The Student Room Group

US church shooter was ‘creepy atheist” who disliked religious people

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80
Original post by AngeryPenguin
Hitler was an atheist
Interestingly, Hitler was actually a big fan of Islam - but he thought that it was better suited to Germans than to Arabs because they were stronger and more martial. He believed that had Al Ghafiqi won at the Battle of Tours, Europe would eventualy have been ruled by a race of Islamised Germans.
Original post by QE2
Interestingly, Hitler was actually a big fan of Islam - but he thought that it was better suited to Germans than to Arabs because they were stronger and more martial. He believed that had Al Ghafiqi won at the Battle of Tours, Europe would eventualy have been ruled by a race of Islamised Germans.


Rubbish. Hitler wasn't a fan of any religion and he merely said that out of Christianity and Islam, Islam would be better for the German people, this doesn't imply that he was a fan or that he wanted Islam. His goal was to eradicate religion completely starting with Christianity.
Original post by Ninja Squirrel
His goal was to eradicate religion completely starting with Christianity.


I think he made a stronger start on Judaism than he did Christianity, didn't he?
Original post by Good bloke
I think he made a stronger start on Judaism than he did Christianity, didn't he?


Well yes but I mean with the Germans.
Reply 84
Original post by Ninja Squirrel
Rubbish. Hitler wasn't a fan of any religion and he merely said that out of Christianity and Islam, Islam would be better for the German people, this doesn't imply that he was a fan or that he wanted Islam.
Apart from the term "big fan", which I admit was over-egging it slightly, everything I said is verifiable by reading Speer's diaries. Hitler actually called Islam "that cult which glorifies heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone", and said that had they been converted to Islam "Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world."
So obviously a certain amount of respect, at the very least.

It was just an interesting point. Hitler liking something doesn't necessarily make it bad. We don't automatically condemn vegetarians and dog-lovers, do we?

His goal was to eradicate religion completely starting with Christianity.
Not entirely sure about that. The whole army did have "God With Us" on their belt buckles, after all.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Ninja Squirrel
Well yes but I mean with the Germans.


Well, he killed 90% of all pre-war German and Austrian Jews. No other country's Jews suffered a great proportional loss.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by QE2
Apart from the term "big fan", which I admit was over-egging it slightly, everything I said is verifiable by reading Speer's diaries. Hitler actually called Islam "that cult which glorifies heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone", and said that had they been converted to Islam "Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world."
So obviously a certain amount of respect, at the very least.

It was just an interesting point. Hitler liking something doesn't necessarily make it bad. We don't automatically condemn vegetarians and dog-lovers, do we?


What you're forgetting, or just neglecting to point out is that Hitler visited the Arabs and had an agenda with them, the purge of Jews from Palestine. It makes sense then that you will say things to please the enemy of your enemy in order to get them on your side.

Talking up Islam to Muslims to get them to help you in your agenda isn't really rocket science. Believing Hitler genuinely liked Islam is a stretch indeed.
I told you Devil loves to separate humans and love to influence humans.
Pretty shocking to see after all the nonsense Muslims have to put up with, being blamed for terrorism and told they must disavow Jihadis or else they are guilty, a bunch of White atheists shrugging their shoulders saying that this was nothing to do with them.
Original post by QE2
If the attack was intended to further a political, religious, social or economic agenda, then yes it was terrorism.


Interesting, was the invasion of Vietnam terrorism?
A lot of Atheists are becoming so radicalised they are posting pictures of themselves on social media brandishing weapons

atheist.png
Reply 91
Original post by Ninja Squirrel
What you're forgetting, or just neglecting to point out is that Hitler visited the Arabs and had an agenda with them, the purge of Jews from Palestine. It makes sense then that you will say things to please the enemy of your enemy in order to get them on your side.

Talking up Islam to Muslims to get them to help you in your agenda isn't really rocket science. Believing Hitler genuinely liked Islam is a stretch indeed.
Those statements aren't from meetings with Arab leaders but from private conversations with Albert Speer.
Again, I'm not saying he liked it, but it seems clear that he admired it.
Original post by QE2
Again, I'm not saying he liked it, but it seems clear that he admired it.


Well it is a very admirable religion, however I doubt Hitler would have ever tolerated Islam in his Nazi empire.
Reply 93
Original post by Laissez‒faire
Interesting, was the invasion of Vietnam terrorism?
The definition of terrorism specifies "unlawful use of violence against civilians", so it is clear that some of the action during the Vietnam war amounted to terrorism.

Which invasion are you talking about? (The US didn't invade Vietnam)
Reply 94
Original post by Ninja Squirrel
Well it is a very admirable religion, however I doubt Hitler would have ever tolerated Islam in his Nazi empire.
Call me old-fashioned, but I don't see anything admirable in slavery, rape, domestic violence, execution for sexuality or religious belief, gender discrimination or social oppression.

Could you explain what is so admirable about it that it make you overlook all those things?
Reply 95
Original post by Ganjaweed Rebel
Pretty shocking to see after all the nonsense Muslims have to put up with, being blamed for terrorism
No reasonable person is blaming Muslims in general for terrorism. They are blaming Islam.

and told they must disavow Jihadis or else they are guilty,
Another straw man. Eyebrows are only raised when they refuse to condemn Islamist terrorism.

a bunch of White atheists shrugging their shoulders saying that this was nothing to do with them.
It wasn't, in exactly the same way as Islamist attacks are nothing to do with most Brown Muslims.

However, you will have noticed those atheists were all happy to condemn the attack and didn't start blubbing "Atheistophobia!" when the issue came up. And they are also happy to call the attack "terrorism" if the evidence shows that it was committed with the purpose of furthering an ideological agenda. - Was it?
Original post by QE2
The definition of terrorism specifies "unlawful use of violence against civilians", so it is clear that some of the action during the Vietnam war amounted to terrorism.

Which invasion are you talking about? (The US didn't invade Vietnam)


Unlawful eh? I guess the so called 'coalition of the willing' (Mainly United States) were all terrorists.

Lets not get into semantics, I know South Vietnam 'asked' for help but we all know how much weight that holds.
Original post by QE2
Call me old-fashioned, but I don't see anything admirable in slavery, rape, domestic violence, execution for sexuality or religious belief, gender discrimination or social oppression.

Could you explain what is so admirable about it that it make you overlook all those things?


This isn't the thread for that kind of discussion but the short answer is most of those things are not permitted / supported in Islam and those other things are not in practice today, maybe in a few countries like Saudi Arabia but that's it.
Original post by QE2
Why should I?
It was nothing to do with me and atheism is the not-religion of peace. This guy was just following a twisted interpretation of atheism for his own purposes.

Just kidding!
Of course I condemn it. Why wouldn't I?
What possible reason could I have for refusing to condemn a brutal and murderous attack on non-combatants, regardless of who the attacker or victims are?

However, despite your attempt a whataboutery, there is nothing in atheism that can be used to justify the attack, because it is nothing more than a lack of belief in gods. If his actions were motivated by a hatred for religious people, that is due to his own personal beliefs and prejudices. There are no atheist texts or rules or revelations that atheists are obliged to follow that say that non-atheists should be fought until all belief is atheist, or that religious people are the vilest of creatures who deserve harsh punishment if they refuse to submit to atheism, for example.


well, you could say (/argue) BECAUSE he is an atheist this happened. if he was following a religion then he would know what is right and wrong and would value morals and the sanctity of life and how precious everyone is in the eyes of god...
Original post by ismailali
I told you Devil loves to separate humans and love to influence humans.


The devil doesn’t exist. It’s about time people started taking responsibility for their own heinous actions instead of, like children, always blaming some imaginary, evil being.

Original post by Imzy010
well, you could say (/argue) BECAUSE he is an atheist this happened. if he was following a religion then he would know what is right and wrong and would value morals and the sanctity of life and how precious everyone is in the eyes of god...


Obvious troll. You must live under a rock if you think all atheists are immoral, evil murderers etc. All you need is a 10 second google search to find all the horrible things that religious people have done over the millennia, which clearly demonstrates that belief in a deity does not preclude that kind of behaviour. For starters, are you conveniently ignoring all the recent terrorist attacks committed by Muslims?
(edited 6 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending