Invoking Hitler

This is a response to Keith LawrenceâÄôs Monday letter to the editor. Lawrence managed to mention baptism, the atrocities of humanity (not just religion), the Hitler Youth, Richard Dawkins and parenting issues all in one less than 250 word column. Congrats! I largely agree that it does not make sense to label your with child a political party or a specific religion until they can critically analyze for themselves, but I would still like to express my disgust with the polarizing nature of his column and eager jump to GodwinâÄôs law. Yes, religion has done some disgusting things in the past and present; anyone can look to the pope as the current easy target on that one (opposing contraception in HIV-ridden Africa? Opposing the abortion of a Brazilian 9-year-oldâÄôs fetus by rape?). But immediately jumping to the Hitler defense is disgusting. If a person decides to be debaptized to make a formal declaration of their separation from the church, fine. But I would hope their reasons are more critical than an ad hominem attack on religion by invoking Hitler. Perhaps logic or scientific evidence does not point to the existence of a being outside time but who also intervenes (the religious are having their cake and eating it, too, here). Perhaps genetics, biology, geology, psychology, physics, paleontology, etc., all point to a universe older than 6,000 years. But Hitler? Really? Flip the coin. When people of religious background say that Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler were atheists, how able to engage in meaningful discourse are we? We immediately move toward trying to disprove these false ideas and get highly emotional because we think, âÄúDid this person just compare me to those genocidal psychopaths?âÄù Atheists: Be more critical in your arguments. Leave the ad hominem and ipse dixit fallacies out of the discussion. Will Martin University student