A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-05-2013, 09:20 PM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
@frstratzero
?

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, 10:20 PM (This post was last modified: 27-05-2013 10:37 PM by Full Circle.)
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 07:08 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  Also when I call Galileo an idiot it is because he said he would write an even argument detailing the different views on Planetary movement. He then proceeded to put the argument of the geocentrics into the mouth of a buffoon called Simplicio. Which is not a great way to keep friends especially when they have power over you. Also I would like to point out that Galileo's points where incorrect, the tides are not caused by the sun but the moon, as Kepler discovered not 30 years before.

You do realize that Simplicio (Italian play on word simpleton to allude that the Church was a Simpleton) was a madeup character that he concocted in his Dialogue that represented the Church so he could tell of his astronomical observations in a very circumspect and clever way without commiting heresy and being burned at the stake?

I am astounded at your characterization of Galileo, the only possible explanation is that you haven't read his works and contributions to science or have read them but didn't understand them. Either way you are embarrasing yourself by calling him names.

Galileo has been called the "father of modern observational astronomy", the "father of modern physics", the "father of science", and "the Father of Modern Science".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

Dialogue - http://books.google.com/books?id=SPhnaiE...&q&f=false

“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
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
28-05-2013, 12:53 AM (This post was last modified: 28-05-2013 02:08 AM by Mark Fulton.)
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?

Re "You're demanding that he personally apologize for things that he is obviously not personally guilty of"

It's largely irrelevant whether he's personally guily or not. He's the spokesman for them, and their head. I admit it is early days (for him), but he's yet to start making amends.

The Catholic church (ie the Vatican) had, and still has, a policy of covering up priest pedophilia and protecting the offenders. THAT IS IMMORAL. I demand an apology from the current pope for that, and financial compensation for the victims, and the records of offenders to be handed over to secular authorities. End of argument.

Re "And do you seriously expect any Catholic to "admit that the Bible is a mountain-load of fabricated nonsense"?" YES! I suggest all catholics should become informed about the real history of their book, and the honest ones amongst would admit this. Until there's evidence they've examined their book critically, they shouldn't be allowed to promote said book as the truth without objection from people like me.

Re "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 word "redeemed" means nothing to me. I have no wish, and am not presumptuous enough, to judge individuals. I respect anyone, including catholics, who put forward a rational argument.

Re "The pope showed tolerance toward atheism,"
WTF? The pope should be cowering in shame after 1900 years of the Vatican's abuse of the world's people. We shouldn't print what he thinks about anything until he comes good with apologies and compensation.

Re "We ought to show them the same level of fairness."
I believe in fairness too.

I know you think I am "ranting" about this, and you probably think I'm exaggerating the evils of the Vatican. I seriously don't think I am. I have read the history. I've read their statements from the last 800 years , and , apart from the odd idea from Vatican 2 in the 1960's, they have always been all about propping up their own power and wealth. They have been out of touch with society at large. I see barely no humanitarian work. Their wealth is obscene. Yet they still strut around telling people how to live their lives, and still milk the market for all it is worth, while raping the children.

The Vatican has been and is, the most evil (large) organization in the world. There is no doubt about that in my mind.

The fact that they still have some credibility in today's world appalls me. It's like a battered wife going back to the violent husband who's still sexually abusing the children.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
28-05-2013, 01:20 AM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 09:20 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  @frstratzero
?

I get you a real reply tomorrow. I'm tired and figured that guy might lighten the mood for debate.

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
28-05-2013, 03:19 AM (This post was last modified: 28-05-2013 04:37 AM by Mark Fulton.)
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.

TS, I'll try to be civil to you, but it won't be easy.

You write
"In the United States the Church has paid over 2.6 Billion dollars to those affected by child abuse, which has bankrupted several parishes."

What's your point?

Let's look at some facts. In the last ten years, the American media has exposed scandals in nearly every state of the USA. In February 2004, the final reports of two surveys commissioned by the US bishops (one must give them credit for doing this) were released. These surveys were conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York (http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/Pries...andal.htm) and by the National Review Board
(http://www.nccbuscc.org/nrb/nrbstudy/nrbreport.pdf ). Both reports looked at the issue of youth sexual abuse among Catholic clergy in the USA since the 1950s.

The John Jay survey revealed that almost forty-five hundred clergy perpetrators had been reported by dioceses since 1950, 4.3 percent of those actively working as priests in the period, and that at least ten thousand known victims had made plausible allegations against priests. The authors made the point that these figures were almost certainly an underestimate and that the church would face many more allegations in the years to come. Most victims were aged eleven to fourteen and eighty-one percent were boys. Seventy-six percent of the allegations made against priests had never been reported to law enforcement authorities.

The National Review Board report placed blame for the widespread scandals directly on the bishops’ negligence. One of its concluding recommendations was that
“dioceses and orders should report all allegations of sexual abuse to the civil authorities, regardless of the circumstances, or the age or perceived credibility of the accuser” (pg.144).

Richard Sipe is a retired American Roman Catholic priest involved in full-time research and consultation about the sexual practices of Roman Catholic clergy (http://www.richardsipe.com/reports/sipe_...2005.htm). He’s authored six books on the subject, and has served as a respected consultant and expert witness in over two hundred cases involving sexual abuse of minors by Roman Catholic clergy. He claimed, in 2005, that

“Dioceses throughout the United States are now recording an average of 7 to 9 percent priest abusers of minors in their records.” (http://www.richardsipe.com/Dialogue/Dial...–23.html). The existence of any known child abusers still working as catholic priests is unacceptable.


Are you suggesting a few billion dollars can compensate 10, 000+ American families
who have been devastated by the abuse?

The Vatican hierarchy is made up of aging men who usually have had no experience raising children, and in my opinion show little real regard or empathy for people. They don’t reside in households or with real families. They live in an old boys’ network, and are dedicated to the Holy Mother Church that feeds, houses, and pays them. They like to be known as “Father,” but they don’t behave like true fathers. They haven’t had to hear the cries of traumatized children. They’re not privy to the damage done to victims: the ensuing years of depression, drug addiction, alcoholism, panic attacks, sexual dysfunction, and sometimes suicide that are so often the consequences of being sexually abused as a child. ( http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/health/ef...hilia.html ) No amount of money can give these people their lives back.

"I still disagree with the apology, but the Church has done it." WELL FUCK YOU, YOU IGNORANT TWERP!

Oops, I forgot to be nice.Cool

RE "So what if they supported Hitler, everyone did."
I'm not even going to grace this with a reply.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
28-05-2013, 03:45 AM (This post was last modified: 28-05-2013 04:38 AM by Mark Fulton.)
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.

Re "you are basically saying that the only way you will forgive the Catholic church is if they become atheist."

The catholic church doesn't want my forgiveness. What's right or wrong, good or bad, truthful or a lie is not what they're about. For them, it's all about power and its trappings. I mean nothing to them.

And you're right. I won't forgive them.

What's important to them is the sheep, the gullible masses, the people like you. You're their lifeblood. You mean they never have to get a real job; that they have a guaranteed income stream.

Promise the plebs heaven, threaten them with hell, rape their kids, and ride the cash cow using ideas you never have to deliver on. Thumbsup

It's gotta be the largest scam ever inflicted on mankind.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2013, 04:31 AM (This post was last modified: 28-05-2013 05:30 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(28-05-2013 03:45 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(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.

Re "you are basically saying that the only way you will forgive the Catholic church is if they become atheist."

The catholic church doesn't want my forgiveness. What's right or wrong, good or bad, truthful or a lie is not what they're about. For them it's all about power and its trappings. I mean nothing to them.

And you're right. I won't forgive them.

What's important to them is the sheep, the gullible masses, the people like you. You're their lifeblood. You mean they never have to get a real job; that they have a guaranteed income stream.

Promise the plebs heaven, threaten them with hell, rape their kids, and ride the cash cow using ideas you never have to deliver on.

It's gotta be the largest scam ever inflicted on mankind.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/h...2800_n.jpg
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2013, 06:09 AM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
(27-05-2013 07:08 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  I already gave my reasons why I believe the Church had no significant culpability for the impending genocide. They pulled their support from Hitler in 1938 the Genocide did not begin until 1943.

Please learn some actual history.
Quote:From the beginning of the Third Reich concentration camps were founded, initially as places of incarceration. Although the death rate in the concentration camps was high, with a mortality rate of 50%, they were not designed to be killing centers. (By 1942, six large extermination camps had been established in Nazi-occupied Poland, which were built solely for mass killings.) After 1939, the camps increasingly became places where Jews and POWs were either killed or made to work as slave laborers, undernourished and tortured. It is estimated that the Germans established 15,000 camps and subcamps in the occupied countries, mostly in eastern Europe. New camps were founded in areas with large Jewish, Polish intelligentsia, communist, or Roma and Sinti populations, including inside Germany. The transportation of prisoners was often carried out under horrifying conditions using rail freight cars, in which many died before reaching their destination.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
28-05-2013, 10:01 AM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
@ FullCircle

Quote:You do realize that Simplicio (Italian play on word simpleton to allude that the Church was a Simpleton) was a madeup character that he concocted in his Dialogue that represented the Church so he could tell of his astronomical observations in a very circumspect and clever way without committing heresy and being burned at the stake?

Yes that was the point I was trying to make in my post. Galileo asked to do a dialogue, The Pope encouraged him to do so, under the condition that he does not present the theory as truth and that he include his (pope Urban VIII) favorite arguments within the dialogue. What does Galileo do? He writes a dialogue which leaves no doubt as to what the stance of the author his and puts the Popes arguments into the mouth of Simplicio.

Quote:I am astounded at your characterization of Galileo, the only possible explanation is that you haven't read his works and contributions to science or have read them but didn't understand them

You are very correct I have never read the Dialogue and I have no intention of reading it. I am not an astronomer, I most likely would not understand anything in it, so why read it. My opinions on Galileo are based entirely upon what I have read on Wikipedia and other sources. So I apologize if what I said is wrong, (And from further reading I seem to have been wrong about the sunspots). Also I have nothing to say about his other contributions as I know little about them, but in truth they don't particularly matter in this discussion as when I called him an idiot I was referring to his actions during the Galileo affair. I'm sure he was an excellent philosopher and scientist.

A man can be very intelligent and yet still be an idiot. it is difficult to think of an equivalent since worldly powers have very little control over science these days but it is almost as if I approached Obama regarding say healthcare, and he told me to write an even argument which included some of his favourite arguments. I then proceed to call the proponent of the healthcare bill "the Niggardly Man" while shooting down each of his arguments. Do you really think he is going to be that happy with me.

That is why he was an idiot, he alienated his chief supporters who had the power to pardon him. He alienated many of the other scientific minds of the time by deriding and more or less ignoring the Tychian system, which was becoming more popular amongst scientists. He also didn't account for the stellar parallax. so he kind of put himself there out on his own. And always remember its not what you know but who you know.

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
28-05-2013, 10:17 AM
RE: A Message to the Vatican...FUCK YOU!
@MarkFulton
you write
Quote:What's your point?

My Point is this you said at the beginning, which my entire most was supposed to argue against that

Quote: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.

So what do you want. You ask that the church give money to those affected by child abuse, I say they have, and then you say "so what". What do you want!

Could the church still be more transparent with whatever documents it has regarding the sex abuse scandal, yes I'll give you that. However this Pope, at least from his opening statements, appears to want to change this. He already plans to remake the curia and its hierarchy, so give him some time, it's only been two months.

Quote:"I still disagree with the apology, but the Church has done it." WELL FUCK YOU, YOU IGNORANT TWERP!

Hey I'm not ignorant, I'm just a cold hearted bastard (also that was directed against apparent atrocities toward Jews and Muslims, not the sex scandal)

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: