Debate Club at Auschwitz

June 22, 2008 § 15 Comments

That is my new title for the blog Vox Nova.

Tagged:

§ 15 Responses to Debate Club at Auschwitz

  • Lydia McGrew says:

    Let’s hear it for “hyperbole and histrionics.” I really liked the Church of Satan post he was tut-tutting about.

  • Zachary says:

    For someone who seems to value precise moral analysis, it is confusing to me that you find no distinctions between Auschwitz and the United States, between abortion and the Nazi holocaust.Do you think all the differences are irrelevant or simply serve to distract, or what?

  • zippy says:

    I only recently discovered that one of the contributors is explicitly and unapologetically pro-choice: not arguing that voting for X pro-choice candidate can be licit if you don’t support his pro-choice position, mind you, but directly and unapologetically pro-choice.My perceptions are doubtless colored somewhat by having read the excellent and interesting book < HREF="http://books.google.com/books?id=kjo__n_uEcAC&dq=what+we+knew&pg=PP1&ots=DOKp07lxRr&sig=LmsWyFdDarZN3Yj7qIhaE6BWKHo&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result" REL="nofollow">What We Knew<>. I think there is something basically wrong with the implicit notion that just because the slaughter is happening right now, not 60 years ago, it is not of at least equal gravity to the slaughter of 60 years ago.So yeah, it smells to me like a debate club at Auschwitz.

  • Lydia McGrew says:

    Like Zippy, I think it’s salutary to ponder the similarities there. After all, we _do_ agree that the unborn children killed every day in abortion mills across the country are innocent human beings. So…For that matter, I think the comparison to the Holocaust is far more enlightening to the one more often made to slavery. Let’s put it starkly: To enslave a man is very evil indeed. But to inherit a slave may happen to you without your consent. And a man enslaved may yet gain his freedom. To the extent that such evils can be compared, murder is worse.

  • Scott says:

    <>For that matter, I think the comparison to the Holocaust is far more enlightening to the one more often made to slavery.<>True. However the slavery analogy is still good as so many arguments made in defense of intrinsic evils sound like they could have come from 1860. “Who are you to impose your patriarchal morality on women?” becomes, “Who are you to impose your <>Northern<> morality on slave-owners?” (I need to do some reaserch, but I seem to recall this was an actual argument back then.)“<>Dred Scott<> is here to stay, so let’s get out of the legal/politcal battle and instead win the hearts and minds of slavers and reduce the number of slaves bought and sold.”“How many unaborted children have YOU adopted?”“How many slaves have YOU bought and freed?”And so on.

  • Scott says:

    “Lincoln’s Republicans are no better than Dems and haven’t done anything on the slavery issue.”–Catholics for John Breckinridge😀

  • ZippyNo contributor on VN is pro-choice. You would do well not to misrepresent the positions of others if it is beyond your limited reasoning skills. Everyone on VN is working to the same pro-life end.

  • zippy says:

    Henry:Maybe you didn’t get the memo.< HREF="http://vox-nova.com/2008/06/17/with-obama-it-really-is-a-vote-for-abortion-among-other-things/#comment-25308" REL="nofollow">Here<> is where I learned that in fact one of your contributors is overtly and unapologetically pro-choice:Commenter SB:<>I don’t think anyone who claims that “subsidiarity” justifies the pro-choice position is interested in “serious” — or even intellectually honest — philosophical discussion.<>VN contributor Gerald L. Campbell:<>It very clearly does. The problem is that you don’t understand the pro-choice position. <>

  • Gerald is not pro-choice. Zippy, he has more than once made that clear: he is against abortion. He is, however, looking for other possible means to the end than the failed strategies of the past few decades. He’s not the only one. Franky Schaeffer is another. And to argue the proper meaning of pro-choice does not make one pro-choice. Just like my pointing out false presentations of what Islam teaches doesn’t make me Muslim. Mischaracterization of the other’s position will never get converts; all it does is solidifies their opposition.

  • zippy says:

    Yeah OK Henry. Subsidiarity justifies the pro-choice position, only it doesn’t.Debate club at Auschwitz.

  • William Luse says:

    <>Everyone on VN is working to the same pro-life end.<>What crap.Sorry about your reasoning skills, Zippy.

  • Anonymous says:

    <>Everyone on VN is working to the same pro-life end.<>Was this a serious remark?They must think like the Nazi who says, “Although I don’t believe Jews should be killed, I’ll support Hitler nevertheless because of the good he’ll do for the country!”

  • Lydia McGrew says:

    Oh, gosh, I just tried to go read that thread Zippy linked to figure out how subsidiarity justifies the pro-choice position (always happy to learn something new), but I feel my brain cells dying now as a result of reading that Gerald Campbell fellow, so I’d better stop. I still didn’t find the argument. It must be hidden very deeply.Zippy, you’re one patient fella to put up with that much childish abuse. I mean, okay, so they didn’t exactly cuss, but…And now it gets carried over here. Like Bill, I sympathize with you over the poor reasoning skills. 🙂

  • SB says:

    <>Gerald is not pro-choice. Zippy, he has more than once made that clear: he is against abortion. He is, however, looking for other possible means to the end than the failed strategies of the past few decades.<>What sophistry and confusion. Gerald is “against abortion” only in the sense that he privately thinks abortion is wrong, but such a person can still be pro-choice (a term referring to those people who want abortion to be legal). Gerald most definitely falls into that category. Moreover, Henry himself recognizes this, as he is obviously aware that Gerald is looking for “other possible means” of ending abortion . . . that is, means other than using the law. Which is to say, he’s pro-choice.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Debate Club at Auschwitz at Zippy Catholic.

meta

%d bloggers like this: