Catholic Church Reburies "Heretic" Copernicus as Hero

[Galileo Galilei]

Catholic Church Reburies "Heretic" Copernicus as Hero

Nicolaus Copernicus was called a heretic by the Catholic Church for saying that the Sun, not the Earth, was the center of the Universe. 500 years since his death, the same Church has decided the astronomer was a hero. Polish priests blessed what is believed to be Copernicus’ remains and reburied them in the spot where his skull was found in 2005.

The burial ceremony was officiated by some of Poland’s top clerics, signaling the healing of the rift between Copernicus and the Catholic Church. Copernicus’ once-unmarked grave now has a granite tombstone that honors the astronomer for his contribution to modern scientific age and to the church that once disowned him. The marker recognizes Copernicus as the founder of the heliocentric theory and as a church canon.

The Church’s acceptance of Copernicus comes 18 years after it made peace with Galileo Galilei, who was also condemned for helping advance Copernicus’ theory. Copernicus was generally labeled a heretic for other offenses like his sympathy for Lutheranism rather than his views about the universe, as his death.

Read more:

http://dailycontributor.com/catholic-church-reburies-heretic-copernicus-as-hero/15254/#ixzz0roY1ZlCq

[JohnEngland]

Sigh, another smear on the Catholic Church. Seriously, I don't think that there is a single institution that gets lied about and disorted more than the Church. Next, the media are going to tell us that the Church tried to cover up a secret, female pope. Oh wait... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288501/Mystery-pregnant-pope-New-film-reopens-Vaticans-enduring-wounds.html

[Dr.3D]

Catholic Church Reburies "Heretic" Copernicus as Hero

Nicolaus Copernicus was called a heretic by the Catholic Church for saying that the Sun, not the Earth, was the center of the Universe. 500 years since his death, the same Church has decided the astronomer was a hero. Polish priests blessed what is believed to be Copernicus’ remains and reburied them in the spot where his skull was found in 2005.

The burial ceremony was officiated by some of Poland’s top clerics, signaling the healing of the rift between Copernicus and the Catholic Church. Copernicus’ once-unmarked grave now has a granite tombstone that honors the astronomer for his contribution to modern scientific age and to the church that once disowned him. The marker recognizes Copernicus as the founder of the heliocentric theory and as a church canon.

The Church’s acceptance of Copernicus comes 18 years after it made peace with Galileo Galilei, who was also condemned for helping advance Copernicus’ theory. Copernicus was generally labeled a heretic for other offenses like his sympathy for Lutheranism rather than his views about the universe, as his death.

Read more:

http://dailycontributor.com/catholic-church-reburies-heretic-copernicus-as-hero/15254/#ixzz0roY1ZlCq

The sun is not the center of the universe. It is the center of our planetary system.

[Galileo Galilei]

Sigh, another smear on the Catholic Church. Seriously, I don't think that there is a single institution that gets lied about and disorted more than the Church. Next, the media are going to tell us that the Church tried to cover up a secret, female pope. Oh wait... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288501/Mystery-pregnant-pope-New-film-reopens-Vaticans-enduring-wounds.html

Copernicus was in the clear during his lifetime. But during the time of Galileo, Copernicus's book was banned and his ideas were banned.

Galileo actually whited out the passages of Copernicus's book that were prohibited, but he didn't use enough white out, so you could still see through down to the original page.

[Galileo Galilei]

The sun is not the center of the universe. It is the center of our planetary system.

In 1500s and 1600s, the words used to denote "universe" and "solar system" were interchangable. I suggest you take this important issue up with the translator.

[Vessol]

Meh, the Church is just trying to get some good PR after all the recent scandals being reveled that threw their membership into a frenzy.

It's good to see the Church so desperate and trying to gain some power in the modern world.

I hope that someday people realize that organized religion is just a tool for the State to control people.
(Note: I'm not anti-religious, at all. I think religion can be a great tool to help people and make their lives feel more fulfilled. It is also a personal matter. I however do not like organized religion.)

[BlackTerrel]

Shouldn't this be in the religion section?

[Agorism]

Regressives

[tasteless]

Meh, the Church is just trying to get some good PR after all the recent scandals being reveled that threw their membership into a frenzy.

It's good to see the Church so desperate and trying to gain some power in the modern world.

I hope that someday people realize that organized religion is just a tool for the State to control people.
(Note: I'm not anti-religious, at all. I think religion can be a great tool to help people and make their lives feel more fulfilled. It is also a personal matter. I however do not like organized religion.)

nothing the Church does will ever make people like you happy.

if they leave stuff alone, you guys will say "WHEN WILL THE CHURCH APOLOGIZE FOR THEIR INJUSTICES!!!!1111111ONE

when they go through the pains of setting things right, you say "LOOK AT THE CHURCH MAKING A POWER GRAB WITH A PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN!!!!1111oneoneoenoene"

[qh4dotcom]

I'm tired of the hypocrisy of religious folks...54% of Catholics who are supposed to be against abortion and against killing voted for pro-abortion and pro-war Obama.

[tremendoustie]

I'm tired of the hypocrisy of religious folks...54% of Catholics who are supposed to be against abortion and against killing voted for pro-abortion and pro-war Obama.

At the time, Obama was considered the anti-war vote. He promised to bring the troops home.

[Bman]

One has to wonder how long it will take them to do the same with Darwin.

[BlackTerrel]

nothing the Church does will ever make people like you happy.

if they leave stuff alone, you guys will say "WHEN WILL THE CHURCH APOLOGIZE FOR THEIR INJUSTICES!!!!1111111ONE

when they go through the pains of setting things right, you say "LOOK AT THE CHURCH MAKING A POWER GRAB WITH A PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN!!!!1111oneoneoenoene"

+1

[BlackTerrel]

I'm tired of the hypocrisy of religious folks...54% of Catholics who are supposed to be against abortion and against killing voted for pro-abortion and pro-war Obama.

How did the atheists vote?

The hostility against Christianity on these boards confuses me. It makes no sense.

[JohnEngland]

nothing the Church does will ever make people like you happy.

if they leave stuff alone, you guys will say "WHEN WILL THE CHURCH APOLOGIZE FOR THEIR INJUSTICES!!!!1111111ONE

when they go through the pains of setting things right, you say "LOOK AT THE CHURCH MAKING A POWER GRAB WITH A PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN!!!!1111oneoneoenoene"

LOL. But I suppose with all the false narratives and smears by the media, it's no surprise that many think Catholics are evil hatemongers who want to rape small children and kill millions of Africans. Oh well, I guess being a libertarian-leaning, Austrian-schooling Catholic, one quickly gets used to ignoring most of what the media "reports" about - Catholicism-related or otherwise!

[Up The Deise]

One has to wonder how long it will take them to do the same with Darwin.

AFAIK the RC church never condemned or presecuted Darwin.

[Krugerrand]

Copernicus was in the clear during his lifetime. But during the time of Galileo, Copernicus's book was banned and his ideas were banned.

Galileo actually whited out the passages of Copernicus's book that were prohibited, but he didn't use enough white out, so you could still see through down to the original page.

Did you know that Michael Nesmith's (of the Monkees) mother invented Liquid Paper?

[jmdrake]

Sigh, another smear on the Catholic Church. Seriously, I don't think that there is a single institution that gets lied about and disorted more than the Church. Next, the media are going to tell us that the Church tried to cover up a secret, female pope. Oh wait... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288501/Mystery-pregnant-pope-New-film-reopens-Vaticans-enduring-wounds.html

I'm confused. How is an article about the Catholic Church attempting to undue a mistake a "smear"? Not unless you really believe the claims of papal infallibility. And most of its recent problems it brought on itself.

[jmdrake]

LOL. But I suppose with all the false narratives and smears by the media, it's no surprise that many think Catholics are evil hatemongers who want to rape small children and kill millions of Africans. Oh well, I guess being a libertarian-leaning, Austrian-schooling Catholic, one quickly gets used to ignoring most of what the media "reports" about - Catholicism-related or otherwise!

I don't know anybody that thinks that. I do know many people, myself included, believe that the Church hierarchy put protection of rapist priests over protection of little kids. And I believe that because that's what the Vatican archives show. Or to coin a phrase "If it's a lie, they told it." (Or rather they wrote about it and tried to bury it in the archives.) That doesn't mean all Catholics are bad anymore than or government's corrupt policies means that all Americans are bad.

[qh4dotcom]

How did the atheists vote?

The hostility against Christianity on these boards confuses me. It makes no sense.

Even worse, 75% voted for Obama

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p2

[qh4dotcom]

At the time, Obama was considered the anti-war vote. He promised to bring the troops home.

Oh please, Anyone who voted for Obama because he was going to end the wars needs to have his head examined. Obama promised and was very clear during the
campaign trail about 16 months of war in Iraq...that alone should have been unacceptable to any soldier who is tired of being in the Iraqi hellhole and
unacceptable to his family members as well. He also promised an escalation in the war in Afghanistan. 8 years of war is more than enough....anybody
promising more war should not have been voted in....and 16 months have passed since he was elected and the wars still keep going on.

[tremendoustie]

Oh please, Anyone who voted for Obama because he was going to end the wars needs to have his head examined.


Then about 50% of America needs to have their heads examined. Not that I necessarily disagree ...

He flat out promised the troops would be out of Iraq by now.



Obama promised and was very clear during the
campaign trail about 16 months of war in Iraq...that alone should have been unacceptable to any soldier who is tired of being in the Iraqi hellhole and
unacceptable to his family members as well. He also promised an escalation in the war in Afghanistan. 8 years of war is more than enough....anybody
promising more war should not have been voted in....and 16 months have passed since he was elected and the wars still keep going on.

Sure, but in many people's minds, the only alternative was McCain, who was even more of a warmonger. "Lesser of two evils" and all that. Yet another fallacy of electoral politics: the idea that if someone offers you a choice between getting shot or beaten, and you select the latter, that means you consented to the beating.

The fact is, most of the people who opposed the wars voted for Obama. And most of the people who voted for Bush wanted smaller government. Whoops. Forget consent of the people, this form of government doesn't even have consent of the majority most of the time. They just get to pick which of two con artists will be the one to enslave them for the next four years.

[BlackTerrel]

I'm confused. How is an article about the Catholic Church attempting to undue a mistake a "smear"? Not unless you really believe the claims of papal infallibility. And most of its recent problems it brought on itself.

Perhaps not the article itself but read the thread. With a couple exceptions it's an anti-Catholic fest. It doesn't take much for people to latch on.

There is a hostility against Christianity (not just Catholicism) by a couple members here. It is pretty noticeable. I also wonder why this is not in the Religion subforum. Or even hot topics - if it were other religions it would be.

[John Taylor]

The sun is not the center of the universe. It is the center of our planetary system.

Don't be a heretic.

[BlackTerrel]

Even worse, 75% voted for Obama

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p2

So 75% of atheists voted for Obama and 54% of Catholics did. But some on this thread are singling out Catholics for voting for Obama???

Can someone explain the logic here...

[t0rnado]

Sigh, another smear on the Catholic Church. Seriously, I don't think that there is a single institution that gets lied about and disorted more than the Church. Next, the media are going to tell us that the Church tried to cover up a secret, female pope. Oh wait... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288501/Mystery-pregnant-pope-New-film-reopens-Vaticans-enduring-wounds.html

The DailyMail is a tabloid and if you spent even 5 seconds browsing the page you linked to, you'd realize that. The Catholic church is a ring of fascist child molesters who deserve to get expose for every crime they've committed against humanity.

[tasteless]

The DailyMail is a tabloid and if you spent even 5 seconds browsing the page you linked to, you'd realize that. The Catholic church is a ring of fascist child molesters who deserve to get expose for every crime they've committed against humanity.

If the Church is a ring of fascist child molesters, then so are doctors, psychologists, teachers, bus drivers, camp counselors, coaches, etc.

Darn, who do we have left to trust? Wait, isn't Ron Paul a doctor? Guess you'll be criticizing him too then.

[BlackTerrel]

The DailyMail is a tabloid and if you spent even 5 seconds browsing the page you linked to, you'd realize that. The Catholic church is a ring of fascist child molesters who deserve to get expose for every crime they've committed against humanity.

I'm glad we have it out in the open to what you really think. I wonder if you'd get away with saying that about any other religion :rolleyes:

For the record I am not Catholic but these accusations are absurdly offensive. And if made against another religion would not be tolerated.

[Galileo Galilei]

I'm glad the Catholic church is praising and recognizing people like Copernicus and Galileo. Both of these great men were Catholics, who grew up and were educated in Catholic culture.

The Catholic Church is an independent source of power in opposition to the New World Order these days, that is why it is under attack by the MSM media.

That said, what happened to the books of Galileo and Copernicus 400 years ago should remind us that too much government power cannot be tolerated. If faithful men in a theocracy would abuse power, just think what would happen in a secular government?

[t0rnado]

If the Church is a ring of fascist child molesters, then so are doctors, psychologists, teachers, bus drivers, camp counselors, coaches, etc.

Darn, who do we have left to trust? Wait, isn't Ron Paul a doctor? Guess you'll be criticizing him too then.

Thank you for your bad reasoning skills. Ron Paul doesn't protect and support other doctors who molest children.


I'm glad we have it out in the open to what you really think. I wonder if you'd get away with saying that about any other religion

For the record I am not Catholic but these accusations are absurdly offensive. And if made against another religion would not be tolerated.

You haven't even made an argument against what I said.

[tasteless]

Thank you for your bad reasoning skills. Ron Paul doesn't protect and support other doctors who molest children.

And the Catholic Church does? Do the vast majority of priests that haven't molested children support the molestation of children? No. But according to you they are part of vast ring of child molesters. I'm just applying your reasoning to other groups that molest children. Why paint a wide brush against one group, but not another?

The Church made the mistake of thinking that child molesters could be rehabilitated. This has given people like you the opportunity to characterize it as them encouraging child molestation. Your bias is showing.

[qh4dotcom]

So 75% of atheists voted for Obama and 54% of Catholics did. But some on this thread are singling out Catholics for voting for Obama???

Can someone explain the logic here...

I said I was tired of the hypocrisy.

An atheist who voted for Obama is not necessarily a hypocrite...a Catholic who is supposed to be against abortion and against killing who voted for pro-abortion, pro-war Obama sure is.

[qh4dotcom]

Then about 50% of America needs to have their heads examined. Not that I necessarily disagree ...


I said those who voted for Obama thinking he was going to end the wars....not everyone who voted for him did so because of the wars...millions of voters had other stupid reasons for voting for him besides the wars...and yes, they need to have their head examined too :)




Sure, but in many people's minds, the only alternative was McCain, who was even more of a warmonger. "Lesser of two evils" and all that.

There was the alternative of staying at home, there was the alternative of voting 3rd party. No excuse for voting for McCain or Obama

"If you vote and you elect dishonest incompetent people and they get into office and screw everything up well you're responsible for what they have done, you caused the problem, you voted them in, you have no right to complain. I am in no way responsible for what these people have done and have every right to complain as loud as I want about the mess YOU created that I had nothing to do with"
-George Carlin
http://www.noob.us/humor/george-carlin-voting/

[tasteless]

I said I was tired of the hypocrisy.

An atheist who voted for Obama is not necessarily a hypocrite...a Catholic who is supposed to be against abortion and against killing who voted for pro-abortion, pro-war Obama sure is.

This is true. According to this (http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6019&Itemid=48):


Of the 161 Catholics presently serving, only 26 have 100 percent pro-life voting records, while 28 have a zero percent rating. Sixty-five have less than a 20 percent pro-life rating and 75 have accepted donations from pro-abortion lobbying groups.


Just like how there are DINOs and RINOs, there are Catholics in name only. Of course, whenever Bishops call Catholic politicians out, people start shrieking about separation of church and state.

[tremendoustie]

I said those who voted for Obama thinking he was going to end the wars....not everyone who voted for him did so because of the wars...millions of voters had other stupid reasons for voting for him besides the wars...and yes, they need to have their head examined too :)

Polls showed opposition to the Iraq war over 60%. The rhetoric coming from obama at the time was mostly anti-war, especially anti Iraq war-- certainly more so than McCain.

People being fed up with the war was a major reason Obama won. I think anyone who had one eye open at the time could tell you that. I'm not saying those people did the right thing in voting for Obama, I'm saying that that was a major motivation for them.



There was the alternative of staying at home, there was the alternative of voting 3rd party. No excuse for voting for McCain or Obama

Most people are brainwashed into thinking "Staying home or voting third party is a vote for the other guy" -- in this case McCain.

They're not totally wrong. The "lesser of two evils" strategy is foolish in the long run, and I would never support someone like obama, but the reality is, people are often forced into a Hobson's choice in any given election.



"If you vote and you elect dishonest incompetent people and they get into office and screw everything up well you're responsible for what they have done, you caused the problem, you voted them in, you have no right to complain. I am in no way responsible for what these people have done and have every right to complain as loud as I want about the mess YOU created that I had nothing to do with"
-George Carlin
[/URL][URL]http://www.noob.us/humor/george-carlin-voting/ (http://www.noob.us/humor/george-carlin-voting/)

It's virtually impossible to really know whether a person is honest by watching a bunch of debates or advertisements. Most people are far too busy and far too unintelligent to accurately assess a person's character in an election scenario, if indeed that's even really possible. One vote among millions, with a zero percent chance of truly affecting the outcome, is not worth hours upon hours of most people's time.

People should not be presented with a limited slate of slimeball scam artists, and then forced to cast a measly vote towards determining which of them will rule over everybody for the next four years. It's insanity. I don't want to be ruled by any megalomaniac scam artist, thank you very much, I'll run my own life and finances.

Look, I'm not letting people who voted for Obama off the hook, but I'm saying it's the nature of the system for politicians to lie to get into power and then do whatever they want, often the opposite of what they were elected for. A system that relies on a superhuman level of vigilance by the populace, and imagines they will somehow find and select a magical angelic being who seeks massive political power for honest, uncorrupted reasons, is begging for abuse.

Handing a few individuals (or the majority for that matter) the power to rule other people's lives, unless you're living in a society of angels, is really asking for it.

The worst devils will seek it and the best liars will get it.

[t0rnado]

And the Catholic Church does? Do the vast majority of priests that haven't molested children support the molestation of children? No. But according to you they are part of vast ring of child molesters. I'm just applying your reasoning to other groups that molest children. Why paint a wide brush against one group, but not another?

The Church made the mistake of thinking that child molesters could be rehabilitated. This has given people like you the opportunity to characterize it as them encouraging child molestation. Your bias is showing.

Yes, I have a bias against cults that protect men who rape children.

Here is just one example out of hundreds of the leader of The Cult approving of child molestation:

"As the U.S. church took steps to try Murphy in secret in 1998, as directed by the Vatican office, the priest appealed directly to Ratzinger. Murphy asked to be left alone, saying he was in ill health having suffered a stroke, and had repented acts committed years earlier, according to the documents." SOURCE: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62O59C20100325

You stated that the church made the mistake of allowing rehabilitated child molesters back into the church. If repentance is what you consider to be rehabilitation, then you need to find a dictionary. Child molestation is not the only crime the church has backed or committed.

[tasteless]

Yes, I have a bias against cults that protect men who rape children.

Here is just one example out of hundreds of the leader of The Cult approving of child molestation:

"As the U.S. church took steps to try Murphy in secret in 1998, as directed by the Vatican office, the priest appealed directly to Ratzinger. Murphy asked to be left alone, saying he was in ill health having suffered a stroke, and had repented acts committed years earlier, according to the documents." SOURCE: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62O59C20100325

You stated that the church made the mistake of allowing rehabilitated child molesters back into the church. If repentance is what you consider to be rehabilitation, then you need to find a dictionary. Child molestation is not the only crime the church has backed or committed.

If you read the whole story, you'd know that they tried hiring a social worker to rehabilitate the priest in question. The man had done horrible things, no doubt, but hewas deathly ill, was no longer a threat to anyone, and died mere months after his letter of appeal. What would you have liked the Vatican to have done between the time they were notified and the time he died, stone him to death so that he would die a few months earlier than he would have even though he was no longer a threat to anyone?

The Church (as well as civil authorities) handled this incorrectly, they should have contacted the police instead of a social worker (even though the police already knew and did nothing), but by no means should their actions be construed as being supportive of molestation, unless you have a bias against the Church and want it to be construed that way.

Read more here (http://www.ncregister.com/blog/cardinal).

[Xenophage]

How did the atheists vote?

The hostility against Christianity on these boards confuses me. It makes no sense.

This atheist campaigned for Ron Paul during the primary, and didn't vote in the general election.

[tremendoustie]

This atheist campaigned for Ron Paul during the primary, and didn't vote in the general election.

And this christian campaigned for RP in the primary and wrote him in in the general.

I think impugning people's political beliefs because of their religious ones is a little silly. Not that most people here do that, just sayin'

Actually, among the people who I agree with most closely politically, there are probably a higher percentage of atheists than in the general public -- but there are also many christians.

[t0rnado]

If you read the whole story, you'd know that they tried hiring a social worker to rehabilitate the priest in question. The man had done horrible things, no doubt, but hewas deathly ill, was no longer a threat to anyone, and died mere months after his letter of appeal. What would you have liked the Vatican to have done between the time they were notified and the time he died, stone him to death so that he would die a few months earlier than he would have even though he was no longer a threat to anyone?

The Church (as well as civil authorities) handled this incorrectly, they should have contacted the police instead of a social worker (even though the police already knew and did nothing), but by no means should their actions be construed as being supportive of molestation, unless you have a bias against the Church and want it to be construed that way.

Read more here (http://www.ncregister.com/blog/cardinal).

You're pulling that information from the National CATHOLIC Register, which is obviously a biased source.

[tasteless]

You're pulling that information from the National CATHOLIC Register, which is obviously a biased source.

At least they're not trying to hide it.

And besides, they link to the NYT which has scans of the actual documents so you can confirm the information. Their article is far more informative than the reuters article you linked to.

But hey, I understand. If you were to actually take all the facts into consideration, you'd realize your characterization of the Church as a ring of child molesters and supportive of pedophilia was unfair. And that would hurt your ego, wouldn't it?

[TER]

Meh, the Church is just trying to get some good PR after all the recent scandals being reveled that threw their membership into a frenzy.

It's good to see the Church so desperate and trying to gain some power in the modern world.

I hope that someday people realize that organized religion is just a tool for the State to control people.

Are guns just a tool for the State to control people? Do they not assist in hunting for food in order to feed a family? And in self-defense, when the State brings their guns? Likewise, organized religion is not 'just a tool to control the masses', but as a means for bodily and spiritual nourishment, enduring assurance, joyous hope, and divine protection. Do not confuse the message with those who destroy the message.

There is nothing unorganized with the Kingdom of Heaven, which is organized par excellance.



(Note: I'm not anti-religious, at all. I think religion can be a great tool to help people and make their lives feel more fulfilled. It is also a personal matter. I however do not like organized religion.)

Just because you don't like religion does not in any way denigrate it. You are but one person who will one day turn to dust. You enjoy watching the Roman Catholic Church appear desperate and weak because you can't bear the thought that one day you might come before your Judge to face your judgments. Even if the very thought of this by now you have hidden deep down in places you've lost forgotten, you are reminded in the silence and know this might very well be the truth. And so you try to define Him in your own way and when that is not agreeable with you, you need to fight against Him in order to try to overcome Him.

But you will fail as will satan and all his demons lest you confess your sins and repent.

This message is not only for you, for all those who mock Christ and put yourselves above Him and defile this website with banter against His Name.

I am a sinner, greater than most if not all those on this board, and when the Bridegroom returns to make His Church His Bride, I will be found with a lamp empty of oil and with no wedding garment to enter the His Kingdom.

Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy.

[libertarian4321]

The Catholic church wants to control people.

Its easier to control ignorant people.

Hence, the Catholic church was working in it's own best interests when trying to stop men of intelligence and reason (like Copernicus, Galileo, and many others)

However, the Catholics are no different than other religions in this respect.

All religions do their best to keep people ignorant- it's unfair to single out the Catholics!

[TER]

I wonder: How many atheist organizations (outside of communist countries of course) have built schools and universities, orphanages, poor houses, and charity hospitals?

[libertarian4321]

I wonder: How many atheist organizations (outside of communist countries of course) have built schools and universities, orphanages, poor houses, and charity hospitals?

Are there any "atheist organizations?" If there are, they aren't large.

Atheists are generally just people who don't want religious fantasy imposed on them= so they don't get together to chant or whatever.

However, that doesn't mean they don't give to charity and similar organizations.

For example, if you go to Kiva.org , you will see that atheist/free thinker group is the largest donor.

More importantly, when we give to charity, it's really a gift, no strings attached.

Religious "charity" often comes with a large dose of proselytizing or forced compliance- something along the lines of "click you heels together three times, say three "hail mary's" and profess your love for the magic man in the sky and we'll give you a loaf of bread and a Bible."

[JohnEngland]

The Catholic church wants to control people.

Its easier to control ignorant people.

Hence, the Catholic church was working in it's own best interests when trying to stop men of intelligence and reason (like Copernicus, Galileo, and many others)

However, the Catholics are no different than other religions in this respect.

All religions do their best to keep people ignorant- it's unfair to single out the Catholics!

*facepalm*

Come on, you must know that you're repeating generic, overused and flat-out wrong statements there.

As a Catholic, it's just so laughable to hear that "The Catholic Church wants to control people". Though maybe individuals want to control individuals, like in every branch of life?

I just don't know where to begin with this nonsense that the Church is trying to stop intelligence and reason, but perhaps this book by Tom Woods might be an interesting place to start:

http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Church-Built-Western-Civilization/dp/0895260387/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277542426&sr=1-1-spell


Religious "charity" often comes with a large dose of proselytizing or forced compliance- something along the lines of "click you heels together three times, say three "hail mary's" and profess your love for the magic man in the sky and we'll give you a loaf of bread and a Bible."

I presume by "religious", you mean "Christian" (I've noticed neo-atheists tend to blurt out the word "religion" when they seem to be implicitly refering to Christianity). Anyway, I think you'll find Christian charity is a little more complicated than that:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03592a.htm

[JohnEngland]

In fact, it's quite interesting reading more of that article on Charity because it's striking how close the bonds are between libertarianism and Christianity. For example, taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia:


The limitations and defects of public charity are well known; it is almost inevitably more mechanical and less sympathetic than private charity; it is more wasteful, not only because it is less carefully administered, but also on account of the readiness of many persons to claim public relief as a right; and, inasmuch as it supplants appeals to the individual conscience by the imposition of a tax, it inflicts a mortal injury upon the spontaneity of charity and the sense of personal responsibility towards the unfortunate.

[tremendoustie]

All religions do their best to keep people ignorant- it's unfair to single out the Catholics!

:rolleyes:

[jmdrake]

Perhaps not the article itself but read the thread. With a couple exceptions it's an anti-Catholic fest. It doesn't take much for people to latch on.

There is a hostility against Christianity (not just Catholicism) by a couple members here. It is pretty noticeable. I also wonder why this is not in the Religion subforum. Or even hot topics - if it were other religions it would be.

If you want something moved you have to specify it. The moderators do not read every thread to see if it should be moved or not. They react when somebody reports it.

Anyway, when I responded there weren't any "anti Catholic" posts in the thread. And it can be argued that such posts resulted in the straw man like defenses being thrown up. People can be upset at the church hierarchy for covering up sexual abuse of children without thinking every individual Catholic is a child molester. Lately the Catholic church has been bringing criticism on themselves by suggesting that accurate reports of child molestation and the reasonable criticism of the church based on those reports is akin to the Holocaust. What a load of crap! All churches have scandals. Most don't become so defensive or reactionary over them. In my own denomination, the equivalent of a "bishop" got caught up in a money scandal that was his own fault. His heart arguably might have been in the right place (trying to gain resources for the church) but his actions were still wrong. The people voted him out of office. Nobody went around saying "The outside world is persecuting us because they are going after our leadership". If the leadership is wrong, it's wrong.

[jmdrake]

If the Church is a ring of fascist child molesters, then so are doctors, psychologists, teachers, bus drivers, camp counselors, coaches, etc.

Darn, who do we have left to trust? Wait, isn't Ron Paul a doctor? Guess you'll be criticizing him too then.

Any doctors, psychologists, teachers, bus drivers, camp counselors, coaches etc who actively helped cover up child molestation of others are guilty of aiding and abetting child molestation. Don't try to confuse the issue. The problem isn't just of pedophile priests. It's of the cover-up of the abuse by not reporting it to authorities and (in some case) transferring those priests to other duties where they still had access to children. And no, not everyone was involved in the cover-up. But those that were should have been defrocked. Many were not. That's a sin and a shame.

That said, it's as much of a mistake for Catholics all internalize what some of their leadership did as it would be for someone to say "All Catholics are child molesters".

[qh4dotcom]

To everyone who has posted in this thread, please take a look at George Carlin's masterpiece on religion. It's been seen by 7+ million folks. It is that good

YouTube - George Carlin - Religion is bullshit. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o)

[CryLibertyOrDeath]

Anti-Catholicism: Because the way to enter into the political mainstream is repeating lines from 1690s England about the largest Christian church in the United States.

[Galileo Galilei]

Most people here are missing the boat; the persecutions of 400 years ago of Galileo and others are due to too much STATE power. The whole ordeal of Galileo is an argument for limited government and the separation of church and state. In fact, we have separation of church and state becasue the Founders knew about Galileo.

[TER]

Religious "charity" often comes with a large dose of proselytizing or forced compliance- something along the lines of "click you heels together three times, say three "hail mary's" and profess your love for the magic man in the sky and we'll give you a loaf of bread and a Bible."

What a silly silly statement.

You mock God and continue to spread falsehoods in your attempt to twist the Lord's teachings on what Christian charity is and give proof that you know nothing of it.

You defend atheists who are the least charitable people in the world and who know little to nothing about true sacrifice and selfless love.

You ridicule God and His saints, who have given their entire lives in selfless acts of love for the poorest amongst them, and meanwhile praise such fools as Richard Dawkins who sells books and gives paid speeches and makes himself a prophet of emptiness and desecration. Where is his act of charity? By insulting the Creator and the billions of people who believe in Him? I tell you this, every day he looks at himself in the mirror and sees himself getting older and growing weaker and full of dead bones and hopelessness. What does such a fool know about true love and the Kingdom of God when he worships his three pound brain which will one day soon turn to dust?

God is not dead. Rather, we try to kill Him. He only seems dead to those who have rejected Him from their hearts over time and who crucify Him daily because they refuse to accept His teachings: that true life is in our selfless love for our neighbor. This is the height of the saints whom He has glorified, who live in Christ and were persecuted and wounded for love, and who stand before Him and pray for all the world while we sit around and mock Him

Lord have mercy on us sinners.

[Bman]

What a silly silly statement.


I know it is not completely silly. Some of the churches in this area are taking records on who gives how much for offering.

The one thing I do like about churches is when they try to do charity work. But one has to admit that many who attend church are there because it is good for business.

[tremendoustie]

To everyone who has posted in this thread, please take a look at George Carlin's masterpiece on religion. It's been seen by 7+ million folks. It is that good

Sorry, it seems like a bunch of sophomoric baloney.

As best I can tell there are three points:

1. A loving God wouldn't send people to hell.

My View: I believe hell is separation from God. It's not some imposed artificial punishment -- a person chooses separation from God in this life, which leads into the next.

2. If God were competent, everything would be perfect.

My View: He gives you free will, and that means the ability to screw things up.

3. Praying is pointless, because God's going to do his will anyway.

My View: Prayer is communication with God. It's not about begging some Santa Claus in the sky for goodies, it's about communicating to God your situation, and understanding what He's saying to you. God is outside of time, so to think of things in a strictly temporal causal sense is flawed, but to pray affects oneself, and naturally, therefore, God's plan. Prayer is more about understanding how to fit into that plan than getting goodies.

Frankly, some of the most militant atheists seem to have what I consider a very juvenile understanding of theistic metaphysical views. It's like they had the worst sunday school teacher on the planet as a kid, thought that's all there was to religion/faith/spirituality, and naturally rebelled against the whole thing.

[Pauls' Revere]

The sun is not the center of the universe. It is the center of our planetary system.
Nice catch!
and I was taught that there were only 9 planets. Now we have exoplanets!
http://exoplanets.org/

[jmdrake]

Most people here are missing the boat; the persecutions of 400 years ago of Galileo and others are due to too much STATE power. The whole ordeal of Galileo is an argument for limited government and the separation of church and state. In fact, we have separation of church and state becasue the Founders knew about Galileo.

True. You have one side falling into the "If you criticize anything the leadership of my sect has ever done you are personally attacking me" trap and others who fall into the "Proof of several rotten apples means the barrel must be rotten" trap. I wonder if Catholics are more prone to the first trap based on the doctrine of papal infallibility (http://www.catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp)? And it could be that non Catholics are more prone to thinking the entire barrel is rotten based on that same doctrine. The bottom line is this. If you weren't involved in the commission of any crime, oppression or abuse and if you didn't participate in covering up said crime, oppression or abuse, then people who raise legitimate criticism of the Catholic church are not talking about you. Those who turn around and make statements like "All (fiil-in-the-blank) who do acts of charity only do so in order to further deceive the masses" are not making legitimate criticisms.

[jmdrake]

Anti-Catholicism: Because the way to enter into the political mainstream is repeating lines from 1690s England about the largest Christian church in the United States.

Let's see. Martin Luther predates that timeline by about 150 years. And the pedophile priest scandal post dates that timeline by about 300 years. Fail.

[Galileo Galilei]

True. You have one side falling into the "If you criticize anything the leadership of my sect has ever done you are personally attacking me" trap and others who fall into the "Proof of several rotten apples means the barrel must be rotten" trap. I wonder if Catholics are more prone to the first trap based on the doctrine of papal infallibility (http://www.catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp)? And it could be that non Catholics are more prone to thinking the entire barrel is rotten based on that same doctrine. The bottom line is this. If you weren't involved in the commission of any crime, oppression or abuse and if you didn't participate in covering up said crime, oppression or abuse, then people who raise legitimate criticism of the Catholic church are not talking about you. Those who turn around and make statements like "All (fiil-in-the-blank) who do acts of charity only do so in order to further deceive the masses" are not making legitimate criticisms.

agreed. And if God-fearing church people abuse power, just think what the God-less athiests will do when they reign control? Like the NWO.

[Dr.3D]

Sorry, it seems like a bunch of sophomoric baloney.

As best I can tell there are three points:

1. A loving God wouldn't send people to hell.

My View: I believe hell is separation from God. It's not some imposed artificial punishment -- a person chooses separation from God in this life, which leads into the next.

2. If God were competent, everything would be perfect.

My View: He gives you free will, and that means the ability to screw things up.

3. Praying is pointless, because God's going to do his will anyway.

My View: Prayer is communication with God. It's not about begging some Santa Claus in the sky for goodies, it's about communicating to God your situation, and understanding what He's saying to you. God is outside of time, so to think of things in a strictly temporal causal sense is flawed, but to pray affects oneself, and naturally, therefore, God's plan. Prayer is more about understanding how to fit into that plan than getting goodies.

Frankly, some of the most militant atheists seem to have what I consider a very juvenile understanding of theistic metaphysical views. It's like they had the worst sunday school teacher on the planet as a kid, thought that's all there was to religion/faith/spirituality, and naturally rebelled against the whole thing.

I very much appreciate your views on this subject as they very closely reflect my own.

Hell is like the city dump. If something is not needed because it is trash, then it goes to the dump and is burned. People so often get the wrong impression of what hell really is. As you said, people put themselves in hell by separating themselves from God.

[osan]

Catholic Church Reburies "Heretic" Copernicus as Hero

Nicolaus Copernicus was called a heretic by the Catholic Church for saying that the Sun, not the Earth, was the center of the Universe. 500 years since his death, the same Church has decided the astronomer was a hero. Polish priests blessed what is believed to be Copernicus’ remains and reburied them in the spot where his skull was found in 2005.

Demonstrating what donks constitute that vile establishment. I'm pretty sure Nico could care less about what they think now. They should have accepted him THEN. What they say now only underscores how rotten and irrelevant they are.

Given the history, one has to wonder why the terrorists are bombing the USA and not the Vatican. A low yield nuke on that 106 acres would do much to cure the ills of the world. But let us not fantasize too wildly of perfection.

[osan]

Sigh, another smear on the Catholic Church. Seriously, I don't think that there is a single institution that gets lied about and disorted more than the Church. Next, the media are going to tell us that the Church tried to cover up a secret, female pope. Oh wait... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288501/Mystery-pregnant-pope-New-film-reopens-Vaticans-enduring-wounds.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288501/Mystery-pregnant-pope-New-film-reopens-Vaticans-enduring-wounds.html)

Are you joking? What other extant organization could claim even 10% of the blood that cakes the hands of the RCC? Not one. Centuries of burning people at the stake, wars on "heretics". How about the 56 thousands of CATHOLICS they slaughtered at Montsegur in 1244 just to get the 700 Cathars? The Roman church is the most singularly evil institution ever created. It should be dismantled to the foundation and forgotten to have ever existed.

With any luck, the Muslim terrorists will realize who their true enemy is and take one of those Iranian nukes for a friendly visit.

Shit.

[Galileo Galilei]

Demonstrating what donks constitute that vile establishment. I'm pretty sure Nico could care less about what they think now. They should have accepted him THEN. What they say now only underscores how rotten and irrelevant they are.

Given the history, one has to wonder why the terrorists are bombing the USA and not the Vatican. A low yield nuke on that 106 acres would do much to cure the ills of the world. But let us not fantasize too wildly of perfection.

Copernicus's book was dedicated to the Pope and was not banned (unless corrected) until 1616. Copernicus died in 1543, the same year the book was published.

[osan]

I'm tired of the hypocrisy of religious folks...54% of Catholics who are supposed to be against abortion and against killing voted for pro-abortion and pro-war Obama.

Isn't that a hoot? Some people are such dumbasses.

[osan]

At the time, Obama was considered the anti-war vote. He promised to bring the troops home.

More crushingly conclusive evidence of just how unforgivably stupid some people are. Imagine that... he promised to have them home by a YEAR AGO.

I would not trust the words of anyone running for office, not even Ron Paul. Why? It is not because they are necessarily liars, but because our political machinery is so hoplessly corrupt that Jesus Christ himself would be unable to do the right things anymore. This is way beyond the abilities of any single political office holder. Just imagine how many pairs of vise grips the various entities have on Obama's tiny, but sensitive balls. He can't go take a shit without someone's OK, I promise you that. If Ronny boy makes it to the oval office, he will be read the riot act forthwith and if he has any concern for the safety of his family, he will either resign or toe the line. Otherwise, the dangerous world may hold accidental events in store for him and those he loves. None of that is his fault. Our system is rotten to the core and as I sit and ponder the ugly truths about the corner in which we now find ourselves, it seems apparent to me that the only thing that holds any hope of better days is far worse ugliness. I hope I am wrong about this, but unless someone can explain to me how we propose to fix what needs repair that doesn't involve the wholesale slaughter of a lot of people, I must retain this view of things. I am all ears, if anyone wants to take a swag.

[osan]

The Catholic Church is an independent source of power in opposition to the New World Order these days, that is why it is under attack by the MSM media.

And the RCC doesn't want competition from the NWO and vise versa. Two wholly rotten power establishments fighting for top billing. No mystery there.


That said, what happened to the books of Galileo and Copernicus 400 years ago should remind us that too much government power cannot be tolerated. If faithful men in a theocracy would abuse power, just think what would happen in a secular government?

Good point.

[JohnEngland]

With any luck, the Muslim terrorists will realize who their true enemy is and take one of those Iranian nukes for a friendly visit.

Shit.

Very sad... Someone has been filled with hate. Looks like libertarianism takes a back seat to rabid, warmongering neo-atheism for some...

Advocating the genocide of Catholics... I think you've been reading too much Dawkins and Hitchens, Osan.

[tasteless]

Any doctors, psychologists, teachers, bus drivers, camp counselors, coaches etc who actively helped cover up child molestation of others are guilty of aiding and abetting child molestation. Don't try to confuse the issue. The problem isn't just of pedophile priests. It's of the cover-up of the abuse by not reporting it to authorities and (in some case) transferring those priests to other duties where they still had access to children. And no, not everyone was involved in the cover-up. But those that were should have been defrocked. Many were not. That's a sin and a shame.

That said, it's as much of a mistake for Catholics all internalize what some of their leadership did as it would be for someone to say "All Catholics are child molesters".

Was there a coverup? The police already knew about it and spoke with the victims, but did nothing about it. Were the police involved in the cover up too? Why is no one criticizing the police?

Tell me what difference it would have made if he was defrocked. Personally, I'd rather see child molesters put behind bars rather than have symbolic things done to embarrass them. In this case, rather than being confined behind bars, the priest in question was confined to a hospital bed. Either way, he wasn't going to molest any more children (and he hadn't molested anyone for a while)

Like I said, it was handled incorrectly, but the Church has adjusted proceedings to make sure it's handled better, and to say that it was condoned by the Vatican is just misinformation.

[BlackTerrel]

I said I was tired of the hypocrisy.

An atheist who voted for Obama is not necessarily a hypocrite...a Catholic who is supposed to be against abortion and against killing who voted for pro-abortion, pro-war Obama sure is.

Catholocism means different things to different people. They do not all march in lock step.

Voting for Obama would not mean one agrees with all his views.

[t0rnado]

Originally Posted by tasteless
At least they're not trying to hide it.

And besides, they link to the NYT which has scans of the actual documents so you can confirm the information. Their article is far more informative than the reuters article you linked to.

But hey, I understand. If you were to actually take all the facts into consideration, you'd realize your characterization of the Church as a ring of child molesters and supportive of pedophilia was unfair. And that would hurt your ego, wouldn't it?

You're assuming that's the only case of a priest molesting a child and the church covering it up? Looks like you're the one who doesn't want his ego and his pathetic beliefs hurt or questioned. If you want to start talking about facts, then realize that the Catholic cult doesn't like to speak of them or accept them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/us/789-children-abused-by-priests-since-1940-massachusetts-says.html?ref=thomas_v_daily

That's 250 priests who molested 789+ children in Boston alone since 1940. It goes to show that this has been occurring in the cult for a while now and isn't just a modern smear tactic. If the Catholic cult didn't continue to protect its child rapists, we might have a more accurate number of children who were a part of this child molestation ring.

[jmdrake]

Was there a coverup? The police already knew about it and spoke with the victims, but did nothing about it. Were the police involved in the cover up too? Why is no one criticizing the police?

Tell me what difference it would have made if he was defrocked. Personally, I'd rather see child molesters put behind bars rather than have symbolic things done to embarrass them. In this case, rather than being confined behind bars, the priest in question was confined to a hospital bed. Either way, he wasn't going to molest any more children (and he hadn't molested anyone for a while)

Like I said, it was handled incorrectly, but the Church has adjusted proceedings to make sure it's handled better, and to say that it was condoned by the Vatican is just misinformation.

Maybe the police were involved in on it? Who knows. But you are not being honest by your implications that it was a single priest. It was many priests all over the world. And some were transferred to other parishes where they had access to more children. They weren't all "confined to a hospital bed".

See: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/15/eveningnews/main6400632.shtml

Father Pezzoti is just one example of what may be a pattern. The Associated Press found 30 cases of priests accused of abuse then transferred overseas. One victim called it the "geographical cure."

Former Benedictine monk Richard Sipe says it is very common.

"It's like a checker game," Sipe said. "They are moved from place to place, wherever they can be hidden or given a job where their past is not known."

Father Vijaya Bhaskar Godugunuru is another example. In 2006, he pleaded no contest to assaulting a 15-year-old girl in Florida. Godugunuru was moved to India, then to Italy.

There are similar cases involving an Indian priest who molested a 14-year-old girl in Minnesota then continuing work in his home diocese and another transferred to India after molesting a 12-year-old girl in New York.

At the Vatican Thursday, Pope Benedict made an apparent reference to the scandal, calling on Christians to do penance.

Here's an image of one of those pedophile priests at his new location after credible allegations against him for child molestation had surfaced!

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2010/04/15/image6400626g.jpg

Confined to a hospital bed my butt!

[tremendoustie]

More crushingly conclusive evidence of just how unforgivably stupid some people are. Imagine that... he promised to have them home by a YEAR AGO.

I would not trust the words of anyone running for office, not even Ron Paul. Why? It is not because they are necessarily liars, but because our political machinery is so hoplessly corrupt that Jesus Christ himself would be unable to do the right things anymore. This is way beyond the abilities of any single political office holder. Just imagine how many pairs of vise grips the various entities have on Obama's tiny, but sensitive balls. He can't go take a shit without someone's OK, I promise you that.


I disagree, I think Obama, and most politicians, are corrupt to the core. He'd do or say just about anything to get power. These men are not honest babes in the woods who get corrupted by big bad shadowy influences.

I attended a C4L event in vegas, where one of the top political strategists there said as much. He said 98% or more of politicians don't have a real principled bone in their bodies. They'll do or say anything that will help them get power and maintain it. To get them "on your side", you have to frighten them, or otherwise convince them that it's in their best interests to do so -- where, with normal people you might use logical argumentation, to convince them of the merit of your ideas.

Another came out and said that the overwhelming majority are "sociopathic".



If Ronny boy makes it to the oval office, he will be read the riot act forthwith and if he has any concern for the safety of his family, he will either resign or toe the line. Otherwise, the dangerous world may hold accidental events in store for him and those he loves. None of that is his fault.


You could be right, but I'm skeptical of that claim.



Our system is rotten to the core and as I sit and ponder the ugly truths about the corner in which we now find ourselves, it seems apparent to me that the only thing that holds any hope of better days is far worse ugliness. I hope I am wrong about this, but unless someone can explain to me how we propose to fix what needs repair that doesn't involve the wholesale slaughter of a lot of people, I must retain this view of things. I am all ears, if anyone wants to take a swag.

I'd love to take a swag! Here's my proposal:

1. Liberty loving people move to the same geographic location, and work to promote freedom. The methods used would vary based on the interests of each individual. Some might get involved politically at the local or state level, others in peaceful civil disobedience, jury nullification, agorism, alternative currencies, media, fund-raising, education, etc.
2. Gradually this area becomes more freedom oriented, which attracts yet more freedom lovers. It provides a demonstration of the success of a more free society, which others can emulate. The ideas of non-agression, and pro-liberty ideas in general, gain growing approval. Also, the idea of state's rights gains popularity. Even socialists and those supporting big government start to look for a sympathetic state to implement their ideas, rather than to the feds.
3. States start to vary widely. People view federally implemented policies as an undesirable imposition on them by people from other parts of the country, or by strangers in Washington. There is widespread peaceful noncooperation with the federal government, including a move away from FRNs. Federal government loses moral authority and fiscal viability. Secession may occur in some states. Federal responsibilities are transferred to state governments, or dropped outright.
6. Certain state governments begin to modify their policies and services to be more non-coercive in nature, funding based on user fees, etc.

[BlackTerrel]

If you want something moved you have to specify it. The moderators do not read every thread to see if it should be moved or not. They react when somebody reports it.

Anyway, when I responded there weren't any "anti Catholic" posts in the thread. And it can be argued that such posts resulted in the straw man like defenses being thrown up. People can be upset at the church hierarchy for covering up sexual abuse of children without thinking every individual Catholic is a child molester. Lately the Catholic church has been bringing criticism on themselves by suggesting that accurate reports of child molestation and the reasonable criticism of the church based on those reports is akin to the Holocaust. What a load of crap! All churches have scandals. Most don't become so defensive or reactionary over them. In my own denomination, the equivalent of a "bishop" got caught up in a money scandal that was his own fault. His heart arguably might have been in the right place (trying to gain resources for the church) but his actions were still wrong. The people voted him out of office. Nobody went around saying "The outside world is persecuting us because they are going after our leadership". If the leadership is wrong, it's wrong.

Look. You can have legitimate issues with how the Church handles certain things. Heck I myself think they didn't handle this scandal well.

But a couple things irk me here. This thread wasn't about pedophiles. It's about a dude who died 500 years ago and people used it as an excuse to start piling on and accusing the Catholic Church of everything under the sun. This is not the first time. It happens frequently anytime Catholicism is brought up. Or even Christianity for that matter.

I'm going to go on a limb here and guess we have A LOT more atheists than the population in general. And that's fine. But beyond being offensive I don't like the idea of using a Ron Paul message board for an anti-Christian message in a country that is 90% Christian. Especially considering Ron Paul himself is Christian.

[osan]

Very sad... Someone has been filled with hate. Looks like libertarianism takes a back seat to rabid, warmongering neo-atheism for some...

First of all, the Roman church is not nearly significant enough to me to waste my time hating it, so you fail on that point. Second, anyone with so much as a shred of intellect and integrity who examines the history of that institution would be hard pressed not to conclude that it is an organism of the purest evil imaginable. What began life as a religious community was quickly transformed into a paramilitary and political machine that murdered tens of millions of innocent people over the course of more than a millennium. We could go on at great length in listing the atrocities committed by the "church", but what's the point - religion is no topic to argue as it accomplishes nothing.


Advocating the genocide of Catholics... I think you've been reading too much Dawkins and Hitchens, Osan.

Oh please, I've advocated nothing of the sort. I simply pointed out that if the fundamentalist Muslims were directed correctly, one of their biggest beefs would be with the Roman church.

If you are going to make an argument, you should do a better and/or less dishonest job of it. I expressed an opinion. You disagree. That's OK by me, but I don't much care for sophistry that has been marinated in the nonsequitur.

file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/OSAN%7E1.COC/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-2.jpg

[osan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by osan http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2767986#post2767986)
More crushingly conclusive evidence of just how unforgivably stupid some people are. Imagine that... he promised to have them home by a YEAR AGO.

I would not trust the words of anyone running for office, not even Ron Paul. Why? It is not because they are necessarily liars, but because our political machinery is so hoplessly corrupt that Jesus Christ himself would be unable to do the right things anymore. This is way beyond the abilities of any single political office holder. Just imagine how many pairs of vise grips the various entities have on Obama's tiny, but sensitive balls. He can't go take a shit without someone's OK, I promise you that.

I disagree, I think Obama, and most politicians, are corrupt to the core. He'd do or say just about anything to get power. These men are not honest babes in the woods who get corrupted by big bad shadowy influences.[/quote]

Read what I wrote more carefully: "It is not because they are necessarily liars,..." Not everyone in our government offices are vile scum. RP is not, IMO, but as president he will be floating in a vast sea of corruption.


I attended a C4L event in vegas, where one of the top political strategists there said as much. He said 98% or more of politicians don't have a real principled bone in their bodies.


I can certainly accept this as plausible and even in the actual ballpark, but let us not paint all with the same brush as that is unjust. The real point here is that the tide is overwhelmingly against the honest man such that even they cannot be trusted to accomplish what they promise and even endeavor for. THAT is a very serious problem, would you not agree?


Another came out and said that the overwhelming majority are "sociopathic".

Sort of irrelevant, though. The roots of their behavior don't much interest me. How we respond to it, however, does - and for the past 150 years (at least) we have done a generally poor job of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by osan http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2767986#post2767986)
If Ronny boy makes it to the oval office, he will be read the riot act forthwith and if he has any concern for the safety of his family, he will either resign or toe the line. Otherwise, the dangerous world may hold accidental events in store for him and those he loves. None of that is his fault.


You could be right, but I'm skeptical of that claim.

Fair enough, but ask yourself this: given that dens of iniquity want boyscouts in their midst about as much as a sharp stick in the eye, how do you imagine such people would respond to a man like RP? If he acted on even 10% of what he says, it would throw the elites into utter chaos and would endanger them and their agenda greatly. Do you believe that they would risk that? Sure, they could have him assassinated, but that is very risky business. It is far easier to sit him down and give him the facts of life first. Run with us or at least stay out of our way and prosper. Run afoul and the price will be unaffordably high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by osan http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2767986#post2767986)
Our system is rotten to the core and as I sit and ponder the ugly truths about the corner in which we now find ourselves, it seems apparent to me that the only thing that holds any hope of better days is far worse ugliness. I hope I am wrong about this, but unless someone can explain to me how we propose to fix what needs repair that doesn't involve the wholesale slaughter of a lot of people, I must retain this view of things. I am all ears, if anyone wants to take a swag


I'd love to take a swag! Here's my proposal:

1. Liberty loving people move to the same geographic location, and work to promote freedom. The methods used would vary based on the interests of each individual. Some might get involved politically at the local or state level, others in peaceful civil disobedience, jury nullification, agorism, alternative currencies, media, fund-raising, education, etc.

Join the Freestaters. I was one of the first.



2. Gradually this area becomes more freedom oriented, which attracts yet more freedom lovers. It provides a demonstration of the success of a more free society, which others can emulate. The ideas of non-agression, and pro-liberty ideas in general, gain growing approval. Also, the idea of state's rights gains popularity. Even socialists and those supporting big government start to look for a sympathetic state to implement their ideas, rather than to the feds.
3. States start to vary widely. People view federally implemented policies as an undesirable imposition on them by people from other parts of the country, or by strangers in Washington. There is widespread peaceful noncooperation with the federal government, including a move away from FRNs. Federal government loses moral authority and fiscal viability. Secession may occur in some states. Federal responsibilities are transferred to state governments, or dropped outright.
6. Certain state governments begin to modify their policies and services to be more non-coercive in nature, funding based on user fees, etc.


All noble ideas, but I suspect that they stand the greatest chance of failure for one major reason: the elites cannot allow them to succeed for exactly the reasons you cite - infectious transmission of the notions of liberty. Assuming a key elite goal is universal dominion, such infection would be disastrous for them.

My greatest fear is that the weapon of economics will be used against us even more viciously than we have seen thus far (bad, but nothing compared with what could happen). In such an event, your typical American sub/urbanite milqtoast is not likely to have the desire or stamina to see the fight for freedom through to its end. It will prove far easier and convenient to join forces with those already in control in exchange for life, food and the illusion of security and <hold on to your irony> freedom. When shelves go bare in a week's time and there is nothing to eat, people will be in a raw panic. At that time they will be ripe for recruitment against anyone the elites choose to point them at. Let us not forget just how finely tuned the propaganda machine is. Consider that the internet would likely have the plug pulled and people will reflexively return to MSM for their "information", at which time the centrally controlled media will do its thing and all significant altnernate sources will have been eliminated in a matter of moments.

There is so much that those in power can do to foil us that it is really quite unsettling to ponder. As I have said before, the ONLY advantage we have are our numbers and it is one of questionable value, given the technologies available to "them".

I hope like hell I am wrong about all of this and that you will be right. I will happily eat that steaming heap of crow. Dead serious, too. It is. however, my habit to always assume that an adversary is far and away superior to myself. This tends to keep one's thinking properly conservative in the fight, a virtue whose value can hardly be overestimated.

[osan]

What a silly silly statement.

You mock God and continue to spread falsehoods in your attempt to twist the Lord's teachings on what Christian charity is and give proof that you know nothing of it.

Spoken like a typical religious ideologue. He did no such a thing as mocking God or anyone else. The history of the Roman church is there for anyone to study. It is a study in the worst crimes of which humans are capable of committing, and it spans a good 1800 years in oceans of blood and abject misery. You can write anything you want, but the truth is there in black and white and in such astonishingly morbid abundance that not a soul in this world need want for utter horror.


You defend atheists who are the least charitable people in the world and who know little to nothing about true sacrifice and selfless love.

I saw no defense of atheists or anyone else for that matter.

The rest of your post is, as you put it, sillly silly.

[osan]

As a Catholic, it's just so laughable to hear that "The Catholic Church wants to control people". Though maybe individuals want to control individuals, like in every branch of life?


Uh huh. My first girlfriend's father was once an ordained Jesuit. He was "in" but left in his mid-30s when the full bloom of the church's utterly evil nature became apparent to him such that he could not longer ignore it. He decided to leave, take a wife, and have a normal life. Anyhow, Bob told me many things about the church he was sworn never to repeat outside of his circle. The Roman church is unvarnished evil. But if that is your thing, then be happy with it. As with any other religion, as long as you keep it out of my face, we shall have no problems.

[TER]

I saw no defense of atheists or anyone else for that matter.

You see with darkened eyes and fight against the Light of God!

You will see the Lord before you sooner than you think and will have to give an account for all you have ever said and done.

Who are you to mock God because of the failings of men?? You who fight against Him and resist Him because of your swollen ego and pride??
You exist as long as He wills it and not a moment more.

Have you osan been a good steward? Have you used the talents wisely for the glory of God, Who is Truth, Light, Life, and Love? What will be your account before Him sitting on the Throne of Judgement? Or do you perhaps believe osan that there is no Judgement? That there are no eternal consequences for the actions you have taken?

By the love of God Who wills all to grow in eternal loving communion with Him, your existence has been ordained eternal. Because even though you refuse to believe it, there is sanctity to human life and real spiritual fruits of divinity that are given by God to those who love Him and allow Him to come and abide in them. There are miracles taking place all around you and you refuse to see it.

The Roman Church is full of sinners. And so is everything else.

Do not mock the Spirit of God by attaching Him to the failings of fallen men, which although I am not Roman Catholic, I am still one of them.

Lord have mercy on us sinners.

[jmdrake]

Look. You can have legitimate issues with how the Church handles certain things. Heck I myself think they didn't handle this scandal well.

But a couple things irk me here. This thread wasn't about pedophiles. It's about a dude who died 500 years ago and people used it as an excuse to start piling on and accusing the Catholic Church of everything under the sun. This is not the first time. It happens frequently anytime Catholicism is brought up. Or even Christianity for that matter.


You should blame JohnEngland for that. It was his defense of the Catholic church (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2764712&postcount=2) that brought pedophilia into the thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2765132&postcount=15)!



I'm going to go on a limb here and guess we have A LOT more atheists than the population in general. And that's fine. But beyond being offensive I don't like the idea of using a Ron Paul message board for an anti-Christian message in a country that is 90% Christian. Especially considering Ron Paul himself is Christian.

I'm not an atheist. I'm a Christian. That said I'm not going to sit back and ignore attempts by people to pretend that the Catholic church was not complicit in the pedophile priest scandal when the evidence shows clearly that it was. Those who use this story to attack Christianity in general, or even to attack all Catholics are wrong. But those who want to sweep it under the wrong and pretend this is all just a "smear campaign" to "hurt the church" are wrong too. Yes Ron Paul is a Christian. But you'll never see him making excuses for the catholic church, or any other church, covering up the actions of child rapists. You also will never see him making absurd claims like criticism of the catholic church was just "repeating lines from 1690s England" (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=250768&page=2). Why are such blatant attacks against protestants ok with you? The protestant reformation predates the church of England of by over 100 years. Real people had real grievances with the Catholic church. To try to claim it was nothing but Henry VIII trying to get a divorce is both inaccurate and insulting. Oh, and Ron Paul is a protestant.

