British Atheists Must Apologize For Mao Tse Tung, Hitler, & Stalin For Beginners!

The Roman Catholic Pope cited Hitler today, asking everyone to “reflect on the sobering lessons of atheist extremism of the 20th century.” Immediately, the British Humanist Association got its back up, accusing the pope of “a terrible libel against those who do not believe in God.”

Christian Death Books: First Nazi Auschwitz Prisoners Were Christians: The Forgotten 50 Million Victims Of The Orthodox Christian Holocaust.

Pope Francis: God Is Real, Concrete Person, Not Mysterious, Intangible Mist: Catholic Communities Band Together After Missile Attack In Waco, Texas!
Waco Texas Fertilizer Company Hit By Drone/Laser Strike After Lawsuit Filed Against Monsanto!

The Pope did not go far enough. Radical atheists like the British Humanist Association should apologize for Hitler. But they should not stop there. They also need to issue an apology for the 67 million innocent men, women and children murdered under Stalin, and the 77 million innocent Chinese killed by Mao.

Hitler, Stalin and Mao were all driven by radical atheism, a militant and fundamentally dogmatic brand of secular extremism. It was this anti-religious impulse that allowed them to become mass murderers. By contrast, a grand total of 1,394 were killed during the 250 years of the Inquisition, most all of whom were murdered by secular authorities.

holocaust_mass_grave_belsen — National Socialism

Why should atheists today apologize for the crimes of others? At one level, it makes no sense: apologies should only be given by the guilty. But on the other hand, since the fanatically anti-Catholic secularists in Britain, and elsewhere, demand that the Pope—who is entirely innocent of any misconduct—apologize for the sins of others, let the atheists take their own medicine and start apologizing for all the crimes committed in their name. It will prove alembic.

Jeff Field
Director of Communications
The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights
450 Seventh Avenue
New York, NY 10123
212-371-3191
212-371-3394 (fax)

Evolutionism

Ole Dickie Dawkins must first validate his epistemology on the issue. When Dickie denies the modus of reason/logic that being ‘Prime Mover’, which has been validated time and time again, even using infant’s modus for communication – he is a dead pool!

Dickie comes from an area of theory that has been blown to shreds time and time again with no biological data that has been validated to show macromolecule to cell transition ever occurred in the world of physics.

Though attempts have been made in general, to build a platform for (biological evolution) by ‘Gradualism’ which failed – then to move onto ‘Punctuated Equilibrium’ which too failed, and then for a combination of Gradualism and PE being the platform still being studied.

Hardly has a platform been established for evolutionism – when too, they wish you to believe that macromolecule to cell transition can and or has broken the bonds of Physics (Prime Mover) and information into Perpetual Motion despite even entropy.

The philosophy of science was developed by man, as a tool to test the probability of repeatability, and if those certain processes would benefit man. The very fact that Dickie wants you to believe that he ascribes to the axioms of science – (which is based upon ‘Prime Mover’) – and at the same time denies ‘Prime Mover’ in his attempt to suggest evolutionism is validated by the same – defines Dickie as man in sept in ideology.

The philosophy of modern science originated with Nicole Oresme a Catholic Intellectual and Bishop of Lisieux. In fact, Jordanus Nemorarius, Rene Descartes, Buridan, John Philoponus, Robert Grosseteste, Roger Bacon, and Leon Battista Alberti can also be credited in part, with the establishment of Modern Science as practiced today.

It was again, a Catholic Astrophysicist Priest, who developed The Big Bang Theory aka; Red Shift and toured with Einstein the world revealing this theory.

I’ve heard the secularist’s arguments over and over again, but they must ignore facts and rely on unvalidated ideology as their real platform. Fact is, those named above lived and walked the planet just like everyone else did – and to deny the facts of their accomplishments, reveals again how atheistic creationism is purely ideological.

For Dickie to attempt physical probability of the ‘metaphysical’, using a ideological platform based upon unknown and unvalidated epistemology, is a horrendous abuse of scientific axioms. Thus we again must recognize that the ‘watch’ can never create the ‘watch maker’.

Lest we forget; Dickie Dawkins once compared the 911 terrorists to pigeons. In the Guardian newspaper on Sept. 15 he stated, “Testosterone-sodden young men too unattractive to get a woman in this world, might be desperate enough to go for 72 private virgins in the next,” he wrote, referring to the promises of an Islamic paradise made to those who die martyrs.

Trouble is, is that by a mathematical balance of probability, this heaven should be running out of virgins by now. Perhaps Dickie should solve this ‘probability’ first. ~ Volubrjotr