“Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution.” Mao Tse-tung (1893 – 1976). Kampf um Mao’s Erbe (1977.)
To people who hate the truth, the truth looks like hate…
Atheism and its humanist ethics.
Atheism proved itself, in the 20th century, to be the most horrendous, barbaric, murderous and criminal ideology the world has ever experienced. Many millions suffered and died at the hands of this hideous ideology, they must never be forgotten.
The promised atheist/socialist utopia … the idea of an atheist Heaven on Earth resulted in a diabolical Hell on Earth.
Who, but a complete idiot would want to resurrect such a monstrous, no-hope philosophy?
The so-called ‘new’ (improved?) atheists try to disassociate themselves from the disastrous record of the world’s first ever, official, atheist states of the 20th century’s, great, atheist experiment.
But there is no other example to go by.
They even try to blame the persecution and brutality on communism, and claim it had nothing to do with atheism.
But communism, per se, is an economic system, there is no compelling reason why it should be brutal, or why it should hate religion, or why it should destroy churches and persecute and murder millions of Christians and people of other faiths.
That is the hallmark of atheism, not communism.
Of course communism is a fatally flawed, economic system which thrives on envy and class hatred, but that is not the same as specifically hating God and religion. That is the unique trait of atheism.
If the communists weren’t also atheists, why would they have outlawed and attacked all religion?
Lenin was a self-declared atheist who, together with his Soviet Bloc, atheist successors, tried to eliminate religion with brutal repression and wholesale murder.
Thus, history tells us that the atheist experiment has been tried and, from beginning to end, was a brutal and diabolical failure. The new atheists may say: “it’s nothing to do with us gov.”
But who wants to risk such devastation again, by giving the atheist ideology another chance? Only a complete fool would want to take that gamble.
However, it was only to be expected and it could easily have been predicted beforehand, that the inevitable result of atheism’s lack of an absolute ethical or moral yardstick would be to wreak havoc on the world – and that is exactly what it did. .
Atheism hasn’t changed at all in that respect, because it can’t.
Atheism and secular humanism categorically reject the concept of intrinsic right and wrong. Therefore, the ephemeral values, moral relativism and situational ethics of atheism are the ideal recipe for abuse.
We can see from the belligerent, intolerant, rabble rousing rhetoric and anti-religious ranting of today’s militant, new atheist zealots, that the leopard hasn’t really changed its spots. Let no one doubt it – atheism has an horrendous and hideously, barbaric record… we must never let it happen again.
Moreover, it is a singularly perverse ideology that motivates its adherents to waste so much time of the only life they believe they have, trying to convince everyone else that they are doomed to eternal oblivion. The ultimate reward for atheists is to never know if they got it right, only if they got it wrong.
There is certainly no moral, rational or scientific defence for the atheist cult, past or present.
But what do atheists themselves say about their ethical and moral values?
They claim that they DO have an ethical and moral yardstick, and cite the Humanist Manifesto as representing the ethics and moral code of atheism.
So is it really true?
The Humanist Manifesto may look good at first glance, but like most proposals atheists have come up with, when examined closely, it is full of holes.
Problems, problems ….
- You don’t have to sign up to the Humanist Manifesto to be an atheist.
- Even if you do sign up to it, there is no incentive to follow it. No reward for following it, and no penalty for not following it. You are not going to be barred from being an atheist because you reject or break the rules of the Humanist Manifesto. It is not enforced in any way.
- It borrows any desirable ethics, it may appear to have, from Judeo-Christian values, there is no atheist, moral code per se.
Atheism is the ideology of naturalism. Genuine, naturalist, ethical values are basically the Darwinian, ‘law of the jungle’. Progressive evolution and improvement through the survival of the fittest/strongest, and the elimination of any who are weaker or unable to adapt – nature red in tooth and claw, In societal terms – the most powerful, wealthiest, most influential, most cunning, dominate and rule for their own benefit. Anything else in the Humanist Manifesto is actually a contradiction of social Darwinism and naturalism. Any socially desirable or compassionate ethics, which may be included in the H.M, are wholly inconsistent with atheist, materialist, naturalist, and evolutionist ideology.