[BlackTerrel]

I'm not an atheist. I'm a Christian. That said I'm not going to sit back and ignore attempts by people to pretend that the Catholic church was not complicit in the pedophile priest scandal when the evidence shows clearly that it was. Those who use this story to attack Christianity in general, or even to attack all Catholics are wrong. But those who want to sweep it under the wrong and pretend this is all just a "smear campaign" to "hurt the church" are wrong too.

I am 100% in agreement with what you said. I think the Priest scandal is a serious one that needs to be addressed. At the same time it is easy for people with an anti-Christian agenda to pile on and use it as an excuse to attack Christians - and that is what I have an issue with


Yes Ron Paul is a Christian. But you'll never see him making excuses for the catholic church, or any other church, covering up the actions of child rapists. You also will never see him making absurd claims like criticism of the catholic church was just "repeating lines from 1690s England" (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=250768&page=2). Why are such blatant attacks against protestants ok with you? The protestant reformation predates the church of England of by over 100 years. Real people had real grievances with the Catholic church. To try to claim it was nothing but Henry VIII trying to get a divorce is both inaccurate and insulting. Oh, and Ron Paul is a protestant.

I don't know enough about that to really comment on that particular case. For the record I am not Catholic but I know many good Christians who are. I was raised Baptist though now I just consider myself Christian.

[Krugerrand]

The protestant reformation predates the church of England of by over 100 years. Real people had real grievances with the Catholic church. To try to claim it was nothing but Henry VIII trying to get a divorce is both inaccurate and insulting. Oh, and Ron Paul is a protestant.

The Church of England has a history that is not too friendly towards Protestants. There is a reason why some people found it worthwhile to sail away on a tiny ship across the Atlantic Ocean in search for religious freedom.

[jmdrake]

The Church of England has a history that is not too friendly towards Protestants. There is a reason why some people found it worthwhile to sail away on a tiny ship across the Atlantic Ocean in search for religious freedom.

The church of England sucked. That said the Catholic church had a history that was not too friendly towards protestants. And those who sailed away were getting away from state sponsored religion. Catholic England persecuted protestants. And then Anglican England persecuted Catholics and other protestants who disagreed. But remember England was just one country! The protestant reformation took place across the entire continent! So enough with your revisionist history.

[BlackTerrel]

I think most everyone on these boards would agree that state sponsored religion is a bad thing. But that's far from exclusively Catholic.

[jmdrake]

I think most everyone on these boards would agree that state sponsored religion is a bad thing. But that's far from exclusively Catholic.

Nobody ever said that it was. But the Catholic church has been far more successful at becoming "state sponsored" than most. That said, the problem is that some would like to pretend the Catholic church never persecuted anyone or that the protestant reformation started in 1690 and was exclusive to England or that the priest molestation scandal was confined to a single priest who was confined to a hospital bed or a host of other nonsense. Like I said it was a defender of the Vatican that brought up the pedophile priest scandal in this thread in order to try to minimize in when nobody else was talking about it. Please go back and read the entire thread from beginning to end. Note where it started going south. The OP was making about state sponsored religion and the absurdity of science being suppressed because the official church at the time disagreed, only now for that same group to venerate that same person. But for whatever reason some took personal offense from that and the rest is history.

[tremendoustie]

Join the Freestaters. I was one of the first.


I'll be moving in about a year, God willing :)

I'm actually a native NHite -- from the Keene area. Discovering the FSP and Keene activism specifically was quite a trip, as you might imagine. What are the odds that the most intense liberty activism in the country would be occurring in my home town of 20K? It's enough to make one a solipsist :p (kidding).



All noble ideas, but I suspect that they stand the greatest chance of failure for one major reason: the elites cannot allow them to succeed for exactly the reasons you cite - infectious transmission of the notions of liberty. Assuming a key elite goal is universal dominion, such infection would be disastrous for them.

My greatest fear is that the weapon of economics will be used against us even more viciously than we have seen thus far (bad, but nothing compared with what could happen). In such an event, your typical American sub/urbanite milqtoast is not likely to have the desire or stamina to see the fight for freedom through to its end. It will prove far easier and convenient to join forces with those already in control in exchange for life, food and the illusion of security and <hold on to your irony> freedom. When shelves go bare in a week's time and there is nothing to eat, people will be in a raw panic. At that time they will be ripe for recruitment against anyone the elites choose to point them at. Let us not forget just how finely tuned the propaganda machine is. Consider that the internet would likely have the plug pulled and people will reflexively return to MSM for their "information", at which time the centrally controlled media will do its thing and all significant altnernate sources will have been eliminated in a matter of moments.

There is so much that those in power can do to foil us that it is really quite unsettling to ponder. As I have said before, the ONLY advantage we have are our numbers and it is one of questionable value, given the technologies available to "them".

I hope like hell I am wrong about all of this and that you will be right. I will happily eat that steaming heap of crow. Dead serious, too. It is. however, my habit to always assume that an adversary is far and away superior to myself. This tends to keep one's thinking properly conservative in the fight, a virtue whose value can hardly be overestimated.

I think you have a higher opinion of the "elites" than I do. I don't think there's a shadowy government controlling things behind the scenes, and I regard most in government as arrogant but moronic megalomaniacs with room temperature IQs -- not malevolent geniuses. I think this is the core difference in our perspectives.

[tasteless]

You're assuming that's the only case of a priest molesting a child and the church covering it up? Looks like you're the one who doesn't want his ego and his pathetic beliefs hurt or questioned. If you want to start talking about facts, then realize that the Catholic cult doesn't like to speak of them or accept them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/us/789-children-abused-by-priests-since-1940-massachusetts-says.html?ref=thomas_v_daily

That's 250 priests who molested 789+ children in Boston alone since 1940. It goes to show that this has been occurring in the cult for a while now and isn't just a modern smear tactic. If the Catholic cult didn't continue to protect its child rapists, we might have a more accurate number of children who were a part of this child molestation ring.

I assumed nothing. You jumped to a conclusion based on that one case, and I demonstrated that you arrived to that conclusion erroneously.

Now you are retreating and trying to bury me with a large number of cases. But the fact remains, the Church NEVER endorsed or protected molestation as you said they did. They may have used the wrong strategy in preventing it, but there was never any encouragement of molestation. I'm sure you didn't even read the source you linked to, as it even says they "found no evidence of ongoing abuse of children."



Maybe the police were involved in on it? Who knows. But you are not being honest by your implications that it was a single priest. It was many priests all over the world. And some were transferred to other parishes where they had access to more children. They weren't all "confined to a hospital bed".

...

Confined to a hospital bed my butt!

Ummm, where did imply it was a single priest? I was responding to a specific piece of evidence brought up by another poster.

I'm afraid this is another case of someone believing what they want to believe about the Church without investigating the entire story.

http://www.buenosairesherald.com/BreakingNews/View/30996



There is no evidence that Pezzotti, now 75, abused children in Brazil, which has more Catholics than any other nation. Brazilian law enforcement officials said they were unaware of any complaints about him.

The Rev. Robert Maloney, provincial of the Xaverians who worked closely on Callander’s settlement, said Pezzotti was allowed to stay in Brazil for another decade and work with children after a psychological evaluation. He added that a Xaverian investigation into Pezzotti and his work in Brazil turned up nothing.

...

Freer noted that even 20 years ago, it was accepted belief that “pedophilia could be cured,” often with intensive psychotherapy. “Pedophilia is now seen as recidivist,” she said.

I know there are many, many unfortunate cases like this. But the fact that a few seconds of googling contradicts the conclusion that the Church encourages molestation yet you continue to defend such a conclusion leads me to believe you're not looking at this objectively.

I have never defended pedophilia or molestation, and I have criticized Catholic leadership in the past for their well intentioned but inappropriate response to many of these cases. But in no way have I seen Catholic leadership endorse or protect molestation. How you can continue to defend this conclusion is beyond me.

[osan]

I wonder: How many atheist organizations (outside of communist countries of course) have built schools and universities, orphanages, poor houses, and charity hospitals?

For 12 centuries prior, the Cathars did just that all over Europe and the RCC butchered them almost into extinction. The Cathars were universally loved and admired and the RCC was generally feared and hated. In most cases people became Catholic because the alternative was the stake or sword. The RCC is shit and history demonstrates this so clearly that one must be a wholesale imbecile not to see it. This is why the Protestant movement had such traction - and how did the RCC respond to that? With more butchery until it became clear that they no longer held sufficient power to kill them all, which I assure you they would have had they possessed the material means. God knows they surely had the will.

The RCC is the most muderous organization in human history, to date. I suspect they may hold that record and distinction awhile longer.

Oh, and I am not anti-Christian by any means, but I am anti-bullshit.