OT for all religions but absolutely Catholics for sure

[9cisco999 107]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/pope-benedict-xvis-leaked-documents-show-fractured-vatican-full-of-rivalries/2013/02/16/23ce0280-76c2-11e2-8f84-3e4b513b1a13_story.html

 

 

 

 

I expected nothing different since reading about the guy throwing in the towel.

 

 

I suspect most religions have the same skeletons. I especially love religions that try to impose guilt.

[tomcat76 327]

At least they're not flying airliners into skyscrapers, blowing up busses, cafes, hotels, & nightclubs, beheading stray journalists, and generally in the face of every other religion on the planet...

 

The Vatican represents a choice that catholics make with their financial support. Yes, they've got pedo-priests to answer for. Yes, church corruption & infighting date back centuries. Yes, their charity seems to come with sort of proselytizing strings attached. But the media hates the Church, and it's every non-believer's whipping boy, so I have to believe there must be some good about it.

Edited February 17, 2013 by tomcat76

[nkped 1,208]

Undoubtedly apocryphal but still good story that the leaders of a European dictatorship meet with the leadership of the Catholic church to tell the bishops that the state with destroy the church. One of the bishops responds that the state would not succeed. After all, the church hierarchy had been trying to destroy the church for 2,000 years and had yet to do so.

[atlas2 4,329]

Get's you thinking.....

 

So Does Hitchins!

 

I miss this guy..........Here's one Hitch-slap with that charlatan the so called Reverend Sharpton

 

 

[media=]

[/media] Edited February 17, 2013 by atlas2

[jacko 8,822]

Good post and you just reminded me I haven't seen the despicable Al on TV for a while... out of favour with Bill and Fox just like Dick Morris.

[dexlowe 0]

Damn you, atlas2, I was hoping to give Hitchens and Dawkins a rest for a while, but you got me sucked back into them again. What an awesome legacy of intellectual debate Hitchens left.

[atlas2 4,329]

Hitchens is a personal hero who I think more people should become familiar with....So I can't bring myself to apologise!!

[BigusDicus 9,883]

Get's you thinking.....

 

So Does Hitchins!

 

I miss this guy..........Here's one Hitch-slap with that charlatan the so called Reverend Sharpton

 

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

Tomcat makes an excellent point. Yes religion and those involved can and sometimes have caused harm. But this 'harm' is minuscule in comparison to the good done done by religion for mankind. One can find fault in this very board but the fault is far outweighed by the education and enjoyment provided to its members.

 

I have always respected, enjoyed Christopher Hitchens and his sarcastic, anti-establishment style. While sharing many of his views I disagree with him in regard to the existence of God. I have appreciated that he always articulated his views without the anger, venom, and hatred some of the anti religious espouse.

 

Never a big fan of Al Sharpton but he did make a couple of good points to which Hitchens responded poorly. Unfortunately Sharpton did not follow up.

 

 

Point 1. Religion sets moral guideposts for mankind to follow. Hitchens responds that these guidepost are not religiously inspired, are basic commonsense rules from within to follow in order.

 

• Guidepost that are absolute - such as the Ten Commandments, etc. thou shall not murder, adultery, etc. remain a constant.
• The problem with 'guideposts' from within and not absolute are subject to modification via rationalization. The old 'Slippery Slope'.

 

Point 2. Hitchens claims some religious people/entities have hurt many people over the years. How many compared to the non-religious? The Atheists?

 

• Stalin, atheist: it is estimated he slaughtered approximately thirty million of his own people.
• Hitler, atheist: responsible for at least 30 perhaps 40 million or more.
• Chairman Mao, atheist: Slaughtered a lot of fellow Chinese. Estimates range from 25-30 million. Some estimates are dramatically higher.

 

We can go on, mention Cambodia and the 2 million slaughtered by the 'atheist communist, etc.. The point is that the loss of life cause by those in the name of religion, as terrible as it is, pales in comparison the those atrocities committed by those without religious influence.

[samfreeland 64]

But is atheism a religion. http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Atheism_is_a_religion

[atlas2 4,329]

Tomcat makes an excellent point. Yes religion and those involved can and sometimes have caused harm. But this 'harm' is minuscule in comparison to the good done done by religion for mankind. One can find fault in this very board but the fault is far outweighed by the education and enjoyment provided to its members.

 

I have always respected, enjoyed Christopher Hitchens and his sarcastic, anti-establishment style. While sharing many of his views I disagree with him in regard to the existence of God. I have appreciated that he always articulated his views without the anger, venom, and hatred some of the anti religious espouse.

 

Never a big fan of Al Sharpton but he did make a couple of good points to which Hitchens responded poorly. Unfortunately Sharpton did not follow up.

 

 

Point 1. Religion sets moral guideposts for mankind to follow. Hitchens responds that these guidepost are not religiously inspired, are basic commonsense rules from within to follow in order.

 

• Guidepost that are absolute - such as the Ten Commandments, etc. thou shall not murder, adultery, etc. remain a constant.
• The problem with 'guideposts' from within and not absolute are subject to modification via rationalization. The old 'Slippery Slope'.

 

Point 2. Hitchens claims some religious people/entities have hurt many people over the years. How many compared to the non-religious? The Atheists?

 

• Stalin, atheist: it is estimated he slaughtered approximately thirty million of his own people.
• Hitler, atheist: responsible for at least 30 perhaps 40 million or more.
• Chairman Mao, atheist: Slaughtered a lot of fellow Chinese. Estimates range from 25-30 million. Some estimates are dramatically higher.

 

We can go on, mention Cambodia and the 2 million slaughtered by the 'atheist communist, etc.. The point is that the loss of life cause by those in the name of religion, as terrible as it is, pales in comparison the those atrocities committed by those without religious influence.

 

 

If you've read or watched a lot of Hitchens and you still feel these questions are unanswered there's nothing new I could add.

[jacko 8,822]

Hitler was not an atheist......he was a member of the Catholic church when he died.

So move that 40 million to the other side of the scales!

 

I think we can readily attribute a few millions to the many 'Holy Wars' of history.

[Gary 4,119]

I don't believe that religion has any effect of whether a person is good or bad. Christians and muslims have done horrific things in the name of their religions. I was born and raised a catholic and when I moved out of my parents home, I gave it up.

 

Every person is born with a conscience and if they are a good person, they will believe in a common sense thing that it is right to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This did not come out of any religious book, it is simply common sense and should be a way of life. Unfortunately we suffer from religious zealots and sick people. The world would be a better place if established religions did not exist and the sick people were better controlled.

[BigusDicus 9,883]

Hitler was not an atheist......he was a member of the Catholic church when he died.

So move that 40 million to the other side of the scales!

 

I think we can readily attribute a few millions to the many 'Holy Wars' of history.

 

There is of course some argument as to whether Hitler actually believed in God or just pretended to keep Eva Braun off his back. Many believed he was an atheist.

 

Regardless, most mass murders and genocides of significance have been perpetrated by Atheists. I grew up hearing and accepting the left's proclamations that religion was responsible for most of the slaughter of the world's innocents. And I have since learned that it simply is not true.

 

" few millions to the many 'Holy Wars' of history". I do not believe there have been millions killed in Holy Wars. Certainly there has been significant loss of life. Just do not know about "millions". The "Crusades" of the middle ages certainly is one of the better know Holy Wars. Muslims/Turkey begin to invade and conquer parts of the Middle East and Mediterranean. Western Europe responds, a bit of back and forth over time. Not sure how many killed.

[atlas2 4,329]

I don't believe that religion has any effect of whether a person is good or bad. Christians and muslims have done horrific things in the name of their religions. I was born and raised a catholic and when I moved out of my parents home, I gave it up.

 

Every person is born with a conscience and if they are a good person, they will believe in a common sense thing that it is right to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This did not come out of any religious book, it is simply common sense and should be a way of life. Unfortunately we suffer from religious zealots and sick people. The world would be a better place if established religions did not exist and the sick people were better controlled.

 

 

I agree...... Logically there shouldn't have been anyone left alive to receive the decalogue, or 10 Commandments if mankind had had no sense of right or wrong before Mt Sinai . .......That's if the flight from Egypt had actually happened.

[BigusDicus 9,883]

I don't believe that religion has any effect of whether a person is good or bad. Christians and muslims have done horrific things in the name of their religions. I was born and raised a catholic and when I moved out of my parents home, I gave it up.

 

Nature in all her beauty and splendor can be a remarkably cruel place. In the animal kingdom (and reptile, bugs, etc.) the strong feed on the week, the big on the small, if hungry enough many will feed upon there own kind, dominant males kill their offspring, etc., etc.. Some believe that is God who instilled "good", a sense of right and wrong in mankind.

 

 

Every person is born with a conscience and if they are a good person, they will believe in a common sense thing that it is right to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This did not come out of any religious book, it is simply common sense and should be a way of life.

 

Common sense? I talked previously of the "Slippery Slope". If there are no absolute guideposts it is too easy for man/society to begin to rationalize minors exceptions to "common sense". an then at some point another exception to the exception. And before long you can be far down the slope.....

 

Unfortunately we suffer from religious zealots and sick people. The world would be a better place if established religions did not exist and the sick people were better controlled.

 

If you wish to take the cynical view that religion is used to control societies, what would be a better way to control? Who would decide who is sick and must be controlled?

[atlas2 4,329]

"Left to themselves good people will do mostly good things. To make a good person to act in a truly evil way .....that takes religion."

[Gary 4,119]

Nature in all her beauty and splendor can be a remarkably cruel place. In the animal kingdom (and reptile, bugs, etc.) the strong feed on the week, the big on the small, if hungry enough many will feed upon there own kind, dominant males kill their offspring, etc., etc.. Some believe that is God who instilled "good", a sense of right and wrong in mankind.

 

 

 

Common sense? I talked previously of the "Slippery Slope". If there are no absolute guideposts it is too easy for man/society to begin to rationalize minors exceptions to "common sense". an then at some point another exception to the exception. And before long you can be far down the slope.....

 

 

If you wish to take the cynical view that religion is used to control societies, what would be a better way to control? Who would decide who is sick and must be controlled?

 

There are no guideposts or rules. Normal people treat other people like they want other people to treat them. Normal people are not cruel, do not steal, damage property or injure and kill other people.

[BigusDicus 9,883]

"Left to themselves good people will do mostly good things. To make a good person to act in a truly evil way .....that takes religion."

 

A mantra of the anti-religion left. Repeated over and over the last few decades. Repeated so often that many believe. Despite the facts.

 

Religion did not inspire Stalin to slaughter more than 30 million of his own people. Nor Hitler, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, etc..

 

I challenge you Atlas to show us acts inspired by religion that equal or surpass the above.

[jacko 8,822]

I challenge you Atlas to show us acts inspired by religion that equal or surpass the above.

You have to be careful with such challenges.

Whilst it may be unlikely that religion can account for the sheer numbers of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc, it can do a pretty good example of brutality and blood-lust. I kind of think sawing off a living persons head is up there, as a basic example.

Edited June 22, 2013 by jacko

[MM 6,562]

 

I challenge you Atlas to show us acts inspired by religion that equal or surpass the above.

You have to be careful with such challenges.

Whilst it may be unlikely that religion can account for the sheer numbers of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc, it can do a pretty good example of brutality and blood-lust. I kind of think sawing off a living persons head is up there, as a basic example.

 

I'd say the Spanish Inquisition, pogroms of Jews, the witch burnings, the burning at the stake of "heretics", all of which acts were by organized religion (Christian, in these cases), some acts lasting for centuries, would be examples...and rather than being instigated during the lifetime of a single atheist, were institutionalized by the religion itself.

Of course we can only guess how many died as a result of these barbaric acts, but the numbers were significant.

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[atlas2 4,329]

A mantra of the anti-religion left. Repeated over and over the last few decades. Repeated so often that many believe. Despite the facts.

 

Religion did not inspire Stalin to slaughter more than 30 million of his own people. Nor Hitler, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, etc..

 

I challenge you Atlas to show us acts inspired by religion that equal or surpass the above.

 

 

I'll come to the quote, (mantra) that seemingly inspired this challenge at the end.

 

I fully accept your point 'BigusDicus" there are more dangers in the world than just those that spring from religion.

 

And I couldn't do the math on the number of heads sent rolling, or beating hearts torn from chest cavities to ensure the next day's sunrise or the grain crop. I couldn't calculate the crucifixions, suti burnings, pogroms and religious wars that have taken life since Man first invented the gods.

But it's a lot......before machine guns, before gas........before ovens....... and in an emptier world.......It's a HELL of a LOT.

 

WWII was not a religious war, though if you asked a 1940's Warsaw Jew for his 5 shekels-worth he'd have likely nodded off his homburg in stating that it absolutely was. And he'd have had a point. Hitler AFAIK never renounced Catholicism, 25% of his top NAZIs were practicing Catholics....... The Vatican was pretty silent about Jewish persecution and continued to order prayers be read for Hitler in church and in the Vatican itself on his birthday throughout the war.

 

True the Vatican made a stand of sorts.......One top Nazi WAS excommunicated, Goebbels. He was 'disowned' not for his connivance in mass murder and the attempted extinction of Europe's Jews, or for other war crimes. (This was done before). His crime in the eyes of the church.... he'd married a protestant. That was definitely crossing the line......More so it seems than anything his fellow officers did that followed

 

WWII was not a religious war but religion played 'some' part in it.

 

Stalin, the atheist used the apparatus of control previously monopolised by the Tzar and the church. The brainwashing, the idolatry.... to become 'godlike' He simply replaced Communism for religion and was worse than what he replaced.........Ditto Mao..... ditto Pol Pot and North Korea's dynastic dictators. But the crimes that they committed weren't committed in the name of atheism.

 

 

However, this was the original quote/mantra that sparked your 'Challenge':

 

"Left to themselves good people will do mostly good things. To make a good person to act in a truly evil way .....that takes religion."

These are not my words, but for me what I think they are expressing is not that religion is the only danger in the world. Stalin, Mao and the others were not 'good people' turned to evil in the name of God or in the cause of atheism. They were bad people made worse by power.

Using WWII as an example.

Many Germans followed orders. They knew they did evil in those camps. Some I'm sure believed they were doing right for their country, some no doubt enjoyed the killing but ordinary Germans allowed themselves to be coerced. You followed the line or you and your family suffered alongside the Jews and the cripples, the gypsies and the gays. But they knew they were 'doing' wrong.... that they were doing evil. It was on their conscience.

But the power of religion to take control of the good is much greater than the product of coercion.

The 'ordinary' Pakistani girl who, wearing a bomber's vest climbed aboard a bus taking other girls to school in Quetta last week, left to herself without the taint of religion, I'm pretty sure would have just gone about her life in a normal way. Instead, she 'believed' she was doing Allah's will. She had God on her side. Killing those innocent girls was God's work. She was doing a good thing.

Religion is dangerous.

Edited June 23, 2013 by atlas2

[atlas2 4,329]

I haven't mentioned the Spanish Inquisition

 

UnFortunately it wasn't an English one......

 

 

Edited June 23, 2013 by atlas2

[nkped 1,208]

True the Vatican made a stand of sorts.......One top Nazi WAS excommunicated, Goebbels. He was 'disowned' not for his connivance in mass murder and the attempted extinction of Europe's Jews, or for other war crimes. (This was done before). His crime in the eyes of the church.... he'd married a protestant. That was definitely crossing the line......More so it seems than anything his fellow officers did that followed

If you google "Goebbels excommunicated", you will see it mentioned in some dodgy sources, but, strangely, you never see any information about which bishop excommunicated him or on what date. If Goebbels married his wife in a Protestant or civil ceremony, as was apparently the case, he would have been regarded as not being in good standing in the Catholic church, but that is not excommunication, which is a legal act under canon law.

 

I know I'm picking at definitions (being Jesuitical?), but you're the one who brought it up.

[atlas2 4,329]

If you google "Goebbels excommunicated", you will see it mentioned in some dodgy sources, but, strangely, you never see any information about which bishop excommunicated him or on what date. If Goebbels married his wife in a Protestant or civil ceremony, as was apparently the case, he would have been regarded as not being in good standing in the Catholic church, but that is not excommunication, which is a legal act under canon law.

 

I know I'm picking at definitions (being Jesuitical?), but you're the one who brought it up.

 

 

http://www.nndb.com/people/201/0...

 

 

Do they always state which Bishop makes the decision? I don't know? Seems clear he WAS excommunicated though and gives the year.

 

The list above has some surprising names........ We're not on it nkped....... I might be soon at this rate. (Can they excommunicate non- Catholics?)

 

 

Editors note:

 

Spookily enough I've just noticed one more "Reputation point' and I have the, 'mark of the Beast'

Edited June 23, 2013 by atlas2

[atlas2 4,329]

Thank you for that!!!