- By far the biggest flaw in the Humanist Manifesto is the fact that it is entirely ephemeral. It advocates ‘situational ethics’ and ‘moral relativism’. And that major flaw makes it a worthless scrap of paper.
Why?
Because …..
Situational ethics is based on what people want or find desirable, not on any adherence to what is intrinsically right or wrong.
A good, example of humanist style, situational ethics in practice, is the gender selection abortions now being blatantly carried out in abortion clinics in Britain. It primarily discriminates against female babies, who are especially targeted for killing, because most of the parents who want it, prefer to have boys for cultural reasons.
The abortion clinics openly admit to it happening, and claim it is legal.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pro-choice-aborti…
The abortion act of 1967 certainly did not intend that, and the Government admits it was not intended.
So we have a Government that knows it is going on, it also knows it is not what the abortion law intended, yet it is still reluctant to do anything about it.
Why?
Because it is wedded to the secularist concept of situational ethics, i.e. whatever people want, people get. Any concept of intrinsic right and wrong takes a back seat, to whatever is the spirit of the times. And that is an example happening right now, in a so-called democracy.
The Nazi persecution of the Jews and other races they considered ‘inferior’ became popular through brainwashing of the public, and was eventually supported by a good proportion of the public.
So, Hitler cleverly used situational ethics to do what he had persuaded people was right and good.
All in all, the Humanist Manifesto and its purported ethical values, is a very dangerous document.
It gives carte blanche to any so-called, ethical values, if they become the fashionable or consensus opinion. Whatever people want, people get, or even worse, what a government decides the people want, they can claim they are justified in giving them.
And for that reason it would not stop; a Lenin, a Stalin, a Hitler, a Mao, or a Pol Pot, even if they had signed up 100% to abide by the Humanist Manifesto.
In fact, the 20th century, atheist tyrants even called their regimes … Democratic People’s Republics. They claimed they were representing people’s wishes, and were carrying out their ‘situational ethics’ on behalf of the people.
What about the common, atheist tactic of highlighting alleged crimes and wrongdoing committed by Christians?
The point is ….
Christians who do wrong, go against the teachings of Christianity. If they blatantly and deliberately go against the intrinsic moral values and teaching of Christianity, they have no right to continue to call themselves Christian. And they can even be excommunicated by the Church, if they fail to admit their actions are wrong.
And, without sincere repentance, they don’t get to go to the Christian Heaven.
End of story!
Atheists who do wrong, go against nothing, unless it is against the law of the land.
You cannot be chucked out of atheism for doing wrong, you cannot even be censored by atheism for doing wrong, it is a complete free for all, you can simply act with impunity according to your own desires and opinion.
The atheist ‘heaven’ is right here on earth, and far from being a ‘heaven’ it is an horrendous nightmare. Anyone with any sense would call it a hell.
And even the law of the land need not stop atheists …..
Whenever, atheists get into a position of power they change the law to suit their situational ethics. Then they can do whatever they want.
That is what Stalin and all the other atheist tyrants did in their people’s DEMOCRATIC republics.
And the atheist thirst for blood does not cease when they live in the so-called ‘real’ democracies, it is simply sanitised by atheist inspired, situational ethics.
They use their ‘humanist’ ethics to change the law, accompanied by ‘newspeak’ and propaganda.
So that what was once considered evil, is not only made legal, it is actually turned around so it is considered a virtue.
The wholesale and brutal slaughter, of the most vulnerable in society … millions of unborn babies, is callously shrugged off as necessary, for ‘free choice’.
Of course murder is always a free choice for the killer, only the dangerous, warped, atheist style, situational ethics could value a killer’s free choice to kill, above the victim’s right not to be killed, and make murder legal.
The callous slaughter of the unborn, which in most cases, was not even put to the people democratically (it was imposed on them by a handful of secularist politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats), is accompanied by the usual atheist lies and devious propaganda.
Doctors acting illegally over abortions get off scot-free ….
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2609950/Scandal-doctors-…
So the secularists simply laugh off democracy, it doesn’t stop them, if it gets in the way of their ideology, they just ignore it, like they do with science.
“Democratic societies” how do they impact on situational ethics?
We see, in practice, that democracy is treated with utter contempt …..
Why ask the people? They are apparently not qualified to consider such difficult matters of right and wrong, like whether babies should live or die? You can’t give those ignorant peasants, plebs and rednecks a vote on it, … leave it to the secularist EXPERTS and their wonderful, situational ethics based on ‘reason’ and ‘science’.
Contrary to the scientific facts, we are told by atheist moralists that the unborn baby is not fully human, it is only a blob of jelly, which has, and deserves, NO rights.
And we are also told, anyone who supports the rights of the unborn babies not to be brutally ripped limb from limb is evil, because they are interfering with free CHOICE.
So the atheist leopard certainly hasn’t changed its lying, devious, brutal and murderous spots, even in so-called ‘real’ democratic societies. It simply legalises and sanitises evil and murder and makes it appear good.
Then it can claim atheism is extremely ethical and virtuous, with its own, beautiful, humanist code of morals and conduct …. Yeah Right!
Remind you of anyone?
Some even have the barefaced audacity to describe their situational ethics with the slogan “Good without God”.
Always remember ….
Atheist/humanist so-called ethics and morals depend entirely on OPINION, and that is why they are so extremely dangerous.
Atheism has no moral or ethical yardstick, no concept of God-given, human rights … only OPINION.
But WHOSE opinion?
My opinion?
Your opinion?
Maybe Richard Dawkins’ opinion?
Or Christopher Hitchens’ opinion?
Or Sam Harris’s opinion?
Or how about Barrack Obama’s opinion?
Or why not STALIN’S or POL POT’S opinion?
So don’t be fooled by the relentless chorus from the ‘new’ atheists and humanists, that atheism has its own code of ethics and morals, their code of ethics is based on the OPINION of one or more of the following … whoever (singly, or as a pressure group or lobby) is: the most vociferous, the most charismatic, the most cunning, the most influential, the most powerful, the most devious, the wealthiest, the most successful propagandist, the most persuasive, or the most brutal.
The Fabian Society Window: a wolf in sheep’s clothing – progressive communism: https://youtu.be/s9oqgQ16qc8
The Fabian Society, masters of subversion unmasked: https://web.archive.org/web/20181005232001/http://freebritainnow.org/0/fabiansociety.htm
Abortion is Murder – Here is 100% PROOF: The video that so-called ‘Pro-choice’ and the multi-milion dollar, abortion industry don’t want you to see. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrl9QQHY2vA&feature=youtu.be Could any sane person, after watching this video, not agree that abortion is pure evil?
The Nazi connection: “Leading Nazis, and early 1900 influential German biologists, revealed in their writings that Darwin’s theory and publications had a major influence upon Nazi race policies. Hitler believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. In the formulation of their racial policies, Hitler’s government relied heavily upon Darwinism, especially the elaborations by Spencer and Haeckel. As a result, a central policy of Hitler’s administration was the development and implementation of policies designed to protect the ‘superior race’. This required at the very least preventing the ‘inferior races’ from mixing with those judged superior, in order to reduce contamination of the latter’s gene pool. The ‘superior race’ belief was based on the theory of group inequality within each species, a major presumption and requirement of Darwin’s original ‘survival of the fittest’ theory. This philosophy culminated in the ‘final solution’, the extermination of approximately six million Jews and four million other people who belonged to what German scientists judged as ‘inferior races’.”
Editor’s Note: Further back-ground on this topic may be found in Joe Keysor’s work on “Hitler, Germany, and the Holocaust”.
https://trueorigin.org/holocaust.php
…civil law cannot contradict right reason without losing its binding force on conscience. Every humanly-created law is legitimate insofar as it is consistent with the natural moral law, recognized by right reason, and insofar as it respects the inalienable rights of every person. —St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 95, a. 2.
EUbabel. The shocking occult symbolism of the European Union.
peuplesobservateursblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/23/togo-all…
Truth in Science 