Topic RSS | Reply to topic
Author Post

andybugden


Member

Posted Wed Sep 15th, 2010 8:39pm Post subject: The Pope

I sent a letter to the graundian in response to the "50 undersigned". I doubt it will get published, but here it is:

Dear Sir,

Am I the only one to see the flaw in the argument presented by the 50 undersigned. I can understand Professor Dawkins, since it has his style, but the rest simply could not have read it through. Let us begin with the last sentence. When we look at the last sentence in the context of the letter as a whole, one can only assume a cretin had the idea of including this idea. On the one hand we have criticism of the church's influence world-wide, whilst on the other a statement to the effect of the importance of the church in the world. This is exactly the type of argument forwarded by Professor Dawkins.

But let me take their points one by one. Opposing the distribution of condoms and increasing the size of families in poor countries. Poor countries normally have a higher infant mortality rate and a male is normally more highly prized. Having a large family does not make these countries poorer. The West normally does that. The Common Agricultural Policy has a far greater affect in that regard. Moreover, those lands that are overpopulated do not tend to be catholic by nature. As for the spread of Aids this is such a falsehood. The church teaches that sex is between a man and a wife - you may be married until death parts you. Follow this rule and Aids does not spread. Those who are of a more promiscuous nature do not follow the Catholic Church's teaching on marriage - why should they on condom use? The United Nations has given millions upon millions to South Africa in its fight against Aids and there have been some initiatives, including the distribution of condoms. These condoms were in a plastic bag with the instructions stapled to the bag and THROUGH the condom. I ask you, which is better - the United Nations initiative or Catholic doctrine. Not only that traditional healers in South Africa even today teach that the cure for Aids is sex with a virgin. You don't believe me - go ask Peter Hain - he will tell you.

I have no clue what is the problem with segregated education. It is well known that girls are a little more advanced than boys and act in a more mature manner during puberty. Maybe the complaint is that we seek to segregate Catholics from non-catholics in education. One of our roles is to make others christians. Imagine you are on top of a table trying to pull people on to it and therefore christianity. It is far easier for them to pull you off the table. In my life there is one faith, one baptism, one church - this is why my boys go to a catholic school. Other parents are free to choose what they want for their own children. In the same way, I will choose a gymnasium that offers Greek and Latin when they are older.

Abortion is a terrible situation and I can sympathise with those faced with such a decision. My belief is that life starts at conception and the church's teaching is based on this position. There are many desperate situations where a woman might be faced with this dilemma, but the church's position is clear - all life is sacred. In many ways we all share the same view. To kill a woman is bad - but do we not consider it worse to kill a pregnant woman? Indeed, pregnancy used to be grounds for a reprieve when Britain still executed criminals.

Homosexual relationships are not allowed in christianity. Sex belongs in a marriage and a marriage is between a man and a woman. All else is forbidden fruit. Adam ate of the fruit. In the same way as we are not to to live with a woman outside marriage, these relationships are not allowed. I do not know about the teaching on transgender, but it is quite a new area of life and the church is conservative - so this is one area that perhaps needs time.

Child abuse. I would point out that children attract child abusers, not the catholic church. In the past police officers were accorded the same weight as catholic priests i.e. they could not lie. The priest would also have many people who know him who simply would not believe any allegation of this nature. There are abusers in all walks of life. Churches of all denominations will attract abusers simply because of the trust we put in our fellow believers. The so called cover up is actually biblical. This sort of thing and others (like stealing for example)are meant to be dealt with in-house and quietly so as not to discourage people from becoming christians. This is in the bible - it is not a papist teaching. The policy here has not worked. The second problem, I think, lies in forgiveness. Yes we forgive. You will find that every christian church will accept convicted child abusers among their number. We have to love the sinner - and yes hate the sin.

The fact that the Holy See does not involve itself with international agreements on Human Rights is absolutely irrelevant. The USA - our most important ally is also guilty. The Church could be the biggest authority on human rights and yet these people would oppose the Pope's State visit because it is not signatory to international agreements?

