Lol.. yes of course they do.. do you think EVERY religious person is a kiddie fiddling hypocrite? Seriously weak arguing.
Oh the ironing.
Another huge straw man there.
If you actively support an organisation so seriously and obviously riven with corruption as the Catholic Church, then you condone what they do and you are part of it.
That's a very good point.
If you can't see that
I can. You seem to be under the impression that I am supporting religion. I'm not, I'm saying that it's not good to insult people of whom you know very little, on the basis that some OTHER people loosely affiliated (and the church is a pretty loose affiliation as we've demonstrated) did something you don't like.
Another huge straw man there.
Well it's not meant to be, that's the straw man that seemed to be underpinning your argument. I'm trying to point that out rather than allege that you actually believe that. It's obviously bobbins which is why I drew attention to it.
It's advice, not an instruction.
Isn't that the Edinburgh defense?
No. Of course not. Why the hell would I be handing out instructions on here? I'm not your lifestyle coach.
Well it's not meant to be, that's the straw man that seemed to be underpinning your argument. I'm trying to point that out rather than allege that you actually believe that. It's obviously bobbins which is why I drew attention to it.
Er.... no - you criticised an exaggerated version of what you think someone meant by what they said, rather than what they actually said - a classic straw man.
And also, my argument?
So, these religion threads are now going to be a thread where we 'discuss' what is or isn't an insult, rather than the point at hand? That pretty much kills the forum then.
If you don't want to participate in the central point of the thread because of the tone of the debate, feel free not to not read it or to report specific posts.
If you want to discuss etiquette, or repeatedly derail the discussion into other areas, why not start your own thread?
(Not that I'm aiming this at anyone in particular but this could apply equally to diet and exercise threads...)
No. Of course not. Why the hell would I be handing out instructions on here? I'm not your lifestyle coach.
Well in that case might I suggest that you work on your communication skills, as that's not how you come across. Your comments on such matters come across in both tone and content as instructions as how everyone should talk.
Ok grum - apologies for losing track of who said what.
do none of you lot who are religionists actually read your own PR? Jesus turning over money lenders tables, treating the lowly and sick with respect for example, or is it a case of suffer the little children unto me, having a different meaning to the one I understood??
Let's look at this again. The assertion is that Christians in general (because it says 'do none of you...?') don't follow Jesus's teachings, because.. what? Because there is bad practice in the church? Well, of course there is. But should they all be tarred with the same brush? Of course not.
Obviously I'm not sticking up for kiddie fiddlers, obviously I'm not condoning the bad stuff, I've said many times I'm not sticking up for organised religion. However Berm Bandit seems to be saying that everyone in the church is at it, as justification for being rude to any Christians who might be reading STW. That seems like weak reasoning to me, because you've got no evidence that the majority of Christians condone such behaviour.
Correct me if that's not what you meant.
Simply put for you. If you actively support an organisation so seriously and obviously riven with corruption as the Catholic Church, then you condone what they do and you are part of it.
What is your evidence for that?
(What is your evidence for that?) oh now you want evidence 😆
They/anyone can believe any crazy old crap they want but when they try and imnpose it on me
Does this happen often?
Can we have an answer please mr junkyard?
Correct me if that's not what you meant.
Gladly.
Firstly, I don't beleive I've ever been rude directly to anyone one on this thread, and indirectly no more so than me being consigned to eternal damnation, so a neutral transaction IMHO.
Secondly, I've made my point very clear several times, if you are a member of an organsiation and don't at least speak up agaisnt its clear and frequent excesses you then condone it, so to that extent, Yes you are tarred with the same brush.
Well yes lets. Not in any way decrying the principles, a point I've also made clear previously elsewhere. I am however decrying the fact that as stated above by condoning you are complicit.Let's look at this again.
Finally, I am not now and never have denied anyones right to hold their own beliefs, opinions and views. What I have said however, is if you put them in the public domain thats your call, but you can hardly complain when by doing so the very obvious flaws in what you beleive are pointed out to you. As religion is unfortunately thrust down everyones necks in this country, I'm sorry if you don't like it, but in my book thats open season.
Going home now, may your God go with you, meanwhile I'll remain spiritually destitute.
Mr woppit - has anyone ever said that, or anything like that to you? Be honest, because the way you come across is that 'religious idiots' appear to be targeting you in particular, on what appears to be a regular basis.
TFTFY
To be honest, you made a bit of a hash of it.
But your one of your subsequent statements explains your attitude to the whole shebang, so fairy nuff.
As religion is unfortunately thrust down everyones necks in this country
It's not though, is it? I find my neck free to support my head, and contain the passages necessary for transport of food and gases. It feels quite free from religion.
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/religion
Oh very clever and witty comic. Care to explain what it's about?
It's not though, is it?
It was at the schools I went to - none of which were 'religious' schools. Daily hymns and reciting of the Lord's Prayer in assembly, visits to church for religious festivals etc.
