 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Pope Francis
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger Date: 19 Mar 13 - 04:36 PM "That just isn't the case, The Great War, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Falklands.... Even with conflicts where the antagonists have different religions, it generally isn't religion as such that's at issue." First of all the idea that there is a Great War is risible. There was nothing great about World War II. War is never "Great". The message that's not received here is that both the Korean War and the Vietnam War were championed by Christian anti-Communist groups and much of the fighting was done by those who had religious indoctrination that allowed them to participate and justify the killing of people who believed differently from them. Vietnam or Korea offered no legitimate threat to the U.S. To say otherwise is bogus. The evidence is that this is still being done in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Islamic countries because the Crusades are still going on and the American Military is indoctrinating more recruits toward its Christianity. World War II might be a slightly different case but remember that Hitler, who was raised a Catholic, used the inherent religious discrimination against Judaism, which is a religious precept. Hitler allowed Catholicism and Lutheranism to flourish during his abominable reign. The "Kirches" were active and involved in subjugating Jews and this points to the role of religion here. As to the Falklands, the Brits have a Protestant base which may have influenced their incursion into a Catholic country. There is a religious aspect to these many wars. It is the case. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude Date: 19 Mar 13 - 01:56 PM It has nothing to do with religious belief's. They may use them to try and justify actions but religion is not nor ever has been the cause. It is about greed, resources, land, ownership of another countries assets. Was Stalin a religious person? big stretch here but again plays into the hate of all faiths. Interesting note, free will is a great thing. Science is exactly why I came to believe. My knowledge of Mathematics, chaos theory .. for everything to happen as it is points me to a higher power. The only explanation for me. Such order out of such random chaotic events is too small to be explained otherwise. But again that is just me |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Mar 13 - 12:18 PM ."Most wars can be reduced to religious conflict" That just isn't the case, The Great War, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Falklands.... Even with conflicts where the antagonists have different religions, it generally isn't religion as such that's at issue. "Show me the evidence that religious people think all religions are equal? " I can't see shy that would be relevant. Fights aren't generally about questions of equality. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger Date: 19 Mar 13 - 11:48 AM Of course Al Quaeda and the American military are infused with religious beliefs. Most wars can be reduced to religious conflict and yes they are exacerbated by malicious politicians and outsiders but they still wouldn't be there if there wasn't the division of religious belief, at least not through the channel of religion. People might find something else to fight about. Religion states unequivocally that a loyalty to one necessitates that other religions are not acceptable. For example, if a Catholic were not so sure of his/her religion then it would be O.K. for him/her to be Jewish, Protestant, Muslim or fill in the blanks. Show me the evidence that religious people think all religions are equal? If that were the case, then who would need them? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Mar 13 - 10:55 PM I'd doubt whether religious belief as such is what motivates even Al Qaeda, as against resentment about essentially political issues. The point is, even in a world where religious difference were absent, the same kinds of conflicts we see would still arise. The slogans and the rationale would be different. In a way it's akin to the situation with the Cold War. The antagonism between Russia and the US and others was assumed to be about ideology - if the Russians stopped believing in "Communism" we'd all be friends. It hasn't worked out that way. It was always more about power and stuff like that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 18 Mar 13 - 08:11 PM Well I don't deny the dangers of fundamentalism (one of which is that is sometimes wraps itself in warm fuzzy imagery), and there is certainly a debate to be had with regard to the extent to which certain rabid leaders have invoked the almighty in furtherance of their cause (interesting, actually, how the people who do that are nearly always on the "wrong" side...). But it's a bit of a stretch to extrapolate from that to the notion that whole wars are fought "in the name of religion". God must seem quite a long way off when you're cowering in a stinking trench, crawling with lice and terrified of the next big bang, or when you've just blown a few dozen civilians to kingdom come with your smart bomb. The blokes who call wars with their fine speeches and rhetoric and invocations of God are not the blokes who end up getting shot at in battle on the whole, though their inevitable sticky ends are not always unwelcome. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger Date: 18 Mar 13 - 07:37 PM Of course there are other areas of repression other than religion, however there are quite a few "true believers" now in the U.S. military which is making a concerted effort to Christianize all branches of service. I don't think you should count the fundamentalist Christians out when it comes to evangelizing. They want to rewrite the Constitution. BTW, race, selection of music or mode of dress can be attributed to fundamental religion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Mar 13 - 02:08 PM There may be some 'true believers' in positions of political power. But far more frequently, I suggest it's a matter of using fanatics and fanaticism when it's convenient, and dropping it when that's convenient. A readiness to do battle or repress 'the others' , outside or inside a society, involves a decision as to who are 'the others', and who are 'our kind', but religion is only one of the markers used. "Race' or colour or age or sex or class can do just as well. Sometimes just what football team people support, or how they choose to dress. Or what kind of music they like. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger Date: 18 Mar 13 - 10:38 AM "Almost every holy war or conflict ostensibly grounded in religious hostility has actually been far more to do with politics and downright naked imperialism. And I think the same applies to accusations about atheism waging wars on religion. Wars are about jostling for power and domination on the one hand and freedom-fighting on the other. God may be a convenient wagon to hitch your war-horses to in order to sucker people into your quest for dominion, but it's a rickety owld thing that usually ends up in a ditch before you reach your battlefield. Same applies to atheism. Why wouldn't it?" Steve, you are overlooking the fact that political figures who indulge in "imperialism" are often "true believers" which puts their domination on a religious footing. God may be a convenient wagon but aside from Karl Rove, many of these committed warlords and "dominionists " owe their destructive fanaticism to their religious beliefs. This ultimately is why war prevails in our world. Religion often rationalizes the degradation of the "other". Preachers in the pulpit today fanatically believe that Christian domination is the only moral way for the U.S. to conduct its laws. This is not a manipulation in the political sense as we've come to know it but a fervent sick belief system that keeps mankind in a loggerhead of conflict. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger Date: 18 Mar 13 - 10:23 AM The jury is still out on this Pope. Pope and the death squads |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Mar 13 - 08:13 AM Two people who've been arguing expressing agreement about something - I think that's almost a first on the Mudcat... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Mar 13 - 08:20 PM We are in complete agreement I think. Cheers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Mar 13 - 06:11 PM I'd agree. So called conflict between religions are generally founded on other differences. Northern Ireland isn't about religious differences between Catholics and Protestants. Israel/Palestine isn't anything to do with the fact that one side is comprised of Jew and the other and the other of Muslims or Christians. The same goes for the Balkans. And in all these cases there are people in both hostile groups who have no religion or are in fact hostile to religion. "Are you a Catholic atheist or a Protestant atheist?" And the same is true generally where a regime has persecuted religion as such - typically because it is seen as a focus for political opposition. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Mar 13 - 04:40 PM Cor, I got cut off mid-flow there. Here's what my whole post looks like: Well you may have a point, but, atheist though I am, I have always defended religion against accusations of atrocities "done in the name of religion". I don't care for religion but I'm going to base my arguments on reality, thank you. Almost every holy war or conflict ostensibly grounded in religious hostility has actually been far more to do with politics and downright naked imperialism. And I think the same applies to accusations about atheism waging wars on religion. Wars are about jostling for power and domination on the one hand and freedom-fighting on the other. God may be a convenient wagon to hitch your war-horses to in order to sucker people into your quest for dominion, but it's a rickety owld thing that usually ends up in a ditch before you reach your battlefield. Same applies to atheism. Why wouldn't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Mar 13 - 04:35 PM Well you may have a point, but, atheist though I am, I have always defended