God to liberate Germany from the punitive Versailles Treaty and restore its power and place in the world.

Most people do not realize how fortunate humanity was that WWII ended as quickly as it did and that the Nazi ideology was crushed. The ideal timing of the US entry into the war. The fortuitous and and worst recorded winter in modern history and the fact that Nazi foreign intelligence service the Abwehr was led by Wilhelm Canaris actively worked against a Nazi victory were all critical. The tremendous role played by Canaris in ensuring Nazi defeat cannot be understated and to the day is largely shrouded in mystery and not publicly released. Despite that the Nazi were very close to an early victory as the following video demonstrates in stark terms.

Eastern Front of WWII animated: 1941
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu3p7dxrhl8

legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 04, 2019, 07:14:27 PM

What evil is there in stem cell research?  I fail to see any.

You are equivocating fertilizing eggs and then disposing of them with murder.  Murdering a human being and not implanting a fertilized egg is not the same thing, IMHO.

You got carried away with your moral superiority complex.

Stem cell research is far from evil.  It solves many medical conditions.  If you believe in God as I am sure you do, you have to admit that this technology solves many issues that God created.  Inborn blindness and deafness come to mind.

How can you say that finding new cures is evil is beyond me?  Forbidding this technology is evil, IMHO.

We are not talking about rounding up children and killing them.  That is what you are implying.


A fertilized egg is simply the first stage of a new human life. Killing it, allowing it to die, or not preparing for it to live before fertilization, is murder.

Stem cell research from stem cells extracted from bone marrow is totally acceptable. Killing an embryo from day one on out to adulthood is murder, even to get the stem cells and the good they might do.

Stem cell research isn't evil. Killing people is evil, even if it's less than a second from when they were conceived that they are murdered.

Cool

Not really. You just arbitrarily decided it is so.  If I showed you both pig and human fertilized eggs, you would not know the difference.



Here is an article about what is coming down the pipe.  It is not as simple as you (and CoinCube) think.
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/opinion-should-human-animal-chimeras-be-granted-personhood-36664
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 04, 2019, 07:00:27 PM
The nazi model infiltrated our society more than we can think, lot of nazi have been recruted in scientific position after ww2.

The only parallel I see between Nazi Germany and Western democracies is patriotism, fervent nationalism, "Make XXX Great Again", etc.
This does not bode well for humanity.

Most scientists are not nationalists, most support internationalism.

Name one scientist who is a nationalist.

Read "Mein Kampf" before you open your mouth on the "nazi model".  Whatever that means.

Hitler was a German nationalist, first and foremost.


Its much deeper than that, the nationalism is just a media to reel people in, mein kempf is propaganda , the Real ideology is Henry Ford, productivism and profits over human values. No sacrifice is too high to get an industrial one up over other nation etc

After ww2, the nazi went CIA, swarmed to south america, middle east, Afganistan etc to concoct civil wars and coup to promote "industrial développement" by exploiting ressources and people to build their Ford topia global.

Now its to the point most people think being scientist is building the next cellphone Who will make the next top company, originally science is studying things and building axiomatic reasoning.

A person who thinks scientists are building cell phones does not understand what scientists do.

And that is the crux of the problem.  Lack of education.

You are reading too much into Huxley's "Brave New World".  Although, I admit it is a good book.  It does make you think about the society we live in.

Its not from brave new world, even if this story is also about that. Mein kempf is propaganda, the persons who write propaganda know its a lie , a forgery and a fraud. If you read the propaganda and think its what the people who write it think, you dont understand how propaganda works. Even the nationalist leagues were funded by the big industrials, To reel the working class in, but its not the essence of the ideology.

Propaganda?  Did you read the book?  Read the book not what others say about this book.

Hitler would be a socialist, maybe even a communist. He hated what his father did for a living.  He was not a very bright anarchist, a very religious man, and foremost a nationalist; from the get-go.  Failed at anything he tried academically.  His parents died early on in his life, he was uprooted from his bourgeois social standing. It is an autobiography, written between 1923-1925, in the same genre as Trotsky's My Life.

BTW, if Hitler would only listen to his father, study in school and get a government job like the rest of his bourgeois friends, we would not have WWII and atrocities that came with it.

Read both books.

Nationalism, religious or social class supremacy is evil.  The worse form of tribalism there is.  Most wars start because of one of them.

full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
December 04, 2019, 02:11:38 PM
The nazi model infiltrated our society more than we can think, lot of nazi have been recruted in scientific position after ww2.

The only parallel I see between Nazi Germany and Western democracies is patriotism, fervent nationalism, "Make XXX Great Again", etc.
This does not bode well for humanity.

Most scientists are not nationalists, most support internationalism.

Name one scientist who is a nationalist.

Read "Mein Kampf" before you open your mouth on the "nazi model".  Whatever that means.

Hitler was a German nationalist, first and foremost.


Its much deeper than that, the nationalism is just a media to reel people in, mein kempf is propaganda , the Real ideology is Henry Ford, productivism and profits over human values. No sacrifice is too high to get an industrial one up over other nation etc

After ww2, the nazi went CIA, swarmed to south america, middle east, Afganistan etc to concoct civil wars and coup to promote "industrial développement" by exploiting ressources and people to build their Ford topia global.

Now its to the point most people think being scientist is building the next cellphone Who will make the next top company, originally science is studying things and building axiomatic reasoning.

A person who thinks scientists are building cell phones does not understand what scientists do.

And that is the crux of the problem.  Lack of education.

You are reading too much into Huxley's "Brave New World".  Although, I admit it is a good book.  It does make you think about the society we live in.

Its not from brave new world, even if this story is also about that. Mein kempf is propaganda, the persons who write propaganda know its a lie , a forgery and a fraud. If you read the propaganda and think its what the people who write it think, you dont understand how propaganda works. Even the nationalist leagues were funded by the big industrials, To reel the working class in, but its not the essence of the ideology.

legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
December 04, 2019, 01:46:48 PM

What evil is there in stem cell research?  I fail to see any.

You are equivocating fertilizing eggs and then disposing of them with murder.  Murdering a human being and not implanting a fertilized egg is not the same thing, IMHO.

You got carried away with your moral superiority complex.

Stem cell research is far from evil.  It solves many medical conditions.  If you believe in God as I am sure you do, you have to admit that this technology solves many issues that God created.  Inborn blindness and deafness come to mind.

How can you say that finding new cures is evil is beyond me?  Forbidding this technology is evil, IMHO.

We are not talking about rounding up children and killing them.  That is what you are implying.


A fertilized egg is simply the first stage of a new human life. Killing it, allowing it to die, or not preparing for it to live before fertilization, is murder.

Stem cell research from stem cells extracted from bone marrow is totally acceptable. Killing an embryo from day one on out to adulthood is murder, even to get the stem cells and the good they might do.

Stem cell research isn't evil. Killing people is evil, even if it's less than a second from when they were conceived that they are murdered.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 04, 2019, 01:35:09 PM
The nazi model infiltrated our society more than we can think, lot of nazi have been recruted in scientific position after ww2.

The only parallel I see between Nazi Germany and Western democracies is patriotism, fervent nationalism, "Make XXX Great Again", etc.
This does not bode well for humanity.

Most scientists are not nationalists, most support internationalism.

Name one scientist who is a nationalist.

Read "Mein Kampf" before you open your mouth on the "nazi model".  Whatever that means.

Hitler was a German nationalist, first and foremost.


Its much deeper than that, the nationalism is just a media to reel people in, mein kempf is propaganda , the Real ideology is Henry Ford, productivism and profits over human values. No sacrifice is too high to get an industrial one up over other nation etc

After ww2, the nazi went CIA, swarmed to south america, middle east, Afganistan etc to concoct civil wars and coup to promote "industrial développement" by exploiting ressources and people to build their Ford topia global.

Now its to the point most people think being scientist is building the next cellphone Who will make the next top company, originally science is studying things and building axiomatic reasoning.

A person who thinks scientists are building cell phones does not understand what scientists do.

And that is the crux of the problem.  Lack of education.

You are reading too much into Huxley's "Brave New World".  Although, I admit it is a good book.  It does make you think about the society we live in.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 04, 2019, 01:28:45 PM

Oh, ok, I understand your logical error now.  You equate a fertilized egg with a fully grown child.  That is simply not true.

Mind I remind you that CNS starts to develop around 5-6 weeks, not at the conception.

Using your logic, in vitro fertilization clinics are committing genocide because they dispose of thousands of fertilized eggs every day.

And you call socialist nationalists radicals.  

I think you are radical, anti-science extremist and do not even know it.  

A fertilized egg is not a human being.  It has the potential of becoming one, but physically it is not what you think it is.


Well then we have isolated the point of our difference. I am not opposed to science but I am opposed to evil and the science of human experimentation unfortunately has a sordid history.

Not everything that can be done is worth consideration.

The fertility industry is full of misdeeds. Do you know where all of those extra embryos come from that they tear apart to get new human embryonic stem cells?

It’s all about money. It is expensive to artificially fertilize and implant a single fertilized egg so those of us in medicine give women drugs and get 8-10 all at once and fertilize them all. Then we implant several of them them intending to suction out and abort one or two if they all succeed a process thats euphemistically described as selective reduction because twins and triplets are often undesired. The rest of the extra embryos are then frozen perhaps for later use but often they end up in the trash or occasionally on the scientists petri dish to be torn apart and experimented upon.

A sane and moral society would at most allow only a single egg to be fertilized and implanted at a time respecting the sanctity of the life that was created.

However, that would be costly. It would require more doctors visits and more attempts for success. Patient costs would be higher and most importantly doctors profits would be lower. Why do it our modern society says. Why let few dead embryos stand in the way of money and power over nature. Create them and grind them up for science and study.

You accuse me of being a radical, anti-science extremist. I deny the charge. I in turn accuse you of supporting great evil which you will shrug off because you don’t believe in objective good and evil.

We will never agree but it is useful to highlight our differences so others reading can understand this issue better.

What evil is there in stem cell research?  I fail to see any.

You are equivocating fertilizing eggs and then disposing of them with murder.  Murdering a human being and not implanting a fertilized egg is not the same thing, IMHO.

You got carried away with your moral superiority complex.

Stem cell research is far from evil.  It solves many medical conditions.  If you believe in God as I am sure you do, you have to admit that this technology solves many issues that God created.  Inborn blindness and deafness come to mind.

How can you say that finding new cures is evil is beyond me?  Forbidding this technology is evil, IMHO.

We are not talking about rounding up children and killing them.  That is what you are implying.

full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
December 04, 2019, 11:07:39 AM
The nazi model infiltrated our society more than we can think, lot of nazi have been recruted in scientific position after ww2.

The only parallel I see between Nazi Germany and Western democracies is patriotism, fervent nationalism, "Make XXX Great Again", etc.
This does not bode well for humanity.

Most scientists are not nationalists, most support internationalism.

Name one scientist who is a nationalist.

Read "Mein Kampf" before you open your mouth on the "nazi model".  Whatever that means.

Hitler was a German nationalist, first and foremost.


Its much deeper than that, the nationalism is just a media to reel people in, mein kempf is propaganda , the Real ideology is Henry Ford, productivism and profits over human values. No sacrifice is too high to get an industrial one up over other nation etc

After ww2, the nazi went CIA, swarmed to south america, middle east, Afganistan etc to concoct civil wars and coup to promote "industrial développement" by exploiting ressources and people to build their Ford topia global.

Now its to the point most people think being scientist is building the next cellphone Who will make the next top company, originally science is studying things and building axiomatic reasoning.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
December 04, 2019, 10:57:18 AM

Oh, ok, I understand your logical error now.  You equate a fertilized egg with a fully grown child.  That is simply not true.

Mind I remind you that CNS starts to develop around 5-6 weeks, not at the conception.

Using your logic, in vitro fertilization clinics are committing genocide because they dispose of thousands of fertilized eggs every day.

And you call socialist nationalists radicals.  

I think you are radical, anti-science extremist and do not even know it.  

A fertilized egg is not a human being.  It has the potential of becoming one, but physically it is not what you think it is.


Well then we have isolated the point of our difference. I am not opposed to science but I am opposed to evil and the science of human experimentation unfortunately has a sordid history.

Not everything that can be done is worth consideration.

The fertility industry is full of misdeeds. Do you know where all of those extra embryos come from that they tear apart to get new human embryonic stem cells?

It’s all about money. It is expensive to artificially fertilize and implant a single fertilized egg so those of us in medicine give women drugs and get 8-10 all at once and fertilize them all. Then we implant several of them them intending to suction out and abort one or two if they all succeed a process thats euphemistically described as selective reduction because twins and triplets are often undesired. The rest of the extra embryos are then frozen perhaps for later use but often they end up in the trash or occasionally on the scientists petri dish to be torn apart and experimented upon.

A sane and moral society would at most allow only a single egg to be fertilized and implanted at a time respecting the sanctity of the life that was created.

