A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-05-2013, 11:09 AM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
I wasn't aware of such message from the Vatican.

Thank you, Vatican.
Finally, I'll sleep tonight without being worried if I'd go to heaven or hell for being an atheist.

DISCLAIMER: If you find a message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a message, complain to me and I will be happy to demonstrate.

[Image: tta.php]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes KVron's post
27-05-2013, 11:28 AM (This post was last modified: 27-05-2013 12:46 PM by kim.)
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 11:09 AM)KVron Wrote:  I wasn't aware of such message from the Vatican.

Thank you, Vatican.
Finally, I'll sleep tonight without being worried if I'd go to heaven or hell for being an atheist.

Uh.... no one said anything about atheists not going to hell. You'll just be tolerated while you're alive, since the church really doesn't seem to have any jurisdiction or sway over your life the way it does it's prisoners slaves flock.

No no, little atheist, you remain destined for hell. Nighty night. Angel

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
27-05-2013, 11:33 AM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 10:08 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(25-05-2013 09:38 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Re
"I don't understand why you're being so hard on the new pope for calling atheists that do good works "redeemed" "

Firstly, because he's patronising. The world doesn't need his approval. He should not be judging the world, the world should be judging the Vatican.

Secondly, it makes no difference if he's a nice guy. He's the head of an organization that historically has brutalized mankind for its own benefit. Today's Islamic terrorists are pussies in comparison to the behavior of the Vatican throughout history. As the Vatican's head he should be cowering in shame for past sins against humanity.

Yes, the Pope could win with me by doing the following ( listed in no particular order. )

- He would have to sell some of their assets and pay for the treatment for all the children that have been sexually and psychologically abused by priests over the last five or six decades. He would have to offer them all financial compensation. As already mentioned, he would have to hand over all the records of pedophile priest offenders to secular authorities.

- He would have to shut down the teaching of Catholicism, with all the psychological and social problems that entails, as truth in schools, and apologize for all the brainwashing and time wasting that has gone on in the past.

- He would have to make an unconditional apology to Jews and Muslims for past atrocities against them.

- He would need to apologize for the Vatican supporting Mussolini and Hitler.

- He would need to apologize to the world for trafficking Nazis out of Germany after the war.

- He would have to make a general apology to the world's women, and acknowledge that the Vatican has suppressed them for close to 1500 years.

- He would have to apologize for all the wars in Europe against Protestants in which 15 million people lost their lives.

- He needs to apologize for the Inquisition and the crusades, and for the selling of indulgences.

- Then he needs to apologize for the brutal murders and brainwashing of native Africans and Americans.

- He would have to apologize to all the homosexuals in the world for the Vatican's homophobia. He needs to unconditionally beg forgiveness from all homosexuals, and actively support gay marriage.

- He should apologize for the Vatican's connections with the mafia and other criminal organizations.

- He would have to apologize to the world for the Vatican's actions in suppressing science, and for keeping the western world in the dark ages.

- He needs to apologize to liberal theologians, philosophers and scientists for holding back the intellectual advancement of mankind.

- He would need to promise to stop promoting prayer as a solution to the world's problems.

- He would need to promise to stop stating that going to church was an answer to the world's problems.

- He could then apologize to all the millions of people in Africa and elsewhere who are suffering from AIDS as a direct result of the Vatican's condemnation of condom use.

- He then needs to admit that he's not God's representative on earth and he's not infallible.

- He needs to apologize to all the world's people for undermining free thinking and individuality.

- He would need to promise to stop suggesting that the expression of sexuality is a sin.

- I would like to see the Vatican using some of their vast resources to do some genuine humanitarian work, rather than just talking about it.

- He should admit that the Bible is a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense, and he should stop promoting it as the truth.

- He should also admit that there was no such thing as a pope Peter in Rome, and that Jesus, if he ever existed, was a Jew, not a Christian.

Only then would some of the evils the Vatican has committed be addressed.

I already criticized you for painting the new pope with the same stereotype that you've applied to all of Catholicism, and it still holds true. You're demanding that he personally apologize for things that he is obviously not personally guilty of -- support of Nazis in WW2, condemnation of condom use, past atrocities against Jews and Muslims -- in fact, there isn't a single thing on the list that he has to be sorry for because he didn't do any of it. Are you about to apologize for Stalin's evil acts? Get serious; none of us are responsible for what former atheists did. I anticipate that you'll make a case of special pleading because Stalin (among other evil atheists) didn't do his acts "in the name of atheism", but then again neither did many former popes. Children weren't raped "in the name of Catholicism"... although I think we can both agree that it is a symptom of deeper problems that the Catholic church is directly responsible for (the lack of marriage among priests by Catholic rules and the protection of guilty clerics by the church hierarchy).

And do you seriously expect any Catholic to "admit that the Bible is a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense"? Are you saying that the only way a Catholic could be redeemed in your eyes is for him or her to be non-Catholic?

The pope showed tolerance toward atheism, which would have been one of your demands before it actually came true. We ought to show them the same level of fairness. You don't have to believe that the Bible is anything other than a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense (because I agree that it is), but you don't have to hate people just because they believe in false ideas. From their point-of-view, our ideas are false and by the same standard they would have reason to hate us. But they shouldn't. Nor should we.

I tried with the Obama parallel to show you how prejudice can lead a person to reject anything done by the object of their prejudice, even if it would otherwise be accepted... let me give it another shot. I asked my mother what Obama could do to redeem himself in her eyes, and she said "defund Planned Parenthood". Would that actually redeem Obama for her? Not at all, and the reason is cognitive dissonance. If Obama did defund PP, then her first reaction would probably be denial ("that's not something that Obama would do"). If she had overwhelming evidence that it was true, then she'd probably shift the blame ("he only did it because of political pressure from the Republicans and/or lobbyist groups that I support"). Finally, she might try the tactic that you've employed here and move the goalposts, suggesting that defunding Planned Parenthood was not what she wanted all along because it didn't go far enough... Obama would also have to denounce the Democratic party altogether (among other things). Does this really sound like a reasonable demand to you?

There is ample precedence of the Catholic Church headed by subsequent Popes apologizing for past actions of previous Sees as well as reversing doctrines.

Two examples: Galileo and Limbo, I can cite many others once I get on my computer at home.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-05-2013, 12:41 PM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 10:08 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(25-05-2013 09:38 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Re
"I don't understand why you're being so hard on the new pope for calling atheists that do good works "redeemed" "

Firstly, because he's patronising. The world doesn't need his approval. He should not be judging the world, the world should be judging the Vatican.

Secondly, it makes no difference if he's a nice guy. He's the head of an organization that historically has brutalized mankind for its own benefit. Today's Islamic terrorists are pussies in comparison to the behavior of the Vatican throughout history. As the Vatican's head he should be cowering in shame for past sins against humanity.

Yes, the Pope could win with me by doing the following ( listed in no particular order. )

- He would have to sell some of their assets and pay for the treatment for all the children that have been sexually and psychologically abused by priests over the last five or six decades. He would have to offer them all financial compensation. As already mentioned, he would have to hand over all the records of pedophile priest offenders to secular authorities.

- He would have to shut down the teaching of Catholicism, with all the psychological and social problems that entails, as truth in schools, and apologize for all the brainwashing and time wasting that has gone on in the past.

- He would have to make an unconditional apology to Jews and Muslims for past atrocities against them.

- He would need to apologize for the Vatican supporting Mussolini and Hitler.

- He would need to apologize to the world for trafficking Nazis out of Germany after the war.

- He would have to make a general apology to the world's women, and acknowledge that the Vatican has suppressed them for close to 1500 years.

- He would have to apologize for all the wars in Europe against Protestants in which 15 million people lost their lives.

- He needs to apologize for the Inquisition and the crusades, and for the selling of indulgences.

- Then he needs to apologize for the brutal murders and brainwashing of native Africans and Americans.

- He would have to apologize to all the homosexuals in the world for the Vatican's homophobia. He needs to unconditionally beg forgiveness from all homosexuals, and actively support gay marriage.

- He should apologize for the Vatican's connections with the mafia and other criminal organizations.

- He would have to apologize to the world for the Vatican's actions in suppressing science, and for keeping the western world in the dark ages.

- He needs to apologize to liberal theologians, philosophers and scientists for holding back the intellectual advancement of mankind.

- He would need to promise to stop promoting prayer as a solution to the world's problems.

- He would need to promise to stop stating that going to church was an answer to the world's problems.

- He could then apologize to all the millions of people in Africa and elsewhere who are suffering from AIDS as a direct result of the Vatican's condemnation of condom use.

- He then needs to admit that he's not God's representative on earth and he's not infallible.

- He needs to apologize to all the world's people for undermining free thinking and individuality.

- He would need to promise to stop suggesting that the expression of sexuality is a sin.

- I would like to see the Vatican using some of their vast resources to do some genuine humanitarian work, rather than just talking about it.

- He should admit that the Bible is a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense, and he should stop promoting it as the truth.

- He should also admit that there was no such thing as a pope Peter in Rome, and that Jesus, if he ever existed, was a Jew, not a Christian.

Only then would some of the evils the Vatican has committed be addressed.

I already criticized you for painting the new pope with the same stereotype that you've applied to all of Catholicism, and it still holds true. You're demanding that he personally apologize for things that he is obviously not personally guilty of -- support of Nazis in WW2, condemnation of condom use, past atrocities against Jews and Muslims -- in fact, there isn't a single thing on the list that he has to be sorry for because he didn't do any of it. Are you about to apologize for Stalin's evil acts? Get serious; none of us are responsible for what former atheists did. I anticipate that you'll make a case of special pleading because Stalin (among other evil atheists) didn't do his acts "in the name of atheism", but then again neither did many former popes. Children weren't raped "in the name of Catholicism"... although I think we can both agree that it is a symptom of deeper problems that the Catholic church is directly responsible for (the lack of marriage among priests by Catholic rules and the protection of guilty clerics by the church hierarchy).

And do you seriously expect any Catholic to "admit that the Bible is a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense"? Are you saying that the only way a Catholic could be redeemed in your eyes is for him or her to be non-Catholic?

The pope showed tolerance toward atheism, which would have been one of your demands before it actually came true. We ought to show them the same level of fairness. You don't have to believe that the Bible is anything other than a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense (because I agree that it is), but you don't have to hate people just because they believe in false ideas. From their point-of-view, our ideas are false and by the same standard they would have reason to hate us. But they shouldn't. Nor should we.

I tried with the Obama parallel to show you how prejudice can lead a person to reject anything done by the object of their prejudice, even if it would otherwise be accepted... let me give it another shot. I asked my mother what Obama could do to redeem himself in her eyes, and she said "defund Planned Parenthood". Would that actually redeem Obama for her? Not at all, and the reason is cognitive dissonance. If Obama did defund PP, then her first reaction would probably be denial ("that's not something that Obama would do"). If she had overwhelming evidence that it was true, then she'd probably shift the blame ("he only did it because of political pressure from the Republicans and/or lobbyist groups that I support"). Finally, she might try the tactic that you've employed here and move the goalposts, suggesting that defunding Planned Parenthood was not what she wanted all along because it didn't go far enough... Obama would also have to denounce the Democratic party altogether (among other things). Does this really sound like a reasonable demand to you?

The Vatican,
The Holy See, the central governing body of the Catholic Church and sovereign entity recognized by international law, consisting of the Pope and the Roman Curia. The Vatican can also be referred to as "The Holy city".

(24-05-2013 09:23 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Mr Pope and colleagues,

Mark is Addressing the Vatican. The Pope is a part of that governing body.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fstratzero's post
27-05-2013, 01:55 PM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 12:41 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(27-05-2013 10:08 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  I already criticized you for painting the new pope with the same stereotype that you've applied to all of Catholicism, and it still holds true. You're demanding that he personally apologize for things that he is obviously not personally guilty of -- support of Nazis in WW2, condemnation of condom use, past atrocities against Jews and Muslims -- in fact, there isn't a single thing on the list that he has to be sorry for because he didn't do any of it. Are you about to apologize for Stalin's evil acts? Get serious; none of us are responsible for what former atheists did. I anticipate that you'll make a case of special pleading because Stalin (among other evil atheists) didn't do his acts "in the name of atheism", but then again neither did many former popes. Children weren't raped "in the name of Catholicism"... although I think we can both agree that it is a symptom of deeper problems that the Catholic church is directly responsible for (the lack of marriage among priests by Catholic rules and the protection of guilty clerics by the church hierarchy).

And do you seriously expect any Catholic to "admit that the Bible is a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense"? Are you saying that the only way a Catholic could be redeemed in your eyes is for him or her to be non-Catholic?

The pope showed tolerance toward atheism, which would have been one of your demands before it actually came true. We ought to show them the same level of fairness. You don't have to believe that the Bible is anything other than a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense (because I agree that it is), but you don't have to hate people just because they believe in false ideas. From their point-of-view, our ideas are false and by the same standard they would have reason to hate us. But they shouldn't. Nor should we.

I tried with the Obama parallel to show you how prejudice can lead a person to reject anything done by the object of their prejudice, even if it would otherwise be accepted... let me give it another shot. I asked my mother what Obama could do to redeem himself in her eyes, and she said "defund Planned Parenthood". Would that actually redeem Obama for her? Not at all, and the reason is cognitive dissonance. If Obama did defund PP, then her first reaction would probably be denial ("that's not something that Obama would do"). If she had overwhelming evidence that it was true, then she'd probably shift the blame ("he only did it because of political pressure from the Republicans and/or lobbyist groups that I support"). Finally, she might try the tactic that you've employed here and move the goalposts, suggesting that defunding Planned Parenthood was not what she wanted all along because it didn't go far enough... Obama would also have to denounce the Democratic party altogether (among other things). Does this really sound like a reasonable demand to you?

The Vatican,
The Holy See, the central governing body of the Catholic Church and sovereign entity recognized by international law, consisting of the Pope and the Roman Curia. The Vatican can also be referred to as "The Holy city".

(24-05-2013 09:23 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Mr Pope and colleagues,

Mark is Addressing the Vatican. The Pope is a part of that governing body.

Also as the elected head (granted by a very small portion of the whole but thats their system) The Pope is in a similar position as a President of a country or the CEO of a corporation (he might actually be both given the catholic church finances and investments) and as such he is responsible for actions current and past of the entity he represents.

IE: BC has a huge oil spill in the gulf of mexico due to gross negligence. The CEO has in all likelihood never stepped foot on that rig but he is ultimately responsible.

So yes the Pope is responsible for the actions of the catholic church because he is the head of the church.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
27-05-2013, 02:45 PM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
Sorry Mark.
Michelangelo beat ya to it. In the Sistine ceiling, he (the most famous gay artist of all time) said it for you. It's still there, for anyone to see. He "mooned" the pope.

[Image: sistinestarsplanets.jpg]

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
27-05-2013, 02:54 PM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
@MarkFulton
Half the things you listed the Vatican has already done, the other half are already part of Catholicism or ridiculous.
In the United States the Church has paid over 2.6 Billion dollars to those affected by child abuse, which has bankrupted several parishes.

Pope John Paul II did this. I still disagree with the apology, but the Church has done it.

So what if they supported Hitler, everyone did. The prime minister of Canada said that "Hitler was a simple person who truly loved his fellow man". You have to remember that at the time Fascism was considered a lesser evil then communism so it garnered a lot of support. Also JFK's father was a Nazi informer. Although I don't think anybody really cared. They also pulled there support from Hitler before the war began with the document "Mitt Brenner Sorge"

G.K. Chesterton would disagree with you there as he considered the Virgin Mary to be the Basis for chivalry and good feminism.

Why should he apologize for wars in a region which found almost any excuse to make war anyway.

If he should apologize for the crusades, then what should the church have done. Should the Church have done nothing and just left Alexios Comenus to the Turks. The Crusade originated because the Byzantine empire was getting destroyed. So the pope urged that Catholics go and help out. Unfortunately the pope had no control over the armies. This happened several times where crusading armies went rogue. I also don't think they should apologize for indulgences especially considering the Church still practices indulgences. You have to remember that an indulgence is a form of penance which only applied to some one who had already confessed. This was because penances at the time where very harsh and someone might accrue over 150 years of only bread and water for their penance. unfortunately their was abuse.

Part of the problem of Gay marriage is not so much that the church is against Gay marriage but that they promote their own concept of marriage. This is why so many people think that the church is going to change its views on homosexuality because they think the church only follows it because it forbids it in the bible. However the entirety of Catholic teaching roots itself in the concept of Natural Law, a concept which can be found outside religion (Although it is normally interior as appose to the Church's exterior concept). So within this they preach that sex should be procreative and unitive. As gays cannot fulfill one of these criteria, gay sex cannot be compatible with the philosophy of the Church. To ask them to deny that is to deny literally their entire concept of the world, which probably won't happen.

And what about all the work the Church did to promote science. Other then Galileo, who was an idiot, the church has often supported scientists as well as artists and musicians by being one of the largest patrons in the medieval world as well as being the main preserver of knowledge. It is because of the church that the dark ages didn't last longer.

The Church doesn't consider any expression of sexuality to be a sin. In fact JPII's two greatest works were "Theology of the Body" and "love and responsibility" where he discussion at length that sex is considered on of the greatest expressions of love.

Also to deny the Bible, his role of representative of God, and Jesus' existence, you are basically saying that the only way you will forgive the Catholic church is if they become atheist. Not a great convincing point. Kind of like me saying that I will only accept you if you convert to Catholicism. And considering what the pope just said about Atheists ability to be redeemed, I'd say he has one up on you.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-05-2013, 03:05 PM (This post was last modified: 27-05-2013 03:45 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 02:54 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  @MarkFulton
Half the things you listed the Vatican has already done, the other half are already part of Catholicism or ridiculous.
In the United States the Church has paid over 2.6 Billion dollars to those affected by child abuse, which has bankrupted several parishes.

Pope John Paul II did this. I still disagree with the apology, but the Church has done it.

So what if they supported Hitler, everyone did. The prime minister of Canada said that "Hitler was a simple person who truly loved his fellow man". You have to remember that at the time Fascism was considered a lesser evil then communism so it garnered a lot of support. Also JFK's father was a Nazi informer. Although I don't think anybody really cared. They also pulled there support from Hitler before the war began with the document "Mitt Brenner Sorge"

G.K. Chesterton would disagree with you there as he considered the Virgin Mary to be the Basis for chivalry and good feminism.

Why should he apologize for wars in a region which found almost any excuse to make war anyway.

If he should apologize for the crusades, then what should the church have done. Should the Church have done nothing and just left Alexios Comenus to the Turks. The Crusade originated because the Byzantine empire was getting destroyed. So the pope urged that Catholics go and help out. Unfortunately the pope had no control over the armies. This happened several times where crusading armies went rogue. I also don't think they should apologize for indulgences especially considering the Church still practices indulgences. You have to remember that an indulgence is a form of penance which only applied to some one who had already confessed. This was because penances at the time where very harsh and someone might accrue over 150 years of only bread and water for their penance. unfortunately their was abuse.

Part of the problem of Gay marriage is not so much that the church is against Gay marriage but that they promote their own concept of marriage. This is why so many people think that the church is going to change its views on homosexuality because they think the church only follows it because it forbids it in the bible. However the entirety of Catholic teaching roots itself in the concept of Natural Law, a concept which can be found outside religion (Although it is normally interior as appose to the Church's exterior concept). So within this they preach that sex should be procreative and unitive. As gays cannot fulfill one of these criteria, gay sex cannot be compatible with the philosophy of the Church. To ask them to deny that is to deny literally their entire concept of the world, which probably won't happen.

And what about all the work the Church did to promote science. Other then Galileo, who was an idiot, the church has often supported scientists as well as artists and musicians by being one of the largest patrons in the medieval world as well as being the main preserver of knowledge. It is because of the church that the dark ages didn't last longer.

The Church doesn't consider any expression of sexuality to be a sin. In fact JPII's two greatest works were "Theology of the Body" and "love and responsibility" where he discussion at length that sex is considered on of the greatest expressions of love.

Also to deny the Bible, his role of representative of God, and Jesus' existence, you are basically saying that the only way you will forgive the Catholic church is if they become atheist. Not a great convincing point. Kind of like me saying that I will only accept you if you convert to Catholicism. And considering what the pope just said about Atheists ability to be redeemed, I'd say he has one up on you.

"Several parishes" ?? Try many dioceses. Nice try at minimizing the horrific scandal. All such garbage. The church says ANY expression of sexuality outside marriage is a sin. The "unnatural" thing did not have to do with "children" but the act. Nice try at revisionism. Any act that cannot potentially result in a child is immoral. Your church cooked up the bullshit of "natural family planning" even while maintaining (in Moral Theology), that the INTENTION was what makes an act immoral. Complete nonsense, and inconsistency. Too bad you don't know your own cult. The Bible says nothing about the pope or the bishop of Rome being "god's representative". It was made up, and the use of the word "ecclesia" is a Greek word, which proves Jebus never said it. There was no such thing as a "church" when Jebus was alive, so saying "upon this rock I will build my *church*" makes no sense, as there was no such thing as a "church" at the time. The entire history of the "wresting of supreme power" from the "co-equal patriarchs" by the bishop of Rome is one of the saddest episodes in religious history, which you people conveniently, (even while laughably saying you are the church of "tradition"), never address.

The entire business of "natural law" has been debunked by science, even though you deny it. All species on the planet engage in same-sex behaviors. They don't promote "their own concept of marriage", They ask for equality. Nothing else. Typical religious bs. So Galileo was an "idiot". I see. And you're not ? Indeed.

Who cares what G.K. Chesterton thought ? The fact is Mary took over the role in chivalry from the Arthurian Legends, and was not the origin for it. Joseph Campbell showed the "mother goddess" was ubiquitous in all religions, and was nothing unique to the Roman church, and neither was your mother goddess, Mary. What has that got to do with anything ? Are you trying to justify all the bullshit of your church with one historical error ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
27-05-2013, 03:40 PM (This post was last modified: 27-05-2013 03:48 PM by fstratzero.)
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 02:54 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  @MarkFulton
Half the things you listed the Vatican has already done, the other half are already part of Catholicism or ridiculous.
In the United States the Church has paid over 2.6 Billion dollars to those affected by child abuse, which has bankrupted several parishes.

Pope John Paul II did this. I still disagree with the apology, but the Church has done it.

So what if they supported Hitler, everyone did. The prime minister of Canada said that "Hitler was a simple person who truly loved his fellow man". You have to remember that at the time Fascism was considered a lesser evil then communism so it garnered a lot of support. Also JFK's father was a Nazi informer. Although I don't think anybody really cared. They also pulled there support from Hitler before the war began with the document "Mitt Brenner Sorge"

G.K. Chesterton would disagree with you there as he considered the Virgin Mary to be the Basis for chivalry and good feminism.

Why should he apologize for wars in a region which found almost any excuse to make war anyway.

If he should apologize for the crusades, then what should the church have done. Should the Church have done nothing and just left Alexios Comenus to the Turks. The Crusade originated because the Byzantine empire was getting destroyed. So the pope urged that Catholics go and help out. Unfortunately the pope had no control over the armies. This happened several times where crusading armies went rogue. I also don't think they should apologize for indulgences especially considering the Church still practices indulgences. You have to remember that an indulgence is a form of penance which only applied to some one who had already confessed. This was because penances at the time where very harsh and someone might accrue over 150 years of only bread and water for their penance. unfortunately their was abuse.

Part of the problem of Gay marriage is not so much that the church is against Gay marriage but that they promote their own concept of marriage. This is why so many people think that the church is going to change its views on homosexuality because they think the church only follows it because it forbids it in the bible. However the entirety of Catholic teaching roots itself in the concept of Natural Law, a concept which can be found outside religion (Although it is normally interior as appose to the Church's exterior concept). So within this they preach that sex should be procreative and unitive. As gays cannot fulfill one of these criteria, gay sex cannot be compatible with the philosophy of the Church. To ask them to deny that is to deny literally their entire concept of the world, which probably won't happen.

And what about all the work the Church did to promote science. Other then Galileo, who was an idiot, the church has often supported scientists as well as artists and musicians by being one of the largest patrons in the medieval world as well as being the main preserver of knowledge. It is because of the church that the dark ages didn't last longer.

The Church doesn't consider any expression of sexuality to be a sin. In fact JPII's two greatest works were "Theology of the Body" and "love and responsibility" where he discussion at length that sex is considered on of the greatest expressions of love.

Also to deny the Bible, his role of representative of God, and Jesus' existence, you are basically saying that the only way you will forgive the Catholic church is if they become atheist. Not a great convincing point. Kind of like me saying that I will only accept you if you convert to Catholicism. And considering what the pope just said about Atheists ability to be redeemed, I'd say he has one up on you.

Drooling

Canadian theists are often as bad as our States counterparts.

You don't get it. What the Catholic church does in one place doesn't mean the entire church gets off scott free.

The pedophile's should be brought to the court systems of their respective countries, and suffer the penalty other pedophiles get.

Paying money to avoid justice is bribery by definition. If they continue to hide these criminals they will have to dole out money until every pedophile stops molesting, or dies. The churches argument against gay marriage is hypocritical as alter boys are the churches favorite target.

The Crusades shouldn't be justified by one Kings cry for help. Remember the sack of Constantinople?

The Catholic version of natural law is:

The Catholic Church understands human beings to consist of body and mind, the physical and the non-physical (or soul perhaps), and that the two are inextricably linked. Humans are capable of discerning the difference between good and evil because they have a conscience. There are many manifestations of the good that we can pursue. Some, like procreation, are common to other animals, while others, like the pursuit of truth, are inclinations peculiar to the capacities of human beings.

Which is completely different from Natural Law as atheists understand it.

Thomas Hobbes version

As used by Thomas Hobbes in his treatises Leviathan and De Cive, natural law is "a precept, or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life, or takes away the means of preserving the same; and to omit that by which he thinks it may best be preserved."

Natural Law as we understand it in the modern sense:

A physical law or scientific law, according to the Oxford English dictionary, "is a theoretical principle deduced from particular facts, applicable to a defined group or class of phenomena, and expressible by the statement that a particular phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions be present."

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fstratzero's post
27-05-2013, 04:02 PM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(25-05-2013 08:28 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  I don't understand why you're being so hard on the new pope for calling atheists that do good works "redeemed". Would you rather that he follow the actions of former popes and call us "heretics"?

He recognized the value of good acts, and at the same time put certain atheists in a positive light. His words were an attempt to make atheists look favorable to Catholics who would have previously seen us as evil, hell-bound lost causes, but instead Catholics (thanks to his words) may find us to be fine as we are and not in need of their proselytizing.

Can the pope even win with you? Is there anything that he possibly could do to satisfy you? You've blamed him personally here for things that he didn't necessarily do -- "burning people for reading [the bible] in their native tongue", "using his intricate network to poison the world through schools and the media", and "creating clones who recite dogma without question". This smells of prejudice, which I suppose is why he already lost in your eyes before he even opened his mouth.

If past popes had been like him, then Catholicism would probably not be the "evil regime" that it is today. I'm proud of him showing the rational reasoning that led him to see atheists for the good people they are (in the cases where that is actually true) and for not assuming that all atheists are cruel, Christian-hating militants as many less-rational Christians still do... just because some of us are.

The Vatican has just announced that, despite what Pope Francis said in his homily earlier this week, atheists are still going to hell.

http://www.irishcentral.com/story/ent/ma...87111.html

Whatever the pope says has to be, confirmed by the Vatican.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fstratzero's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: