Nazi Pope

Who's the best Nazi Pope, Pope Pius XII or Pope Benedict XVI? You decide!

~Ulrika~

Where's the poll?



Not that Pole!

-Ghoti

Ohhh, I was too fast. There we go.

-Ghoti

I voted for Pope Pius XII, because his nose fell off.

~Ulrika~

Ulrika, we get it already. You hate Christians.

Give it a rest, it's got old like three threads ago.

Maybe Ulrika hates hypocrisy? Or maybe she hates the silly idea that because you're a Christian you're somehow moral and upstanding?

I think it's good to see people discussing the Vatican's long standing tolerance, and often support, for fascism. The Catholic church openly supported fascist dictators in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Hungary and Croatia. Only a few months ago the Church held a large public mass celebrating the life of Francisco Franco. And the Vatican is considering sainthood for a Croatian priest accused of assisting the wartime fascist regime in Croatia.

I just think it should be a little rule, if you were a member of the Hitler Youth, you can't be pope. I know, I know, that whole personal responsibility thing only applies to other people.

Francisco Franco, beloved by the church (and even canonized in Spain), was one of the 20th Century's quintessential fascists (a contemporary of Hitler and Mussolini).

For those who are older in the crowd, you might remember Chevy Chase's SNL Franco shtick:It's funny how SNL and the Church are always on the opposite side of issues.

~Ulrika~

Nazi Youth? But wait!! Wasnt the governor of California, Arnie, associated with Kurt Vonnegut or some other ex-nazi party member? Plus his father was a Commandant or whatever, in the nazi party, yes?

Last I remember, if your father was in the party, so was the rest of the family in one way or another.

So does this make all Californians followers of nazi-ism? Should've voted for Gary Coleman!!! Goddess knows he needs the work!

Thats my 2 cents.

I didn't vote for Ahnuhld. And I daresay that calling Kurt Vonnegut an ex-nazi party member would be reason enough for said author to punch you in the face repeatedly until you apologised.

Kurt Vonnegut or some other politician. Cant remember if it was him or not. Either way I DO remember the person being kicked out of the USA.

*** Edit ***

My apologies... Just looked it up. Kurt Waldheim!! Ok, I had the Kurt part right.

As a Jewish Homosexual, I'm finding it hard to pick between the two, but I chose Pius finally because he's sexier.

I vote for Ulrika, with a little effort she could top them both.

Kurt Vonnegut, my hero - once a prisoner of war who earned a Purple Heart. An extraordinary writer. Definately not a Nazi.

.

It looks like the winner is Pope Pius XII by a nose.

~Ulrika~

It's an Internet urban legend that most trolls/flame wars devolve into accusing someone of being a nazi. Calling two Popes nazis is a serious charge and obvious troll bait.

Summary: We have one possible nazi sympathizer on the list, Pius.

Kurt Vonnegut was an American soldier taken prisoner by the Wehrmacht during WWII Battle of the Bulge. His experience as a POW influenced his writing. Certainly not a nazi.

Arnold Schwarzenegger's father Gustav was a local police chief (Graz, Austria) a low-ranking nazi party member. Kurt Waldheim (Secretary General of the United Nations 1972-1981 and President of Austria 1986-1992 ) was an acquaintance of Schwarzenegger's. The discovery of Waldheim's possible warcrimes occured just after Schwarzenegger's marriage in 1986. My understanding is that Waldheim did lie about his war record, but was never charged with war crimes. Schwarzenegger made great pains to have his father investigated for war crimes (he was found not to have committed any) and he did not have any relations with his father, even missing his funeral. Schwarzenegger has donated millions to the Wiesenthal institute and is considered by the Jewish Defense League to be a stand-up guy. I voted for Gray Davis myself. Arnold is certainly not a nazi.

Pope Benedict grew up in nazi Germany and was conscripted in the Hitler Youth. Here is the history of this: Following his fourteenth birthday in 1941, Ratzinger joined the Hitler Youth as membership was legally required after December 1936.[3] According to one of Ratzinger's biographers, the National Catholic Reporter correspondent John Allen, he was an unenthusiastic member who refused to attend meetings. His father was a bitter enemy of Nazism, because he believed it was in conflict with their faith. In 1941 one of Ratzinger's cousins with Down's Syndrome was murdered by the Nazi regime. In 1943, when he was 16, Ratzinger was drafted with many of his classmates into the Luftwaffenhelfer programme. After his class was released from the Corps in September 1944, Ratzinger was put to work setting up anti-tank defences in the Hungarian border area of Austria in preparation for the expected Red Army offensive. He was eventually drafted into the German army at Munich to receive basic infantry training in the nearby town of Traunstein. His unit served at various posts around the city and was never sent to the front. Ratzinger was briefly interned in an Allied prisoner-of-war camp near Ulm and was repatriated on June 19, 1945. The family was reunited when his brother, Georg, returned after being repatriated from a prisoner-of-war camp in Italy.

Benedict is certainly not a nazi. He was an unenthusiastic conscript and would have conscientiously objected if that were an option. I say this as an Atheist.

The closest thing to a nazi sympathizer we have here is Pope Pius. In signing the concordat, he lent international credibility to the nazi regime. The Vatican also looked the other way at the holocaust and the Swiss banking scandals. The Vatican also had good relations with Franco's Spain and Mussolini's Italy. It was a standard, self-serving political deal. Both regimes empowered the church in those countries and ignored the human rights abuses. This does not make Pius a nazi any more than the appeaser Neville Chamberlain. Weak willed and self-serving, yes. Saint or nazi, no.

Ulrika, do you honestly have nothing better to do than to troll the SL sandbox forum and make intolerant, flame-baiting, hurtful remarks like this? Maybe you should go back to being a mother to your kid and take a break from SL again.

An informative posting right up until this sentence. Chamberlain did what he thought was the right thing under the circumstances - hindsight proved him wrong. There was no way he was sympathetic to the nazi regime.

Ulrika has said some pretty terrible things in the forums, but I have never seen her say anything that is half as offensive as this.

May I ask why and what part? She said last time that she left SL to concentrate on her family. What is wrong with suggesting that she take a break from the SL forums and doing what she's already said before was a priority?

I'm sorry if I came across wrong, but it's pretty upsetting when every post I see Ulrika making is becoming more and more of a hate message.

Rotten post that was. Your reply dodges culpability ("…if I came across wrong…" and seeks justification through accusation ("…every post I see Ulrika making…". It's so romper room.

Instead you should just state: "I apologize for my inexcusable misogynistic assertion. Despite the freedom of speech conveyed to all in the U.S. by the Bill of Rights, I wish to sweep that aside to silence your controversial viewpoints with a personal attack as they threaten my personal belief system." Much better.

~Ulrika~

Does not cover private Internet forums. You are bound by the ToS and Community Standards which clearly spell out that religious intolerance is not tolerated.

You know that.

I know that.

You know that I know that.

I'm sorry, Ulrika. I've defended your antics long enough. You've crossed a big obvious line with your name-calling of religions.

Hiro, who is more foolish:

A fool, or the one who argues with a fool?

Ignore her and just let it go.

If one thinks something is against the ToS or CS, one should simply click on the "summon the censors" link in the lower left corner of a post. However, it appears that telling an outspoken woman to shut up and get back in the kitchen is just as acceptable. It's not. Repeat after me: "I apologize for my inexcusable misogynistic assertion. Despite the freedom of speech conveyed to all in the U.S. by the Bill of Rights, I wish to sweep that aside to silence your controversial viewpoints with a personal attack as they threaten my personal belief system."

What's telling is that you're using misogynistic statements to stifle speech -- speech, which is criticizing a male-dominated group that supports fascists. How's that for making my case for me?

~Ulrika~

For the record,

For the record,
~Ulrika~