religion against accusations of atrocities "done in the name of religion". I don't care for religion but I'm going to base my arguments on reality, thank you. Almost every holy war or conflict ostensibly grounded in religious hostility has actually been far more to do with politics and downright naked imperialism. And I think the same applies to accusations about atheism waging wars on religion. Wars are about jostling for power and domination on the one hand and freedom-fighting on the other. God may be a convenient wagon to hitch your war-horses to in order to sucker people into your q |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Mar 13 - 02:23 PM When I'm challenged I'm not going to issue a fatwa against the challenger, have him excommunicated or wave heresy laws at him. Very reassuring, but there have of course been many occasions within my lifetime when equivalent things have been done in the name of atheism. "Attacking organised religion" has too often been a brutal and literally murderous activity. Misusing power to persecute people who are seen as opponents is a long-standing chacteristic of human society, with or without religion, and very bit as common within a totally sectarian context as in one where religion of one sort or another is involved. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Mar 13 - 09:37 AM As I understand it, ex cathedra refers to very few proclamations indeed. The Church itself is in a state of confusion over what might constitute ex cathedra edicts. As far as I can make out, the last instance was in 1950 when the Pope declared that the dogma of the assumption of Our Lady had been declared ex cathedra (how bloody ridiculous can you get...). I suspect that papal infallibility is such an uncomfortable issue, even among ardent Catholics, even among popes (John XXIII more or less ridiculed the notion), that it's a red herring, more or less. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 17 Mar 13 - 08:18 AM Does the Catholic church still claim 'infallibility'? If it does, it most definitely and demonstrably isn't - and needs to be challenged at every opportunity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Mar 13 - 07:31 AM Attacking the beliefs of individual people is simply not on. Challenging belief in appropriate contexts may well be. As an atheist (though atheism isn't a belief), I expect to be challenged if I display my atheism. When I'm challenged I'm not going to issue a fatwa against the challenger, have him excommunicated or wave heresy laws at him. Attacking organised religion is essential and it must be fearless. Organised religions have massive responsibilities to their captive adherents, but are notorious for falling down on those responsibilities. I would say that the biggest failure of organised religions is that they all lie to their people. The fundamental lie they tell is that the whole story on which the religion is predicated is the truth. Fundamental tenets, which fail the evidence test at every turn, are not to be questioned. That is terrible and it is dehumanising. It perverts and obstructs the amazing power of intellect that we are endowed with (by God, if you really must - which makes the intellectual stunting even more insulting, if you think about it: a God who gives us amazing brains that the bishops and imams then forbid us to use). Education is learning to acquire knowledge using our critical faculty. Seeking evidence and rejecting received wisdom is the default. Religion is anti-education. A whole bogus body of learning, called theology, has sprung up round religion. Within the bounds, you are allowed to feel that you can question and doubt and frown. But mind that razor wire round the edges. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Date: 17 Mar 13 - 06:24 AM I don't hate any aspect of being Scottish. Although I have grave reservations regarding the insignificant part calling itself Akenaton. Same as the twaddle above saying that atheism is the same as theism or that atheism is a value stance. No. I don't believe in anything other than what I observe or what is either explained or shown why it can't be explained yet. If that gives me a label of atheist then it is a label of scorn put about by the more superstitious in society. A non stamp collector doesn't hold a view on stamp collecting. If stamp collectors managed to convince government that gay people don't have rights and it says so in their constitution I would then have a legitimate view to put forward about them and their effect on freedoms of others. Same with religion. Fuck all to do with me. Enjoy your activities but don't be surprised by the reaction when you try to influence people with more intelligence and less superstition. Compassion and moral compasses are survival traits of altruism as exhibited by creatures who haven't heard of God and would be annoyed to hear that we reckon he is in our image. Religion is useful though. Perhaps that alone is why it is scrutinised by rational people. If that is victimising, then get your house in order and society will have less to be concerned over. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 17 Mar 13 - 05:24 AM To a modern, scientifically trained mind, much religious teaching appears to be nonsense (except, perhaps, in an allegorical sense); questioning those teachings is not bigotry! The Catholic church is a powerful intitution which has enormous influence over the 'hearts and minds' of millions of people; demanding that such an institution questions some of its own teachings, which may be causing harm and suffering, and roots out such abhorrent practices as child abuse by priests is not bigotry! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:33 PM Steve you could be right but I do hope you are wrong and the new guy is different. So far we seen little progress but maybe just maybe this time ... fingers crossed Well, I agree. I hope I am wrong (I may not be a Catholic any more but my extended family certainly is!) Catholics are on the ropes, virtue of a few rogues. That is bad. Catholics deserve a good deal. As do Muslims, Jews and atheists. We all deserve a better deal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:12 PM Scots behave in myriad ways Ian, as do other nationalities; what particular Scottish behaviour do you take exception to? Homosexual couples are defined by their choice to engage in sex with people of the same gender, this is a type of behaviour which although unconventional and repugnant to most heterosexuals, is "tolerated" in our locality. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude Date: 16 Mar 13 - 08:57 PM Steve you could be right but I do hope you are wrong and the new guy is different. So far we seen little progress but maybe just maybe this time ... fingers crossed |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: RichM Date: 16 Mar 13 - 08:34 PM I am an ex-catholic. Ironically, it came about because I was diligent in studying my religion. Even won a Provincial prize for Catholic Religion when I was in high school. Another prize I won was a Bible---which I read from cover to cover (...oh alright, I did skip some of the begats)... My point is, the warts on the Church, and Christianity showed up as I delved into the history of the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. I couldn't let the anomalies slide...I had to question everything, in my search for complete understanding. My current position is well summed up in this quote from Seth Macfarlane: Religion is notorious for conceiving an idea and then trying to make it true, either by propaganda or sometimes by force. ...while science makes a discovery and then immediately sets about tryiing to disprove it, just to make sure it's correct before everybody makes idiots of themselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 13 - 07:08 PM Honestly - no, really honestly - I haven't seen any anti-Catholics in this thread. Tell yer summat, mate. I was born and bred and educated Catholic. Sufficient for me to know that (whether I like it or not, and, in my case, it's not) the Catholic church has a massive influence in this world and a massive number of (mostly poor and ignorant) adherents. No matter how much I wish it was not that way, it is that way. So there is no point being anti-Catholic, and I am not anti-Catholic. I want to see a damn sight better deal for the hundreds of millions of Catholics in this world, and the rock-solid certainty is that this latest old-man-in-a-frock, "elected" only by a hundred other old-men-in-frocks, is not going to provide that better deal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: gnu Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:42 PM Fer fuck sakes. This therad is worse than the one I just took a strip off of. Ye anti-Cat'lics are stunned as me arse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:40 PM King David had 500 wives? He must'a had a good job to afford 'em and very good Mojo:) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:16 PM Mother Theresa was completely right to have her views without judgement as you are with yours in favor. There is a very big difference between Mother Teresa and me. Mother Teresa had the ears of the whole Catholic world (as well as a good deal of the world beyond Catholicism). I don't. It's very noble of you to place us on equal footing, but it don't wash. I might just point out that having the ears of millions of people carries a degree of responsibility, which in her case she did not exercise. When Mother Teresa spoke out against abortion, she was doing the Vatican's dirty work. Evidence? They could have shut her up, but they didn't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:15 PM yes,but david did get a visit from nathan the prophet taking him to task for his adultery and the death of uriah! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude Date: 16 Mar 13 - 04:17 PM as far as gays and the pope, the times will dictate the change. I see it moving forward myself. An old Catholic priest of great faith who said to my gay CATHOLIC DAUGHTER ... King David had 500 wives, he also sent his friend off to battle to be killed so he could take his wife. the bible may not be the best source to consult on sexual matters. Let nothing anyone says keep you from your faith. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,olddude Date: 16 Mar 13 - 03:48 PM by the way, most people I know including myself do not agree with abortion, however, I would never think of trying to stop a person from making that decision themselves and that is the view of most Catholic I know. Mother Theresa was completely right to have her views without judgement as you are with yours in favor. Abortion is the decision a person has to make. I don't have to agree with it nor do I but they are free to make it . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 16 Mar 13 - 03:47 PM Many a "faith" spends much of its time bashing other faiths or bashing atheism. That would appear to include the atheist face, which is in many ways effectively the established church in many influential circles... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude Date: 16 Mar 13 - 03:07 PM 90% of all Catholics don't listen to what the pope says unless it is about the sacraments. So if you are not Catholic exactly how does it affect you.Other than just hating Catholics. Now taking that same logic do you think all Germans hate Jews because of their past sins. You can go on for centuries, how about what happened to the native Americans. Think about it every organization, political, religious, social, gathering, tribe anything by man is riddled with scandal. Maybe this is the guy who will fix the broken church, maybe not but I will give him his due first. By the way, definition of cult, any organization you are not involved with or don't like |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 13 - 01:37 PM Many a "faith" spends much of its time bashing other faiths or bashing atheism. The Catholic church certainly bashes people who demur from its dictats on matters it regards itself as having the authority of God to decide on. The Catholic church has long taught that abortion is wrong, contraception is wrong, homosexuality is wrong, and now gay marriage is wrong. There is no room for discussion about whether the Church could, in fact, be wrong about these things itself. No, these things are just wrong, and all we are allowed is a conscience get-out clause that the more educated Catholics might get but which less educated Catholics (the vast majority) probably don't get. Mother Teresa said she didn't ever want to hear of a single abortion in Ireland. No-one in the upper echelons of the Church told her to shut her mouth, did they? That there was room for conscience? The Church is all too happy for mixed, confused messages to be put out. And that is the one thing that is definitely wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Musket Date: 16 Mar 13 - 01:18 PM Perhaps olddude, questioning faith as applied to society as opposed to purely its members is seen as faith bashing? Fair question, but not a fair point. When I see people talking about religious equality, it invariably means religious privilege. You see, when a religious cult has influence, the wrong messages are sent. Contraception becomes rarer leading to child poverty and high infant mortality, Gay people are seen as second class, women are told they can't wear pointy hats, people grow up scarred by mea culpa, scientific discovery is held back by "legitimate other views," abortion becomes less of a life saver and more of an excuse to bring misery, especially to the widows, widowers and orphans of those healthcare professionals terrorised by criminals working in the name of their Lord, let alone the poor women needing help. You are right, it is heart breaking, but those with club membership cards hold the key to sorting it and rather than constant attacks as you put it, constant scrutiny is more than justified? Those who you feel we should leave alone are those who can sort this mess out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,olddude Date: 16 Mar 13 - 12:53 PM should have said in my younger days. Now I just walk away from such. Like I said I am talking to a wall |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,olddude Date: 16 Mar 13 - 12:40 PM what I am saying is it is a hypocrite thing to behave like it is all ok to bash peoples faith. We do not tolerate racism do we, I don't so why is is ok on mudcat to constantly go after people of faith. I don't do that to others, I don't like others doing that to me. When someone uses a racist comment around me, when they wake up off the floor they know it probably wasn't a good idea to say that to me. But day after day those of us with faith deal with the non stop bashing. Now the Catholic church has more than a few issues. It is heart breaking to Catholics. We wait to see if it will someday change and do everything we can to make it change. Maybe this guy will do that. Maybe not .. but it is not ok for constant attacks |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Lighter Date: 16 Mar 13 - 12:16 PM > How about "All Catholics/Blacks/Jews/Mexicans are not the same" instead? Because it didn't fit into olddude's proffered format. Obviously, however, that's my meaning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Musket Date: 16 Mar 13 - 10:27 AM What if I didn't agree with the behaviour of Scots? What if I said that British society tolerated Scots? What if people thought such a statement was valid? What if I said someone who pays more taxes should have more say than someone who pays less? What if as a tax payer I said I "tolerated" those who through whatever circumstances live on benefits? What if as a heterosexual person I said I "tolerated" Gay people? What if you shut the f*ck up and stop poisoning every bloody thread on this forum by promoting hate wherever and whenever you get the opportunity? I'm first for free speech, but f*ck me drunk, you'd be first up against the wall come the glorious revolution... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 16 Mar 13 - 10:11 AM That rather opens the way to "He's a Catholic/Black/Jew/Mexican - and you know what they are like" How about "All Catholics/Blacks/Jews/Mexicans are not the same" instead? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Lighter Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:55 AM > all Catholic are ___ CATHOLIC > all blacks are ___ BLACK > all Jews are ___ JEWISH > all Mexican's are ___ MEXICAN That's my position. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton Date: 16 Mar 13 - 08:24 AM To "tolerate" certain types of behaviour does not mean that you agree with the promotion of that behaviour Ian. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:05 AM Olddude, I can visualize you singing Guy Clark's "Stuff That Works" from parts of your last post:) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Date: 16 Mar 13 - 04:03 AM Nice to see that members of society are tolerated. Presumably by themselves as they are part of the same society. Who'd be a Pope eh? He has nailed his flag to the mast of intolerance on such matters to the extent that his views on Gays, contraception and, being British dare I say geography, make him irrelevant to the non Catholic world to begin with. No matter, he strikes accord with at least one sad old atheist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 15 Mar 13 - 09:55 PM Looks as if you might have it cracked, touch wood. Perhaps you've got involved in discussions that didn't work along those lines, but I don't think you'd find it hard getting "your average Jesuit" to happily accept that as a basis for a discussion. As I remarked, "I am thinking now. And therefore I know one thing, that I exist" is a pretty good starting point for a consideration of what else might exist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Mar 13 - 09:43 PM Three strikes on the italics front and still not out. I welcome the indulgence.
-Joe Catholic- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Mar 13 - 09:41 PM Yeah, Steve, but if you want to have a rational and logical discussion, you can't posit at the beginning that your position is true and the other position false. The rules of logic don't allow it.. This is a tricky one for believers, I admit. Thing is, I haven't got a position. That's the whole point. I can't believe in the truth of nothing. That's just ludicrous. So I ask the Jesuit fellow, or any other fellow, to enter a conversation with the same blank canvas as mine. If I don't do this, then I'm immediately letting the Jesuit fellow/whoever commence the conversation on his ground. Me on the back foot before we have even started to exchange words. That simply can't be a sensible conversation. My position is that I haven't got a position, but I'm interested in yours, so tell me more. And have your evidence ready, because I don't do witness, hearsay, dodgy ancient texts, edicts and tradition, let alone the sayings of chairman pete. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude Date: 15 Mar 13 - 09:36 PM ya know what the Catholic hating shit is getting old here. very old. Nobody forces you to like or believe anything (which is pretty evident by these non stop hate threads) ME i believe in fixing things that are broken, Thats why I carry a 70 year old watch and drive a 15 year old car. Maybe this guy is the guy to fix what is broken, However ya won't wait and see cause well ya got your hate to keep ya going. How about filling in the blanks then all Catholic are ___ all blacks are ___ all Jews are ___ all Mexican's are ___ there would be people crawling out of the woodwork should someone say anything like that, but bash a person of faith .. that is perfectly ok right .. fuck it talking to the wall |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton Date: 15 Mar 13 - 07:27 PM Hi Ian, so you you think male to male sex is a conventional arrangement?......You must live in a very strange part of the country, or mix in a very strange group of people. We all know that homosexuality exists, but is relatively rare; in these parts, conventional marriage is between a man and a woman. During my working life here, I have known perhaps five or six homosexual couples, all have moved here from other areas, They have been "tolerated" and quietly left to their own devices, they have not pushed their agenda or the "boundaries" and seem to prefer not to be the centre of controversy |