In all, the 50 really meant "We the undersigned oppose the state visit because we are atheists and/or misocatholics"

Yours faithfully,

Andrew Bugden


Back to top

Tooheyhicks


Member

Posted Sat Sep 18th, 2010 12:34am Post subject: The Pope

Mr Fry, I was once one of your greatest admirers and defenders. With your blatant anti-catholicism, I now wonder who is the real bigot??? You or the Pope?
My money is firmly on you.


Back to top

BGB


Member

Posted Sun Sep 19th, 2010 6:45pm Post subject: The Pope

Extremist homosexual activists enjoyed thirteen years of a labour government that allowed them to hijack the legal system to the extent that a religious objection to homosexuality became a hate crime and religious conviction was given a status comparable with Stalin's counter-revolutionaries; thereby justifying the declassification of someone as being of human merit. The term 'homophobe' exists to dehumanise an opinion, thereby making the person a non-person, their opinions are thus invalidated and no longer constitute a threat to the enforced moral code - it is no different to sending communist detractors to lunatic asylums where they could be discarded and silenced. Fry's problem, as with all intolerant homosexual activists, is that in Rome sits a man who steadfastly remains unaffected and resilient to all this, the liberal-left intelligentsia (and I use that term loosely) have no power over him, either to intimidate or coerce as they have everyone else in this country the last decade - and they can't stand it, they can't deal with it, they can't cope with it. As the Pope's visit approaches their language becomes ever more irrational and bloated, the mud heavier and sticker, 'please, please' they beg, 'why have we no power over this man to intimidate him to accept our moral righteousness?' What they fear of course is the intellectual argument that, when given proper oxygen, destroys the validity of their fight. A weak belief system is, by definition, intolerant to criticism - and so it proves with the cultural fools that have held far too much sway over this country the last thirteen years. It is no wonder they hate Catholicism so much.


Back to top

Anthony Miller


Member

Posted Wed Sep 22nd, 2010 4:17pm Post subject: The Pope

Having read about this and chased a lot of articles back through the internet and thought about this in some depth I believe part of Mr Fry's anti-Catholic ire is actually directed at the "European Conservatives and Reformists Group" to which David Cameron has connected himself and the Conservatives in the European Parilament which is openly anti-Semitic and extremely homophobic.

Mr Fry thus concluded that Catholicism is fundamentally anti-semitic and put his foot unfortantely in it big time with the national press by insinuating that the Polish were somehow involved in the holocaust which I believe he later retracted. I would point him at Pius XI's encyclical Non Abbiamo Bisogno in 1931, in which he criticized the idea of a totalitarian state and Mussolini's treatment of the Church, the encyclical "Mit brennender Sorge" condemning the Nazi ideology of racism and totalitarianism and Nazi violations. While, numerous German Catholics, who participated in the secret printing and distribution of the encyclical "Mit brennender Sorge", went to jail and concentration camps, the Western democracies remained silent, which Pope Pius XI labeled bitterly as "a conspiracy of silence". From 1941 to 1944, Pope Pius XII and the Catholic Church were responsible for saving more Jews from Nazi persecution than any other person or institution. The World Jewish Congress, American Jewish community, Chief Rabbis of Jerusalem, Rome and Budapest, Golda Meir and many other prominent Jewish representatives praised Pius XII for his relief efforts and public denunciation of racial persecution. As a result the KGB launched a smear campaign against Pius XII with motto “Dead men cannot defend themselves”.

It is often pointed out that Christ actually never said anything about homosexual relationships himself and hung out with 12 other men most of the time. And the gospels are peppered with references to the Diciple whom Jesus loved... maybe one day the Church will change its views with regard to homosexuality but I'm not holding my breath. Changing it's view on anything usually takes the Catholic Church about 500 years.

I am not terribly religous but I do sense sectarian undertones in some of the attacks on the Catholic Church which make me uneasy. However, I would like to thank Mr Fry none the less for bringing to public attention how the European Conservatives and Reformists Group is using and perverting the meaning of religon and the dark undertones of the Cameron administration.

There is a lot more going on in the background of the Pope's visit than is visible at first inspection.

France has separation of Church and State with regards to Schooling - it hasn't stopped them banning the burqa. It doesnt follow that if you dont segregate children you will solve the problem if religous intolerance. Although personally I am against segregation in schools as I think it has a lot more to do with saving money. I dont like the ideas of schools being financially connected to the state although I went to a Catholic and later a Non-Conformist school and I cannot say that I believe either brainwashed me. I had little enough brains when I went in and even less now.

http://www.pearshapedcomedy.com

Back to top

boilerman


Member

Posted Sat Oct 9th, 2010 6:51pm Post subject: The Pope

Here's a little thought from an ex catholic,(you bastards ruined my life)how about all religions mind their own feckin buisness and stop trying to persuade us all that they are right and I am wrong.
FFS bring on eternal damnation


Back to top

[insert name]


Member

Posted Sat Oct 9th, 2010 11:02pm Post subject: The Pope

Ah...
What do they say about religion and politics... best to discuss neither.

However.
I always find it interesting that any criticism of religion of any kind brings out hate and vitriol - mostly from those who espouse said religious beliefs.

If I am expected to respect your beliefs in some form of unknowable deity, please respect my belief that no such deity exists...

Life. Don't talk to me about life...

Back to top

reventonrage


Member

Posted Tue Dec 21st, 2010 6:21am Post subject: The Pope

I have watched the speech Mr Fry made at the Intelligence Squared debate about whether the Catholic church is a force for good in the world and I have concluded that it is not. I was a Catholic in the past and I have never been to church (I will proudly admit this) because I found the church's actions very shady. For one, while the priests, pastors and nuns preach about moral values, recently exposed cases of sexual violence shows that there are leaders within the church who do not practise what they preach and do not have an ounce of moral values to speak of.

Furthermore, while I am not able to understand homosexuals fully (and I truly regret that), I am not in any way against gay rights movements or people such as Mr Fry being outspoken against others who stigmatise and discriminate against them because 'Freedom of Speech' is a widely known concept every where. My philosophy is this: If one is able to criticise homosexuals for being "abnormal" and do not expect any backlash, then homosexuals should be allowed to criticise others for discriminating against them. Furthermore, as fellow human beings of this Earth, we should accept and embrace each other's differences and learn to respect these differences. Clearly, the Catholic church does not respect the rights of homosexuals by deeming them as "morally evil individuals". From my point of view, those priests who preach about morality and sexually assault and rape young, innocent children are these so-called "morally evil individuals"!


Back to top

Nitro


Member

Posted Tue Jan 4th, 2011 3:59am Post subject: The Pope

I like seeing things as they were actually said myself, and thought you might too if you haven't seen the debate"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilfSlpENb2Y&feature=related

and as this is mr.fry's site, his portion ought to be shown as well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEhtOhwL8xk&feature=related
BGB, I found your entire diatribe difficult to follow. I mean you're inserting feelings and thoughts into why dissenters of Catholic theology don't agree with it. You insinuate it's because they can't control the pope, that it frustrates them, and so they complain. You've put the cart before the horse here friend.

No, people complain about Catholic ideologies because they are flat out dangerous to innocent human beings. And usually, human beings that are not actively warming the pews at Mass.

And when the Catholic church is wrong, when was the last time you heard a real apology from on high about crimes committed? I mean, Thomas Moore made a Saint? And recently? Why wouldn't anyone with an IQ above room temperature criticize that?

Papa Pontiff is hopelessly out of touch.

Really? Wow.

Back to top

LirSwan


Member

Posted Sun Jan 9th, 2011 6:31pm Post subject: The Pope

I nearly became a card carrying member of the Catholic church when I was a child. However, I wasn't allowed to make my First Holy Communion or my Confirmation, and was rejected by the local church because the priest and the headmaster of my school were convinced that I had written rude things about Jesus in a copy of the Catechism. Of course they should have known it wasn't me - the things written were so banal - but they wanted to believe it was me. Me, the dreadful girl who smoked, never made prefect and who took the pants off the 1st year boys to decorate the netball goals .. I wasn't what *they* wanted in their Catholic club. Catholicism is a club. A club where the silent are welcomed and the individual is shunned.

"Watch that one over there, he'll have someone's eye out." Harold - Hastings - 1066

Back to top

zap


Member

Posted Thu Jan 13th, 2011 2:58am Post subject: The Pope

The problem is that religion is man-made, these days, and not God-made, if you believe, or get comfort from that kind of thing. That so many religious organisations Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Islam, rub shoulders with the capitalist world, quite easily, and readily, speaks volumes to me.

Organised religions simply cannot work. It is an individual's beliefs, and their right to believe them, that really has more relevance, whether right, wrong, or coincidental with the big 'Churches', 'Mosques' or 'Temples'. Where does cash come into it?

A child of five could understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. - Groucho

Back to top

Nitro


Member

Posted Sat Jan 22nd, 2011 3:52am Post subject: The Pope

Good final point Zap. I had a friend visited by his local priest who expressed concern that he and his wife were not having children! He actually went to my friends home, recently married btw, and tried to snick his nose into such business.

Friend said flatly,"Here's a few reasons, pick your favorite: First of all, I ain't bringing kids under my roof that I can't feed yet. Secondly, if you're so god damned concerned about our having kids or not, how's about you call on some of the vast amount of money the Vatican's got and send it my way? Thirdly, since when does a guy who doesn't have a clue about raising kids dare to tell ME to have them? And finally mister, if you guys want to pay their way for the next eighteen years of their lives, we'll start pumping out kids faster than you can count them being born! All that GOLD in the Vatican coffers and none to give to all these poor Catholic families? Go sell your shit and shinola to someone else. Now get out of my house and consider us permanently absent from your church."

You know, a heavy load is put on the backs of local priests and nuns by Big Papa and his crew of silk capes...but go talk to some struggling parish and you can pretty quickly see that their own reps are expected to do much with very, very little real, financial support from On High. No, the priests must beg very poor parish members to dutifully put their extra coins in the passing plate. If the Vatican sold off even its art collection, they could probably REALLY help their members.

Really? Wow.

Back to top

eudoreus


Member

Posted Mon Jan 24th, 2011 1:15pm Post subject: The Pope

....reference the "Intelligence Squared" debate on whether the Catholic faith is a force for good in the world i'd add to Mssrs Hitchins and Frys' excellent discourse the following thought: ARTICLES OF FAITH BIND (and BLIND)....they are intended to, because being frail humans some of us feel the need to be engaged to a creed, whilst others need to be told (or burnt at the stake). So that is what it is....a credo.
So, how to undo any article of faith which has been pronounced upon...nay, decreed by the Bishop of Rome as dogma? Well,it can actually be done, or rather, undone...... But how, you may well ask can he do this, seeing as he was infallible when pronouncing on such matters? How can any Pope, ever again, go back on something apparently God told to His Pope in 1302 was wrong? "So sorry Number 2, but We got that one wrong back there"
Easy...all Pope has to do is make another decree ex cathedra that he is not infallible on such matters after all and noone can argue because he is infallible. He doesn't even need to apologise for centuries of fear, hate and discrimination because he was only.....yeah, that's right...acting under Orders.
Infallibility is second only to Catch 22 in it's absolute simplicity in that it neatly solves a dozen worries of any patriarch....in one law....you have to admire the economy, but above all the application of the principle of the Möbius ribbon....whichever way you look at it it's sewn up...no joins....perfect. You see, it's this:- (and i spent hours thinking this out whilst whiling away boring hours of church tedium when i was a little Catholic): A man said that he was told by God that he could have infallibility. And when he said that to the world he was speaking infallibly. Love it! Honest dictatorship!
On 18 November 1302, Pope Boniface VIII issued the Papal bull Unam sanctam.....sinners who don't repent won't see God....so unless you stop being gay, birth controlling, or wanting to be a lady priest and doubtless other odds and ends, forget it! You won't get even a back row seat for da big show.


Back to top