However, that would be costly. It would require more doctors visits and more attempts for success. Patient costs would be higher and most importantly doctors profits would be lower. Why do it our modern society says. Why let few dead embryos stand in the way of money and power over nature. Create them and grind them up for science and study.

You accuse me of being a radical, anti-science extremist. I deny the charge. I in turn accuse you of supporting great evil which you will shrug off because you don’t believe in objective good and evil.

We will never agree but it is useful to highlight our differences so others reading can understand this issue better.


legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 04, 2019, 08:05:13 AM

Hmm, so in your opinion, a fertilized egg is a human being?

Yes

Oh, ok, I understand your logical error now.  You equate a fertilized egg with a fully grown child.  That is simply not true.

May I remind you that CNS starts to develop around 5-6 weeks, not at the conception.

Using your logic, in vitro fertilization clinics are committing genocide because they kill and dispose of thousands of fertilized eggs (human beings) every day.

And you call socialist nationalists radicals.  

I think you are radical, anti-science extremist and do not even know it.  

A fertilized egg is not a human being.  It has the potential of becoming one, but physically it is not what you think it is.

legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
December 04, 2019, 05:49:48 AM

Hmm, so in your opinion, a fertilized egg is a human being?

Yes

It's not an opinion.

The whole structure of a sperm or egg, is different than the when they are united. Check out the number of chromozomes in the cells before and after uniting.

As the unit grows, the only difference is the number of cells. The chromozome number remains the same.

The differences have to do with the formation of the organs, BUT, organ formation is already programmed into the DNA, and remains programmed therein throughout life. So really, there is no difference between an embryo and an adult human regarding that he/she is a person.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
December 03, 2019, 10:26:38 PM

Hmm, so in your opinion, a fertilized egg is a human being?

Yes
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 03, 2019, 10:20:50 PM

That is not what I asked.  Let me try again.

Is a fertilized egg a human, like you and me, or the children that were experimented on by the Nazis?

When do you consider an embryo to be a person?

Your very question highlights your bias.

You are attempting to seperate humanity into two groups the ones who you feel are the “real humans” which you are calling “persons” deserving of human rights and “others” whom you presumably feel can be owned, sold, killed, or experimented upon as one would a lifeless object.

It’s a common error. Slavers have used it throughout history to justify the kidnapping and enslavement of the weak. Nazis used it to to justify mass starvation of the “inferior” Russians. We use it today to justify the killing of the unborn.

There is no “person” catagory. There are just human beings at various stages of growth and development young and old.

Hmm, so in your opinion, a fertilized egg is a human being?
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
December 03, 2019, 09:51:40 PM

That is not what I asked.  Let me try again.

Is a fertilized egg a human, like you and me, or the children that were experimented on by the Nazis?

When do you consider an embryo to be a person?

Your very question highlights your bias.

You are attempting to seperate humanity into two groups the ones who you feel are the “real humans” which you are calling “persons” deserving of human rights and “others” whom you presumably feel can be owned, sold, killed, or experimented upon as one would a lifeless object.

It’s a common error. Slavers have used it throughout history to justify the kidnapping and enslavement of the weak. Nazis used it to to justify mass starvation of the “inferior” Russians. We use it today to justify the killing of the unborn.

There is no “person” catagory. There are just human beings at various stages of growth and development young and old.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 03, 2019, 09:03:12 PM

Oh, so you think a fertilized egg... is a human?
...
Fascinating.


Yes.

It is a human life in its most fragile form and long before the onset of consciousness but a human life nevertheless and deserving of the respect and sanctity that designation entails.

Its not complicated really.

A Scientific View of When Life Begins
https://lozierinstitute.org/a-scientific-view-of-when-life-begins/
Quote from: Maureen Condic, Ph.D.
That human life begins at sperm-egg fusion is uncontested, objective, based on the universally accepted scientific method of distinguishing different cell types from each other and on ample scientific evidence (thousands of independent, peer-reviewed publications). Moreover, it is entirely independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life or of human embryos. Indeed, this definition does not directly address the central ethical question surrounding the embryo: What value ought society place on human life at the earliest stages of development?  A neutral examination of the evidence merely establishes the onset of a new human life at a scientifically well-defined “moment of conception,” a conclusion that unequivocally indicates that human embryos from the one-cell stage forward are indeed living individuals of the human species; i.e., human beings.

That is not what I asked.  Let me try again.

Is a fertilized egg a human, like you and me, or the children that were experimented on by the Nazis?

When do you consider an embryo to be a person?
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
December 03, 2019, 06:25:59 PM

Oh, so you think a fertilized egg... is a human?
...
Fascinating.


Yes.

It is a human life in its most fragile form and long before the onset of consciousness but a human life nevertheless and deserving of the respect and sanctity that designation entails.

Its not complicated really.

A Scientific View of When Life Begins
https://lozierinstitute.org/a-scientific-view-of-when-life-begins/
Quote from: Maureen Condic, Ph.D.
That human life begins at sperm-egg fusion is uncontested, objective, based on the universally accepted scientific method of distinguishing different cell types from each other and on ample scientific evidence (thousands of independent, peer-reviewed publications). Moreover, it is entirely independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life or of human embryos. Indeed, this definition does not directly address the central ethical question surrounding the embryo: What value ought society place on human life at the earliest stages of development?  A neutral examination of the evidence merely establishes the onset of a new human life at a scientifically well-defined “moment of conception,” a conclusion that unequivocally indicates that human embryos from the one-cell stage forward are indeed living individuals of the human species; i.e., human beings.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 03, 2019, 05:07:55 PM
The nazi model infiltrated our society more than we can think, lot of nazi have been recruted in scientific position after ww2.

The only parallel I see between Nazi Germany and Western democracies is patriotism, fervent nationalism, "Make XXX Great Again", etc.
This does not bode well for humanity.

Most scientists are not nationalists, most support internationalism.

Name one scientist who is a nationalist.

Read "Mein Kampf" before you open your mouth on the "nazi model".  Whatever that means.

Hitler was a German nationalist, first and foremost.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
December 03, 2019, 04:52:54 PM
Because both involve something monstrous that is justified by dehumanizing and reducing the victim to the level of mere object.
With stem cell research the experimentation and dissection is justified by claiming the embro is not a real human life. With Nazi experimentation the medical experimentation was justified because the victims were not true valuable humans just Untermensch sub-man or subhumans. Their loss benefited the Übermensch with scientific knowledge and thus their sacrifice was justified for the greater good.

Its the same logical error in both cases.

As I said earlier there is something particularly monstrous about creating human life. Deciding its no longer wanted or needed for some convenience or economic reason and then instead of nurturing that life into birth and adulthood choosing to kill and experiment on it for knowledge and profit.



Why do you think stem cells or pre-implantation embryos are the victims?

Didn't I just make that clear?

Scientifically human life begins at conception. The only way to justify ending it with the goal of promoting scientific advancement is to dehumanize the early stages of that life and then claim it has no value.

Such dehumanization is a category error witnessed in its most extreme form in the Nazi experimentation but also prevalent in modern research on human embryos.

Oh, so you think a fertilized egg in the pre-implantation stage is a human?

And you think that doing research on stem cells is equivalent to doing medical experiments on humans?

Fascinating.

Are a bunch of eggs and sperm on a petri dish humans as well?

So I am guessing disposing of fertilized eggs constitutes genocide in your book, right?

Unbelievable.
full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
December 03, 2019, 02:43:50 PM
The nazi model infiltrated our society more than we can think, lot of nazi have been recruted in scientific position after ww2.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
December 03, 2019, 02:33:58 PM
Because both involve something monstrous that is justified by dehumanizing and reducing the victim to the level of mere object.
With stem cell research the experimentation and dissection is justified by claiming the embro is not a real human life. With Nazi experimentation the medical experimentation was justified because the victims were not true valuable humans just Untermensch sub-man or subhumans. Their loss benefited the Übermensch with scientific knowledge and thus their sacrifice was justified for the greater good.

Its the same logical error in both cases.

As I said earlier there is something particularly monstrous about creating human life. Deciding its no longer wanted or needed for some convenience or economic reason and then instead of nurturing that life into birth and adulthood choosing to kill and experiment on it for knowledge and profit.



Why do you think stem cells or pre-implantation embryos are the victims?

Didn't I just make that clear?

Scientifically human life begins at conception. The only way to justify ending it with the goal of promoting scientific advancement is to dehumanize the early stages of that life and then claim it has no value.

Such dehumanization is a category error witnessed in its most extreme form in the Nazi experimentation but also prevalent in modern research on human embryos.
Pages:
Jump to: