IF HITLER HAD CALLED HIMSELF A PROPHET INSTEAD OF DER FUHRER, WOULD WE HAVE LET HIM BE?

OF COURSE NOT.

LINCOLN FAMOUSLY ASKED HIS SON HOW MANY LEGS A DOG WOULD HAVE IF YOU CALLED ITS TAIL A LEG.

HIS SON SAID 5.

LINCOLN SAID, "NO. CALLING A DOG'S TAIL DOESN'T MAKE IT A TAIL."

HAD HITLER CALLED HIMSELF A PROPHET - AND HAD HIS NAZI FOLLOWERS ADORED HIM AS SUCH - IT WOULD NOT HAVE MADE NAZISM A RELIGION OR ANY MORE RESPECTABLE OR ACCEPTABLE OR ANY LESS DANGEROUS.

AND CALLING A HATE-FILLED CREED - WHICH ADVOCATES MISOGYNY AND CHILD MARRIAGE AND HONOR-KILLING AND GENOCIDE AND SUPREMACISM - A RELIGION DOESN'T MAKE IT A RELIGION.

BESIDES, ANY "RELIGION" THAT PREACHES OVERTHROWING OUR CONSTITUTION - (AND REPLACING IT WITH SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT WRITTEN WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE) -  IS INSURRECTIONIST AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH.

NOT EVERY GERMAN WAS A NAZI AND NOT EVERY NAZI WAS DESERVING OF DEATH - ON THE BATTLEFIELD OR IN TRIALS AFTER THE WAR.

BUT NAZISM WAS DESERVING OF UTTER CONDEMNATION, AND SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO REESTABLISH ITSELF AS A CREED.

NAZISM IS NOT A UNIQUE CREED IN THIS REGARD.