I agree DD, and don't know what the few people on STW are on about when they suggest that religion is 'thrust down their throats' constantly in this country.
Yes, England and Scotland both have 'national churches' with a nominal voice national affairs, and we might well wish to debate whether or not they still should (bearing in mind the fact that many of their own members don't think so, and haven't since at least 1833). And yes, there are religious schools, whose merits we might argue, but no one needs to send their kids to them.
But where is this religion that is being forced on people? The fact that Christianity is part of the historical landscape here means that of course we are going to be conscious of it, but does history need to be revised so that there are no reminders of it?
I don't get it.
And yes, there are religious schools, whose merits we might argue, but no one needs to send their kids to them.
See my post above.
There's also no justification for schools that discriminate on the grounds of religion being funded by the state. If you want to indoctrinate children and segregate them from other religions or the non-religious, I suppose that's up to you - but there's no way the state should be funding it.
Firstly, I don't beleive I've ever been rude directly to anyone one on this thread, and indirectly no more so than me being consigned to eternal damnation, so a neutral transaction IMHO.
You do of course know that the Catholic church has never condemened anyone to hell, and that it can't.
Of course that applies to joolsburgers very clever but terribly misinformed cartoon.
Then grum, I agree it should be removed from the schools.
Or at the most, taught in the context of a North American-style 'social studies' class, in which you learn about religion as just one aspect of the whole human picture, which includes culture, food, etc., etc.
But thrust down your throat? Really?
But thrust down your throat? Really?
Yes. Although.......
Back to the 'baby with the bath water thing' - I think a religious upbringing can help with teaching people about morality, community spirit, altruism, rejecting materialism, trying to be a better person etc etc.
I suppose I just feel like in the modern world we should be able to do these things because they are the right thing to do, not because if we don't then the magic man in the sky who's watching us all will get angry.
And without the officially sanctioned bigotry too.
As religion is unfortunately thrust down everyones necks in this country
Is this happening ? Really.
I saw a couple of churches today while I was driving, but other than that I don't get any sort of religion "thrusted" on me.
And I don't think I ever have either.
And considering I went to a Catholic Grammar School and Studied Theology, you would think I would have been a prime candidate.
But as I decided I did not want to be Catholic, I was left to do what I wanted to do.
Where are all these people Forcing Religion on you, because they have been ignoring me for decades ?
Secondly, I've made my point very clear several times, if you are a member of an organsiation and don't at least speak up agaisnt its clear and frequent excesses you then condone it, so to that extent, Yes you are tarred with the same brush.
Hmm. Still not convinced. Firstly, you are assuming that people are not speaking out. I think many are, but I do not listen in on services around the country. Secondly, many could consider the church as much greater than the current administration. So if you believe in the tenets of Catholicism but don't like the leaders, you haven't got a lot of choice I don't think. You may love your own priest and parish, so leaving the church could be a serious problem.
but you can hardly complain when by doing so the very obvious flaws in what you beleive are pointed out to you
For what feels like the five hundredth time, THAT IS NOT WHAT I AM COMPLAINING ABOUT! I am complaining about the nastiness associated with the arguments presented on here.
As religion is unfortunately thrust down everyone's necks in this country
Simply not true. No-one has ever mentioned it to me, not even the close friends who are religious, and not even when discussing their religious matters around me. Once, I was sat on a bench in town presumably looking dejected, and someone invited me to their church. I refused, but it was rather decent of him to give me an option should I need it.
Do kids still do the Lord's Prayer and sing hymns in school? For me that stopped when I was 10, over 25 years ago.
I wholeheartedly agree grum, in spite of being from the 'still believing in God' section of society (though not entirely with you on the whole forcing religion down your throat thing).
I wholeheartedly agree grum, in spite of being from the 'still believing in God' section of society.
Yay.... let's have a cuddle. 🙂
Secondly, many could consider the church as much greater than the current administration.
Isn't the pope meant to be God's representative on earth though?
You do of course know that the Catholic church has never condemened anyone to hell, and that it can't.Of course that applies to joolsburgers very clever but terribly misinformed cartoon.
Seeing as you seem to be very well informed then, how do you explain this?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs" (CCC 1035).
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-hell-there-is
I'm really interested in this forced down your throat and religious views imposed on you bit. Can those who have been victims of this please tell us what form this took?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs" (CCC 1035).
That is the statement of the cathecism, it is different from the church condeming anyone, saying "you are going to hell"
I hope that resolves the issues.
In his 1994 book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, Pope John Paul II wrote that too often "preachers, catechists, teachers . . . no longer have the courage to preach the threat of hell" (p. 183).
Yes, that really is a terrible shame isn't it. 😐
Another lovely quote from catholic.com:
"An ever-burning Gehenna and the punishment of being devoured by living flames will consume the condemned; nor will there be any way in which the tormented can ever have respite or be at an end. Souls along with their bodies will be preserved for suffering in unlimited agonies. . . . The grief at punishment will then be without the fruit of repentance; weeping will be useless, and prayer ineffectual. Too late will they believe in eternal punishment, who would not believe in eternal life" (To Demetrian 24 [A.D. 252]).
That is the statement of the cathecism, it is different from the church condeming anyone, saying "you are going to hell"
I hope that resolves the issues.
Not really no. Just seems like weasily semantics on your part TBH.
I'm not sure what your point is, grum. The Catholic church teaches of hell. It's not a very nice place.
Where are all these people Forcing Religion on you, because they have been ignoring me for decades ?
😯
I am forced to accept that whereas the law requires that animals have to be stunned before having their throats cut, UNLESS the religion card is played, whereby cruelty is OK (halal). Edit: By law, in many jobs, I would HAVE to accept this.
I am forced to accept that people can mutilate boys (but not girls) genitals in the name of their religion. The poor unfortunate boys are also forced to accept it, as will their future partners.
My point is that IMO it's deeply weird and unpleasant to be indoctrinating children with this kind of creepy archaic fear-mongering.
I'm sorry if that offends anyone but I find the idea of scaring children into behaving how you want them to with the threat of eternal torture pretty offensive.
Not really no. Just seems like weasily semantics on your part TBH.
That's nice.
It's not semantics. There is the difference between the churches description is of what it believes will happen to a soul. It does not compel that to happen.
Like i can say if you step off a ledge you will fall, it is not the same as me pushing you. It is a descriptionof what I believe the likely outcome will be.
The church has never sent anyone to hell or condemned them in that way.
Is that clearer and less weasley?
The church has never sent anyone to hell or condemned them in that way.
Depends what you man by the 'the church', but I'd say the church has certainly killed them, and/or condemned them to a life with mutilated genitals.
I am forced to accept that whereas the law requires that animals have to be stunned before having their throats cut, UNLESS the religion card is played, whereby cruelty is OK (halal).I am forced to accept that people can mutilate boys (but not girls) genitals in the name of their religion. The poor unfortunate boys are also forced to accept it, as will their future partners.
Not really forced you directly though is it? And it is a practice rather some making you obey some religion
The church has never sent anyone to hell or condemned them in that way.
Isn't the following passage saying, 'if you're religious (though presumably strictly Catholic only) and do what the church says you'll be fine, and if not you will be damned to eternal hell'? Hard to interpret it any other way really:
"If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not, if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment" (Second Clement 5:5 [A.D. 150]).
Whether the church directly condemns anyone to hell isn't really relevant if they are saying 'you will go to hell unless you do exactly as we say.' That's what I mean by semantics. And yes, thank you that was a bit less weasily. 🙂
Depends what you man by the 'the church', but I'd say the church has certainly killed them, and/or condemned them to a life with mutilated genitals
I meant he Catholic church, as a body. Yup, the church has killed people I'm not sure that it has compelled the, to mutliated gentials and actually circumsed penii are quite attractive to some folks. So, not everyone sees it as mutilation..
Not really forced you directly though is it?
Well, if you want to use that argument, we can safety say 'the church' hasn't ever forced anyone to do anything.
And of course we could argue ad infinitum about the exact meaning of 'forced'. Perhaps they only coerced?
Of course realistically, that's borrox.
Whether the church directly condemns anyone to hell isn't really relevant if they are saying that you will go to hell unless you do exactly as we say.
Oh but it is completely different! And the church doesn't say that you go to hell if you do ot obey them. The church never says "you will go to hell"
circumsed penii are quite attractive to some folks. So, not everyone sees it as mutilation..
Ditto missing limbs.
Regardless of peoples perverse opinions, it's 'mutilation' by dictionary definition.
The church never says "you will go to hell"
😯 You haven't studied religions for long then?
Well, if you want to use that argument, we can safety say 'the church' hasn't ever forced anyone to do anything.
Dunno about that, it was pretty forcy during the Inquisition, but the church never come along to you and made you do something or even just gone on at you for anything. And the existence of halal or kosher slaughter is not really a catholic thing and even in terms of broader relgionits actually your government which is forcing you to live in a country which allows these things.
Oh but it is completely different!
How? 😕
And the church doesn't say that you go to hell if you do ot obey them. The church never says "you will go to hell"
So how do you interpret this as being any different to what you just said? 😕
"If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not, [b]if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment[/b]" (Second Clement 5:5 [A.D. 150]).
The church never says "you will go to hell"
You haven't studied religions for long then?
The Catholic church, I mean. Unless of course you know otherwise.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’
So who is it that's in a state of mortal sin when they die? Pretty sure that would be non-believers, homosexuals, people who've had abortions (even if they were raped). Correct me if I'm wrong.
