I always get a laugh at wikipedia antiChristian bigotry pretending they'd ever allow any positive "academic assessment" of the truth about which they are in denial, as seen in the groundless opposition to The Pink Swastika, based solely on the unsupportable and groundless obsessive hate speech of the deranged antiChristian bigots that run wikipedia. Russ Davis
41 comments
Academic assessment consists of examining claims based on their evidence. Claims without evidence can and frequently should be dismissed without evidence.
Essentially, you fail, suck it up pussy.
what a pernicious little toad.
I think about it when I face behaviour and practices; these people think about it when they breathe!
A: "I think the attempts by the rabid element of the right wing to disassociate fascism from the far right by labeling historic fascist figures "gay" or "atheist" is a huge delusional stretch."
B: "Why do you hate god?"
Maybe it's just because I have a bad cold and can't think straight but I had to read this several times to even gain a basic understanding. Oh, and the Pink Swastika is a repulsive book. I read an online version where all the claims were destroyed by a commentator.
http://www.qrd.org/qrd/religion/anti/annotated.pink.swastika
The OP reflects a common misconception that infects the media and has spilled over into the general public's attitude: the idea that two sides must be presented equally for everything. Laura Lebo, one of the reporters at the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial complained about this in her book, "The Devil in Dover". At one point, her editor asked if she could include something positive about the pro-intelligent design side to be "fair and balanced". She said there wasn't anything fair and balanced about what was happening in court. The ID side was getting eviscerated.
Sometimes there just is no valid "other side".
I tend to get wires crossed when I'm sick, so sorry if I'm totally wrong here, but this guy's defending a book that tried to say that homosexuals are responsible for the Holocaust by way of blasting people who refute it for Anti-Christian hate-speech and bigotry?
Overwhelming irony, much?
Also, let's for a moment assume that the premise of The Pink Swastika is indeed true and grounded in reality. Why do you suppose that those Nazi homosexuals became such militant, deranged psychopaths?
I'd posit it would be because of the society that ostracized, persecuted, and oppressed them. And I'm not just saying that because I hate homophobes and disagree with what you're saying, either. There's actually plenty of evidence that shows receiving that kind of treatment causes the victims to perpetuate it themselves. After all, that's exactly how the cycle of domestic violence and abuse works. Of course, that doesn't by any means excuse their actions or make them completely innocent, but it does place a portion of the guilt on the homophobic society that more or less made them snap, so if you wanna argue against LGBT rights, this ain't exactly a can of worms you wanna open.
In conclusion, like I stated in my earlier comment, The Pink Swastika offers no convincing evidence to support the claim that there was a disproportionately large amount of homosexuals or homosexual behavior in the Nazi Party. Even if it did, that would mean homophobes were most likely partially to blame for the Nazi's atrocities, so either way...
image
Re: John's post(from their POV) the flood of left wing/liberal/Pro-homosexual (delete as applicable) propaganda that they believe exists in a biased media...
It's a lousy book.
It's centrepiece is Ernst Rohm, a Nazi only gay in the sense that he assaulted teenaged boys, and someone who was killed by the Nazi leadership only 2 years into their rule partly because of that.
Hardly proof that the whole Nazi party was a 'gay rights movenment'.
@ bbq burrito:
As an ex-Oregonian as of a year ago (I moved to NY), I thank you for ensuring it didn't pass.
Addendum: Hi Troy! come get me, big boy <3
... annoying little shit...
'PINK Swastika'?
What whaleshit. The real 'nazis' here are asswipes like Russ Davis, who think it's their God-given right to harass, persecute, segregate, and in some cases, assault or even murder those who disagree with them (Eric Rudolph, Paul Hill, James Kopp, John Salvi etc).
Is there a circumstance where this angry, hate-filled drivel makes sense? There is no meaning or point whatsoever.
The Nazis killed homosexuals by the thousands during WWII, these were marked by a pink triangle (guess there's the source for the pink swastika). The Nazis were all for tall blond strong men and women making lots of tall blond strong children together.
Major history fail.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
