Video: Hitler and America’s holocaust

posted at 6:15 pm on September 27, 2011 by Tina Korbe

When I clicked “play” on this video and saw that it was more than 30 minutes long, I thought I’d just watch the first few minutes and then move on. But once I started, I couldn’t stop. It’s one of the most gripping pieces I’ve ever encountered. But be forewarned: It contains graphic images and explores powerful ideas. Watching it was a very emotional experience for me and I suspect it might be for others, also.

Abortion is the one issue about which I can never see shades of gray. The legal questions surrounding the issue might be complex, but, as Ray Comfort says in the video, Adolf Hitler didn’t do anything legally wrong. What he did was morally wrong — and, somehow, some way, nearly everyone knows that.

We’re in a profound state of denial about the most fundamental flaw in our society, about our disregard for the sanctity of human life. But, with education, the scales fall from our eyes and we see abortion for what it is. Future generations will be utterly shocked, heartbroken and angry that we allowed this holocaust to happen under the protection of law, the pretense of choice and the fear of appearing intolerant or judgmental. How have we let this happen? More than 50 million precious, innocent babies …

All that’s necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Part of the Christian dogma is that “we are all sinners” and implicitly, that all sin as equivalent. Details vary between denominations.

gh on September 27, 2011 at 9:47 PM

I was merely suggesting an explanation for the other poster’s (shick) pov.

gh on September 27, 2011 at 10:12 PM

The devil is in the details, or in their lack. Most Christian denominations that I know don’t believe exactly what you suggest that “all sin as equivalent”. But the deserved punishment for all non-equivalent sin is the same being death and hell.

shick on September 27, 2011 at 11:31 PM

I don’t think that’s true at all. He just uses Hitler as an example to draw out their inner moral sense. Once they make the moral argument, he then just asks them to apply it to a different case. The point is that their original positions on Abortion are dogma that has been repeated so much that they can produce the politically correct response without a moment’s thought. He’s just forcing them to think.

gh on September 27, 2011 at 10:41 PM

I agree with your understanding of his point. I was trying to show lorien1973 that his/her logic was faulty.

shick on September 27, 2011 at 11:40 PM

This is a joke, right?

I guess we should salute the bravery of the camp guards at Buchenwald; after all, they could have been killed by the liberators.

Good Solid B-Plus on September 27, 2011 at 6:25 PM

My paternal grandfather-born in the Jewish Pale of Settlement-lost his aunt and uncle(probably more relatives too but we know of these two) at Babi Yar. Being that they were in their late 60′s-early 70′s my guess is that they weren’t armed.
Hitler got off on killing innocents.

annoyinglittletwerp on September 27, 2011 at 11:41 PM

shick on September 27, 2011 at 11:31 PM

What I meant by “all sin is equivalent”* is the view that the only salvation is through Christ and that we are all sinners.

I believe there are passages in the gospels that would support this.

I realize that the Catholic church, in particular, does distinguish degrees of sinfulness.

* “as” was a typo.

gh on September 27, 2011 at 11:46 PM

I realize that the Catholic church, in particular, does distinguish degrees of sinfulness.

* “as” was a typo.

gh on September 27, 2011 at 11:46 PM

We also have Purgatory as an option. I know I’m not good enough to get into heaven, so I’m aiming for that with all my heart.

cynccook on September 28, 2011 at 12:03 AM

Many people believe capital punishment to be barbaric. Consider this case: http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2011/09/26/kasich-approves-clemency-for-joseph-murphy.html

This man committed a horrific crime against a weak, vulnerable old woman. Should he die for it?

cynccook on September 27, 2011 at 11:29 PM

Many people believe that it is barbaric NOT to use capital punishment against murder.

Your link doesn’t provide that much information so I’m going on what is provided. From what I make of it, Murphy was exposed to terrible parental abuse. Abuse has had different results. Some turn out bad. Others see the bad inflicted on them and don’t want to inflict it on others. The badly turned out child is all the more made aware about the evils of hurting another. He would actually be more culpable for his actions if he committed them because he knows how devastating they are to others.

But does this bad upbringing really make a difference in whether he gets CP or not?

With what little is provided I say with a sorrowful heart that he should be executed.

Consider this link.

shick on September 28, 2011 at 12:17 AM

We also have Purgatory as an option. I know I’m not good enough to get into heaven, so I’m aiming for that with all my heart.

cynccook on September 28, 2011 at 12:03 AM

I’m a Baptist who has been justified by works. The works of Christ on the cross.

You’ll never be good enough to get to heaven. That’s why Christ died for our sins. It’s blasphemous to try to add to his work.

Good night.

shick on September 28, 2011 at 12:23 AM

What I meant by “all sin is equivalent”* is the view that the only salvation is through Christ and that we are all sinners.

I believe there are passages in the gospels that would support this.

I realize that the Catholic church, in particular, does distinguish degrees of sinfulness.

* “as” was a typo.

gh on September 27, 2011 at 11:46 PM

Ahh. That all sin and all require the same savior.

Good night.

shick on September 28, 2011 at 12:24 AM

Thanks Tina.I’m showing this to my kids later this weekend

AH_C on September 28, 2011 at 12:32 AM

He has a part here where he says hitler killed kids with downs syndrome; then asks if its okay to kill babies with downs syndrome.

Yes, I think the parent should have the choice to abort that child or keep it. No, I don’t think some third party should make that choice for you.

That’s part of the fundamental problem in how he’s framing the discussion.
lorien1973 on September 27, 2011 at 7:33 PM

Here’s where you expose your shallow thinking. My grandmother was a Nazi party member almost from the start. She, being highly edumacated thru university bought into the leading liberal, progressive thinking of the day. What opened her eyes was when her daughter fell ill and became deaf. After she thot about it, she went to the Berlin party HQ and submitted her resignation. She related how she had to wait over an hour wondering if it was a mistake, would they punish her, would they take her daughter away. No matter what happened, she determined she would face it with her daughter by her side. Eventually an officer returned and told her to go home and wait for further instructions, so she and my mom went home. Mom had no clue as to what was going on, as she was only 4, but recalled the place as being menancing.

But as you posit, this is a choice that a mother has a right to. In the days before ultrasound and testing, said mom would have no way of knowing if a child would be born blind, deaf, crippled, with Downs etc. The only recourse, then was to kill them post-birth once a deformity was ascertained. Millions were killed this way, as were twins/triplets as a sign of evil spirits. I suppose you’re fine with that, eh? What about forced sterilization or abortions for hookers and/or STD? Wouldn’t want a child to risk coming into that environment, eh? Not to worry, someone else would have discovered and proved the theory of relativity in place of an aborted Albert Einstein.

From your POV, it must be a good thing that we have 50 million aborted taxpayers causing an entitlement crisis now rather than postponing it into the next century.

Meh.

AH_C on September 28, 2011 at 12:58 AM

I often hear from proponents of abortion that it’s the woman’s body so it’s their choice to which I say, it’s not their heart being stopped.

Remember the ad: Abortion stops a beating heart? It really is as simple as that.

That said, I do believe in exceptions one being rape/incest (No I don’t think pregnancy should be forced on any women who didn’t consent to the sex) and those cases where the woman’s body simply cannot handle the baby and carrying it further will cause undo harm of which there are cases to justify abortion. Hypocrite though it may make me, as a last resort I’d allow the morning after pill.

Yakko77 on September 28, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Very powerful and thought provoking video Tina. Thanks for sharing.

The questions on how I’d handle certain Holocaust situations like being ordered to bury alive victims or be shot myself were very tough.

Yakko77 on September 28, 2011 at 1:27 AM

lorien1973 on September 27, 2011 at 7:33 PM

I have autism. If they were to discover a way to prenatal test for autism-as they do Downs-would it be okay to abort someone like me?
Should a child who might end up like me-or little Trig Palin(who has Downs) be allowed to be born.

You don’t get to commit murder just because your unborn child might be a little different,or because it wasn’t conceived by your choice.

annoyinglittletwerp on September 28, 2011 at 1:54 AM

It’s a powerful video but then I remember the many comments I have heard from the secular left in regards to these issues: babies are not human, they are more like parasites leeching off the mother in the womb; There is no God or Judgement day, don’t preach to me; Hitler was a Christian himself.

The 10 commandments should be in every school, every court house and every Government building. They are what our law is based after and their influence should not be hidden.

This country really is losing its moral foundation and Progressivism truly is an assault on basic moral values as expressed in the Ten Commandments. As a society we are so confused and always trying to rationalize or simply dismiss bad behavior yet we never actually think about why we feel the way we do because more and more of us are not taught how to through education thanks to moral relativism. Not only are the Commandments readily ignored, but they are contradicted regularly where we are taught it is ok to murder in some cases and we are taught to covet our neighbor’s wealth. Our very own President is violating the 10th Commandment routinely in order to get himself re-elected.

Those who hate religion love to equate it with moral absolutism, yet the 10 Commandments don’t demand much from us and aren’t so much restrictions on our behavior than they are protections from those who would trespass against us.

Daemonocracy on September 28, 2011 at 3:08 AM

This is a superb post, Tina. Bravo.

Cylor on September 28, 2011 at 4:42 AM

Hypocrite though it may make me, as a last resort I’d allow the morning after pill.

Yakko77 on September 28, 2011 at 1:26 AM

If you believe life is a gift from God, then you must believe it is worth defending from those who would take it, even unintentionally. If the baby inside you is killing you, you have the God-given right to defend your life, even if it means that other life must end. Short of that, you have no justification. No, not even if pregnancy was “forced” upon you. Without the threat of death, it’s a question of emotional pain and the degree of inconvenience.

SKYFOX on September 28, 2011 at 7:04 AM

Very powerful. I never could square abortion as a “choice”. Never could figure out why it wasn’t murder. Until somebody figures out how it isn’t murder, then I remain fervently pro-life.

Nice job.

Pablo Snooze on September 28, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Not to take away from the very powerful video, but does anyone know why the narrator introduces himself (at 0:49) with, “I’m Ray Comfort, I’m Jewish, and I’m . . .”.

According to both what he says in the video and what I’ve read about him, he’s not:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Comfort
I was a bit confused by that.

Still a moving video to be sure, but I’m curious why a well-known evangelical Christian minister known for his writing and debating against evolution introduces himself that way . . . am I missing something?

SoRight on September 28, 2011 at 1:51 PM

I liked the video making people think about their beliefs in a different way is always good however his accusation that I deny the existence of God to get out of being judged is offensive.

Speakup on September 28, 2011 at 2:18 PM

SoRight on September 28, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Ray Comfort was born ethnically Jewish via his mother, technically still is.

Never trust wiki.

Jason Coleman on September 28, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Jason Coleman on September 28, 2011 at 4:28 PM

I’d read that as well (and Wikipedia doesn’t contradict that, it just isn’t part of the article). But “Jewish” is not an ethnicity, it’s a religion. Someone who either is not practicing or, perhaps, has never practiced the religion seems to be intentionally misleading by introducing themselves that way. Not as “ethnically Jewish matrilineally” or “I’m an evangelical Christian who was born Jewish” or “my mother was Jewish” or anything else like that. Simply, “I’m Jewish”. It’s just curious, especially since he’s surely aware that the vast majority of people would interpret “I’m Jewish” to be a statement of religious belief. Odd, and it just made his later statements about the only path to salvation being embracing Christ seem disjointed (in a way they wouldn’t have been if he’d not offered the misleading introduction.

SoRight on September 28, 2011 at 8:32 PM

It’s just curious, especially since he’s surely aware that the vast majority of people would interpret “I’m Jewish” to be a statement of religious belief. Odd, and it just made his later statements about the only path to salvation being embracing Christ seem disjointed (in a way they wouldn’t have been if he’d not offered the misleading introduction.

SoRight on September 28, 2011 at 8:32 PM

I take it to mean he’s a Jew in the traditional sense of the word, like Peter, Andrew, Judas and even Paul(when it suited him). Then he’s a Christian like the aforementioned. May not mean much to us gentiles but has meaning among observant Jews.

AH_C on September 28, 2011 at 8:51 PM

But “Jewish” is not an ethnicity, it’s a religion.

Actually, “Jewish” is both, and it unique in that regard.

I think you might be confused and think that I meant that Jewish was a race. It is not a race.

Here’s a chart to make it easy to understand.

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethnicity_vs_Race

Jason Coleman on September 28, 2011 at 9:23 PM

Also it’s important to note that “Judaism” technically refers only to the religion.

Jew and Jewish are descriptors for both the Jew(ish) ethnicity and Jew(ish) religion.

Jason Coleman on September 28, 2011 at 9:42 PM

Jason Coleman on September 28, 2011 at 9:23 PM

Being Jewish (religiously that is) I know that technically it can be used that way, which is why I specifically said:

especially since he’s surely aware that the vast majority of people would interpret “I’m Jewish” to be a statement of religious belief

My point was that he made a statement which he knew most viewers would misinterpret, which (for me) calls his integrity into question. It’s like the “depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is” thing. People who say something that’s technically correct all while knowing it is certain to be misinterpreted in their favor can’t be trusted.

Not to mention, if not for that fact I never would have gone and read about him and found out that he’s a staunch creationist who deceptively edited our 4 chapters of a printing of Darwin’s ‘Origin of the Species’ in order to advance his agenda.

SoRight on September 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM

I understand your points, I neither agree nor disagree with them.

I will say however, that even the most secular Jew non-religious Jew stands up for their ethnic heritage when Hitler is brought into the picture.

I don’t have a problem with that, mainly because Hitler didn’t care if the Ethnic Jew was a follower of Judaism or Christianity or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I’ll forgive them that little bit of confusion it causes the rest of us.

Jason Coleman on September 28, 2011 at 10:05 PM

Jason Coleman on September 28, 2011 at 10:05 PM

Fair enough, but there’s a difference between a non-practicing Jew (or those who only practice for the next 10 days each year :-) and a fervently practicing Christian whose mother was Jewish. The former does typically call himself a Jew. But when have you ever seen the latter identify himself that way. If indeed he was doing it to show solidarity with the Jewish victims of the Shoah then so be it. But it was a linguistically unlikely way of doing so which is unfortunate given how good the video would otherwise have been.

SoRight on September 28, 2011 at 11:29 PM

Spend a day at the Holocaust Memorial, you’ll find plenty who self-identify that way. If you know a Jewish Christian**, start talking with them about the Holocaust, then after a few minutes, pause, and ask them if they are Jewish. I think you’ll find what you are looking for.

For me, as an atheist, I’ll give anyone the right to identify with their ethnic and religious culture however they see fit, as long as they are telling the truth. He was, so be it.

Let’s not forget that there are plenty of Jews for Jesus out there, both the nutter and the very sincere variety. Let’s also not forget that Jesus himself is a Jew ethnically and religiously at first, and there is a very real argument to be made that all Christians are they themselves Judaic before they are Christian.

That you only give credence or authority to his Jewish heritage on religious grounds, is your problem, not his. His Ethnic Jewish heritage in relation to the Holocaust is equally valid as any religious beliefs he may or may not hold today. Hitler wasn’t after the Jews strictly because of their holy books and rites, he was after them because they were Jews, period. Hitler viewed Jews as a sub-human population, he gassed and incinerated Jews irregardless of whether they used the Torah or Bible. He went after Jews who didn’t even know they were Jewish by tracing them back through their mothers as far back as he could document. He made a modern computer science of cross-referencing genealogy and public records down to even the most mundane of sources. Even a close association with a Jew could condemn a non-Jew. In other words, it wasn’t all about the religion.

Mr. Comfort calls himself Jewish, to identify with the victims of the Holocaust, and he has every right and privilege to do so. He discusses Jewish persecution through the Holocaust, as his right and privilege to do so. He discusses abortion, as is his right to do so. He discusses his own personal god-construct as is his right to do so. I can see no legitimate reason to criticize him on the grounds of his truthful and accurate claim to be Jewish.

I humbly suggest that you should feel the same.

Jason Coleman on September 29, 2011 at 12:27 AM

** I starred that because it’s a clunky construction and I wanted to recognize it, but I couldn’t figure out a better way to say the same thing accurately.

I starred it because I want to make it clear that I will not engage in any Jewish Christian = Muslim discussion should some wiseacre want to take it that way. If you do, bugger off.

Jason Coleman on September 29, 2011 at 12:30 AM

30 Minutes of Godwin’s law?

I appreciate what he’s trying to do, but I don’t know if it’s going to do much but preach to the choir..

Also a little ‘odd’ that people, upon hearing anti-war protesters claiming ‘thou shalt not kill’, argued that it actually read ‘thou shalt not murder’, and yet here we are in this video going back to ‘thou shalt not kill’

Interesting video nonetheless.

Reaps on September 29, 2011 at 12:53 AM

30 Minutes of Godwin’s law?

Reaps on September 29, 2011 at 12:53 AM

It’s not Godwin, if it starts with Hitler and/or Nazis.

**I can actually see a possibly correlation between Godwin’s law and the phenomenon in the first segment. Talk about unintended consequences.

Jason Coleman on September 29, 2011 at 1:03 AM

What a heartfelt, good intentioned propaganda video.

Where is his Croc-a-duck?

V-rod on September 29, 2011 at 1:28 AM

Jason Coleman on September 29, 2011 at 12:27 AM

With all due respect, you keep writing as though I’m saying he doesn’t have some right to call himself Jewish. I’ve acknowledged that it can technically be said — I’ve simply maintained that it seems meant to deceive.

Keep in mind, the Holocaust is not at all the point of his video. His point is not about the slaughter of Jews in the least. His project is about abortion and damnation/salvation. The only reason he talks about the Holocaust is to set up an equivalence (and not an inappropriate one) to his other mass murder, of aborted babies. If the Rwandan genocide were better known he could have just as well started the video asking people if they’d have helped the Hutu finish off a village of Tutsis. So the solidarity argument would make more sense if he was claiming to be a baby. ;-)

And when he transitions (awkwardly) into talking about thieving, blaspheming sinners destined to burn in hell unless they repent and turn to Christ . . . well, Jews for Jesus notwithstanding these are not the views of mainstream (or even fringe) Judaism.

So yes, everyone’s got every right to call themselves whatever religion they want. But if it appears to be done with the intent to mislead, others have the right to call them out for the deception.

SoRight on September 29, 2011 at 3:19 AM

SoRight on September 29, 2011 at 3:19 AM

I don’t see how you can claim he’s misleading unless you are continuing to hold to the position that “‘Jewish’ isn’t an ethnicity, it’s a religion”. That position is false.

I would also disagree that he “only reason he talks about the Holocaust is to set up an equivalence”. I would suggest that there is also attempting to place the interviewee in a moral dilemma and force him or her into confronting their own moral inconsistency. He does this before and separately from the abortion segment and then pulled that inconsistency back for the third.

Your complaint about thieving and blaspheming not being the views of Judaism is you again hanging up on religion, yet it not the religious views of Mr. Comfort that is point in the third segment, the religious views of the interviewee is the point and more specifically their denial of their religious views. Notice that no one in the third segment identifies themselves as anything other than Christian (even Mohawk boy admits his Christian tradition at the end).

If Mr. Comfort had broached any subjects unique to Judaism, then you might have a case that he is misleading or falsely representing something, yet he does not do that in any way.

We could go round and round, if you want to deny he’s a Jew and find that he’s somehow misleading on the basis that he’s not a common enough Jew for you, so be it. I don’t care what religious sect he’s from, I don’t really care all that much about the third segment because for me, as an atheist, it’s not as powerful or pertinent as it would be for a subscriber to a god-construct.

Finally, as far as I am concerned, I view your complain about “Jewish” with about as much gravity as I would if your complaint was that he was Kiwi and by conducting his interview in America and talking about American abortion statistics with Americans, he is somehow misleading because he doesn’t specifically talk about abortion in New Zealand.

Jason Coleman on September 29, 2011 at 10:54 AM

My point was that he made a statement which he knew most viewers would misinterpret, which (for me) calls his integrity into question.

SoRight on September 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM

This is where you I think you err. Most people don’t misinterpret the statement “I’m a Jew” to mean religion. Most understand it to relate to lineage. At least that’s what Ray obviosly is trying to convey. It’s not his fault that you misterpretted his meaning. I don’t say that to be harsh. I also think it is fair to say that most Jews barely consider themselves religous.

shick on September 29, 2011 at 11:43 AM

I view your complain about “Jewish” with about as much gravity as I would if your complaint was that he was Kiwi and by conducting his interview in America
Jason Coleman on September 29, 2011 at 10:54 AM

This actually is a pretty good proof that we’re both wasting your time discussing it. On questions of atheism I expect you’d be an excellent resource — you’re clearly a thoughtful and intelligent person. But as a practicing Jew I’m going to choose to rely more heavily on my and my compatriots opinions of what being Jewish means. I asked a simple question based on my understanding of a term that I’ve heard used firsthand perhaps tens of thousands of times in my life, and which the narrator used differently. Unless you just recently became an atheist after a lifetime of religious activity, I just don’t think you can speak authoritatively about what most people mean when they say they’re Jewish.

I also think it is fair to say that most Jews barely consider themselves religous.
shick on September 29, 2011 at 11:43 AM

That’s quite a broad statement to make about the heartfelt beliefs of several million people spread throughout the world. How many have you discussed this with?

SoRight on September 29, 2011 at 3:41 PM

But as a practicing Jew I’m going to choose to rely more heavily on my and my compatriots opinions of what being Jewish means.

And by doing so, you exclude a super-majority of the population. The issue isn’t what Jewish means to you and a few friends. Whether you like it or not, Jewish has been both an ethnic and religious identifier for thousands of years. The Catholic Church recognizes the ethnic and religious distinction and that alone means you and your compatriots are severely outnumbered from the start.

I just don’t think you can speak authoritatively about what most people mean when they say they’re Jewish.

I claim neither authority nor require “most”. Objectively, the identified populations do exist, they are significant leading to majority and I don’t need to argue their relative size to demonstrate the validity of my points. I don’t value one sect over another nor ethnic group over another based upon which is the larger population, I respect their self-identified religious or lack thereof beliefs just as I do their self-identified ethnic distinctions of lack thereof.

I’m not going to judge the content of a message by the speakers ethnic heritage nor their personal god-construct. I’ll judge the message upon it’s content, logic and truth. The statement, “Roy Comfort is Jewish” is logical, true, and the content is noted.

Jason Coleman on September 29, 2011 at 5:26 PM

That’s quite a broad statement to make about the heartfelt beliefs of several million people spread throughout the world. How many have you discussed this with?

SoRight on September 29, 2011 at 3:41 PM

You are right to say it is. I admit it is a sweeping general statement. But from those Jews I do know they have indicated the same to me. And those Jews I mentioned are all ethnically Jewish. I know of none who fit exclusively in the religious category. Do you? That doesn’t mean they are not there but they are the a microminority of Jews. That is because Jews are known mostly for their ethnicity and not their religion. But the ethnicity comes with the religious background as well.

shick on September 30, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3