The Nazi’s had flair they made the Jews wear…
19 11 2003I’ve been reading sections of Mein Kampf for history this evening. I’ve
come across a couple of gems I would like to point out. It’s amazing to me how,
although we are so far removed from the rabid anti-semitism and nationalistic
frenzy that was the Nazi party, some of the same sort of arguments and tone of
voice are heard today.
For example:
“A Volkish state must therefore begin by raising marriage from the
level of a continuous defilement of the race, and give it the consecration of an
institution which is called upon to produce images of the Lord and not
monstrosities halfway between man and ape. “
While in this passage he’s discussing marriage between gentiles and Jews, the
argument that he’s using sounds to me a lot like arguments used today in
opposition to gay marriages. (“Marriage Protection Week” anyone?) This is why I
am so scared by what passing around in politics these days. While I’m not a very
religious person myself, I do realize the importance of a person’s religious
convictions in their morals and values. I think it’s stupid to think that we can
have a political state completely seperate from the influences religion. I do
think, however, that if we can’t sepertate the two and continue making policies
based on the religions tenents themselves, we can only lead ourselves into
trouble.
Religion, as I’ve percieved, is primarily concerned with solid, unchanging facts,
Revelations, if you will, that are taken, discussed, but in the end, remain
mostly the same. (Yes, I know a lot of discussion and change goes on in
religious communities, but most often not at the most basic levels. I’m open to
discussion on the subject; enlighten me.) Government, on the other hand, deals
directly with the people, who are most certainly not steady, certain forces, and
while they look to religion to provide them a steady guiding force in their life,
they expect their government to reflect them and grow and change with their
culture. If the majority of the population has no problem with homosexuals
damning themselves by getting married, it is NOT the place of the goverment to
step in and “save” the homosexuals denying them the rights provided to
hetrosexual marriages. At the same time, I think we need to be careful confusing
“civil unions” and “marriage.” You can be married in the eyes of the church and
unrelated in the eyes of the government and you can be married in the eyes of
the goverment and unrelated in the eyes of the church. It’s important that we
not mingle the two too closely. “Do you *really* think that gays don’t have the
rights to share income and property with their partners the way that straights
do, or is what you really take issue with the idea of recoginzing their love and
devotion as equal to yours?”
ANYWAY. If you’re reading this, you probably agree with me anyway, so I’ll move
on.
The other quote of interest falls into the “He’s right, but he’s a dick,” column
(thank you Mr. Jon Stewart.)
“It would be more in keeping with the intention of the noblest man
in this world if our two Christian churches, instead of annoying Negroes with
missions which they neither desire nor undertstand, would kindly, but in all
seriousness, teach our European humanity that where parents are not healthy it
is a deed pleasing to God to take pity on a poor little healthy orphan child and
give him father and mother,than themselves to give birth to a sick child who
will only bring unhappiness and suffering on himself and the rest of the world.”
While I don’t necessarily argree with why he’s saying what he’s saying
(that the unhealthy are lesser beings and don’t deserve to exist, tainting the
Aryan blood, or that Negroes “don’t understand” Aryan missionaries,) I do agree
with some of what he’s wanting to say. This is a really beefy quote here,
dealing with two issues on which I feel very strongly, and often conflictedly.
(If “conflictedly” were a word…”)
The first is the idea of evangelism. I have never, EVER liked the idea of going
door to door, waking people up in the morning to tell them that they need to be
saved, and to be saved they need to convert. I do agree with the idea of sharing
your ideas and encouraging people to look outside their every day experinces to
views that would not necessarily occur to them. All through middle and early
highschool (not since my transition to IMSA, as I have been generally removed
from that sort of enviroment,) I was asked, almost every day if I had Jesus in
my heart, if I was saved. Not only was this annoying, it made me very
uncomfortable, if irrationally, feeling as though I might thought of as lesser
than her, that my opinions and beliefs were pitiable. This is the point where
It’s my belief that if people are truely concerned about the spritual life of
others, than they need to look to themselves and their neighbors who claim to be
following the same beliefs, they should seek to enrich their beliefs and faith,
live by example, and leave the “heathens” to enrich their own beliefs. Share
knowledge by education, not by force. “We’re not going to show you how to grow
food and build houses unless you pick up a Bible.”
(At this point in time, Chris gave me a back massage, and I COMPELTELY lost my
train of thought, so I move on to my next point, being adoption/birth
control/evolution as a species/etc.)
The basic idea that he’s getting across is that if you’re probably going to
bring unhealthy children into the world, that you shouldn’t have children.
(Don’t ask me how this relates to early detection of birth defects and abortion,
I have no idea yet. Ok, you can ask, but don’t expect me to have well supported
and cited opinions.) I agree, honestly, as an “unhealthy” child. myself. That’s
not to say that I don’t value my life, but I do respect my parent’s hesitation
to bring another child into the world after what they went through with me.
There are perfectly happy, healthy children throughout the world that need homes
and families. I find it… here I’m tempted almost to say “abhorrent”… that
people who can’t have kids on their own spend thousands of dollars on fertility
treatments resulting in three or four kids at a time. I understand the appeal of
wanting kids that are “theirs” but something in my head is screaming “if you
can’t have kids on your own, that’s EVOLUTION people,” sending those genes back
into the gene pool is scary.
My wisdom teeth keep reminding me of this idea. Modern dentistry has removed the
need for people to grow another set of molars in their teens. We keep our teeth
now. We are interfering and pulling these extra teeth, the gene would be
selected against by evolution and people would no longer grow them. That’s the
idea, anyway. Now I’m not saying that people who have wisdom teeth shouldn’t be
allowed to reproduce, but I am saying that we are effectively stopping, if not
reversing the process of evolution on humans. This isn’t a good thing. People
are already showing weaker immune systems and the rampant use of antibiotics is
not helping this at all. I will fight my cold on my own, thank you.
Even if you don’t think of adoption in biological or evolutionary terms, (which
does have it’s own risks, reference Volkish thought,) there already are all of
these children in the world, why can’t you care for them? What makes them any
less lovable? Not only does it work in terms of population control, but it seems
to me to provide more oppertunities for international community building
(through over-seas adoption) as well as alleviating the strain put on the
economy to support these children. All too often, however, I see people who want
to adopt only adopting “perfect babies” and are not willing to consider adopting
the “tough cases” that are older or not perfectly healthy. (Many children aren’t
adopted simply because they have a treatable illiness such as diabetes.)
Ethically, I just don’t think it’s right to spend that much money and effort to
bring a child into the world when so many are already here.
Politically/philosophically, I don’t feel that I have the right to stand in
their way, I just hope they throughly consider the options and realize the
potential ramifications of their actions.
Wow. This has been really long. Thank you for reading it. It is at this point
that I decide “fuck it, I’m done for tonight,” post, and go to bed. Well, at
least back to my room.