Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lead by example Pope!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    You understand two atheists just defended your pope? It would be nice to not be insulted for a change.
    If a Christian religious leader is being defended by atheist, they probably need to take a good look at themselves and their theology.
    “I do not wish to have the slave emancipated because I love him, but because I hate his master."
    --Salmon P. Chase

    Comment


    • #62
      Why exactly? You're being very vague. Why can't a religious person and atheist agree on anything?
      First Counsul Maleketh of Jonov

      Comment


      • #63
        Hey, Delenda estRoma and I agree all the time on stuff. Not all stuff, but a common ground can be found.

        Pruitt
        Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

        Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

        by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
          Why exactly? You're being very vague. Why can't a religious person and atheist agree on anything?
          They are the same.
          ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

          BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

          BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
            They are the same.
            How so?
            First Counsul Maleketh of Jonov

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Michele View Post
              Sigh.

              1. Pope Francis was ordained priest at 33 years of age. That's rather old even today and it was extraordinarily old at that time. He has experience as a worker, having worked as a humble janitor, as a chemistry technician and even as a night-club bouncer. He also has experience as a second-generation immigrant, of course, born of a family that fled Italy because his father was escaping Fascism.

              2. Agnostics and atheists can be exactly as irrational as any believer in a supernatural being. If you really insist, I can provide a long list of examples.

              3. The Catholic Church of course isn't against reason. You could start by reading Fides et Ratio, by John Paul II; Caritas in Veritate, by Benedict XVI; and Lumen Fidei, by the current Pope. When you have read those, I can provide more suggestions.
              Naturally, the Church does not deem that reason alone is enough of a guide for man. If you want a list of regimes whose atheist, enlightened dictators thought it would be, I can provide it, so you can look up the body counts.

              4. The advice provided by the Pope on this issue is hardly contradictory. He never said anything like "boot those filthy foreigners out". As to the advice being useless, one might disagree with it, of course, but that's not the same thing.
              Janitor, chemistry technician and night-club bouncer are not credentials I would look for in a candidate for political adviser. They may provide experience useful to a social worker but even then I suspect that it is experience of a subjective nature. I will admit that this pope has shown more interest in "worldly" affairs than some but as a spiritual leader he is tied to the mythology that focuses primarily on the "after life".

              While it is true that religious people have no monopoly on irrationality, the rationality of separation of church and state is based on historical evidence not conjecture. Historically the political influence of the Catholic Church cannot be questioned what can be question is if that kind of influence is compatible with a liberal democracy.

              There is a long history of the Catholic Church only coming to grips with reasoned views of the nature of reality after being forced to do so by the preponderance of evidence making it impossible to do otherwise. Obvious example would include the treatment of Galileo, the endorsement of miracles that are often proven ridiculous, and the falsification of relics etc. . As late as 1950 the church took a neutral view on evolution marking what is the greatest scientific principal relevant to biology and human development irrelevant. The church also continues to insist on a literal Adam and Eve which negates any real understanding of evolution. The church's philosophers also share an indefensible position on the nature of mind that is shared by many liberals and has recently come under attack by authors such as Steven Pinker in his book the Blank Slate.

              What is contradictory about the Pope's advise on immigration is that it fails to acknowledge the church's role in creating the conditions that necessitate immigration which include medieval views on reproduction and the use of condoms to prevent sexually transmitted diseases. The church's tacit support of other superstitions in the name of ecumenicalism also plays a role in religious conflicts that generate immigrants.
              We hunt the hunters

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                Janitor, chemistry technician and night-club bouncer are not credentials I would look for in a candidate for political adviser. They may provide experience useful to a social worker but even then I suspect that it is experience of a subjective nature. I will admit that this pope has shown more interest in "worldly" affairs than some but as a spiritual leader he is tied to the mythology that focuses primarily on the "after life".
                You complained about lack of experience in general. Now you shift the goalposts and demand political experience. Evidently you are unaware that being the Buenos Aires bishop during the dirty war and the Kirchner years, being a cardinal, and being a leader in the ecumenical and interfaith dialogue are political credentials.
                And yes, he believes in the afterlife. You still have to demonstrate that believing in the afterlife makes one a less viable adviser for the present life, in comparison with a nonbeliever. A nonbeliever in the afterlife might, for instance, easily conclude that the present life is meaningless and offer only nihilist advice concerning how to behave here and now - and I'd question that that makes him a better adviser.



                While it is true that religious people have no monopoly on irrationality, the rationality of separation of church and state is based on historical evidence not conjecture. Historically the political influence of the Catholic Church cannot be questioned what can be question is if that kind of influence is compatible with a liberal democracy.
                Yes. Now, while I do see that you, as others like you, want to blame the Church of today for things committed two centuries ago, I'm not following you down that path. Otherwise, if we were talking about the present-day USA, and I felt like criticizing them, I could always drag onstage the Black's plight until the 1960s, or the treatment of the Native Americans and so on. If we were discussing the US armed forces, I could have some cheap shots with My Lay and the Philippines, and so on.

                We're not discussing the role of religions in the whole history of mankind. We're discussing whether the present-day Pope can have a say or not on a specific issue, the immigrants and refugees. I'm willing to extend that to the general issue of whether a religious figure can take a public stand on political and social issues - or if on the contrary the vaunted freedom of speech applies to neo-Nazis but not to religious leaders. I'll follow you up to that point, but if you're going to mention the Inquisition and the Crusades, I won't.


                What is contradictory about the Pope's advise on immigration is that it fails to acknowledge the church's role in creating the conditions that necessitate immigration which include medieval views on reproduction and the use of condoms to prevent sexually transmitted diseases.
                A very outdated outlook. The notion that it is overpopulation that spurs emigration has long faded away. If it were true, then the immigrants reaching Europe now would be Indians and Chinese.

                The church's tacit support of other superstitions in the name of ecumenicalism also plays a role in religious conflicts that generate immigrants.
                Too vague, please explain.
                Michele

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Savez View Post
                  This Pope is a clown. Climate change? Good grief. He's an embarrassment to the Catholic Church.
                  Oh, I see. He disagrees with you on an issue, so he's got to be a clown.
                  Michele

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Michele View Post
                    Oh, I see. He disagrees with you on an issue, so he's got to be a clown.
                    You're just lucky nobody has started calling the Pope a secret Muslim.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                      You're just lucky nobody has started calling the Pope a secret Muslim.
                      I can't find evidence of his Muslimism yet..................but I believe it is safe to conclude that he is a Marxist.
                      Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

                      Prayers.

                      BoRG

                      http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Salinator View Post
                        I can't find evidence of his Muslimism yet..................but I believe it is safe to conclude that he is a Marxist.
                        The secret combination of Marxism with its great ideological enemy, organized religion!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                          The secret combination of Marxism with its great ideological enemy, organized religion!
                          You were expecting rationality & factuality? He cares about poor people & the environment, so he must be a Marxist. No matter that the left wing government of Argentina (some of who's members were Marxist) accused him of working with the right wing military dictatorship or that he managed to get promoted twice by a Pope who was a virulent anti-communist. Four legs good, two legs bad.

                          I haven't read the rest of the thread, but if we haven't had our first mention of 'liberation theology' it isn't far away.
                          Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Salinator View Post
                            I can't find evidence of his Muslimism yet..................but I believe it is safe to conclude that he is a Marxist.
                            While following the teachings of Christ...check the board in your eye.
                            "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                            Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                            you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                              You were expecting rationality & factuality? He cares about poor people & the environment, so he must be a Marxist.
                              Well, Laudato si' is just out, so I guess he has just provided more ammunition for those who take objection that a follower of Christ is on the side of the poor and God's creation.

                              Not read it yet, so I won't comment on that; but another reason not to wander off in that direction is that all of that is again irrelevant to the topic at hand.
                              The topic at hand is that the Pope also is on the side of the foreigner. Maybe it's because he's read
                              Exodus 22:21,
                              Leviticus 19:10,
                              Deuteronomy 10:19,
                              1 Kings 8:43,
                              Job 31:32,
                              Jeremiah 22:3,
                              Zechariah 7:10,
                              and, of course,
                              Matthew 25,
                              just to mention the most interesting bits?
                              Michele

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
                                How so?
                                Atheism, the un-religion. People can be rabid fanatics, or they can be towards the middle. Either way, it's the same as any other religion. You seem to lean towards the former. Atheism is a religion. A religion is based around an idea. That idea may or may not involve a deity.
                                ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                                BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                                BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X