New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Of course, it's a pure coincidence that both groups originated in Italy (lets bound to Roman church now), but not all organizations would easily handle abusing hundreds thousands of children in different continents and killing millions of innocents. Anyone can create a belief system. But if one takes that system blindly, without any specific reason (e.g. to commit a crime), than what can be said about such individual? I mean we don't have to judge or we can pretend, that it is ok, but if you clearly understand, that "broad belief system" is a diluted BS at most, it impacts your opinion about religious people, whether you like it or not.
Oh, I thought you were serious. Now you're just going into conspiracy lunacy because organized crime originated independently in numerous cultures and regions.
Not all but historically many have. If you can't think of ten organizations that have done this off the top of your head, you need to read some history.
You mean the religions?
Not all, but many.. Your organization as well? I bet Christians would gladly accept this explanation.
FWIW, I'm a Christian but not a Catholic nor going to church, so I'm not defending "my" church.
Look like you watch too much CNN and BBC and read NewYorkTimes..
So what's the point of your whole post? We are free to have different beliefs, I don't question that right.
LOL...none of the above. And how you could draw such a conclusion from what I've written mystifies me.
Indeed. But you seem to ignorantly conflate multiple things from different categories into strange conspiracy theories, which is what I was objecting to.
Why categorize? Why look at plain facts? That's your imagination created conspiracy, not me. I just like Italy.
You missed the point, probably intentionally. And to say that Buddhists are on the level of doing bad shit as Christians, we can't be living in the same universe.
I'm curious. Stack 'em up. Given the very, very low atheism population for the last 5000 years, this will be news to me. You already missed the story posted above about 200K French boys abused. The fucking Catholics in North America alone have been doing bad shit to kids for centuries.
Not in this thread, but in books, movies, real life, etc, introducing someone for the first time and saying they're a good Christian... it would be just fine to say they were a good person.
Where did I say they're bad? I was making the point it doesn't make them automatically good.
It's not. That's an actual debate topic. Your response sounds like a PR person trying to make it sound like they're not diametrically opposed on a number of things.
Catholic = Christian.
That's irrelevant and defending it is pathetic.
I think he was referring to how the Vatican and mafia were in bed together and swapped the Vatican's dirty assets for the Mafia's clean assets. And all the mysterious murders/deaths/circumstances at the Vatican.
Then how can you trust a book where the first chapter is completely fabricated? Everything else is first and third person hearsay written in a time with less than 3% literacy, and stories repackaged from the previous 1000 years?
The Holocaust and other general depredations of the Nazis, the Cambodian genocide, the Holodomor...already, we're into the tens of millions.
I disagree. There is no coherent definition of "feminism". And "Christian" is everything from a Catholic to an Orthodox to a Southern Baptist to the extremely liberal churches which have transgendered ministers to Mormons, Unitarians, and Jehovah's Witnesses. Even within that short list, there are multiple definitions possible of what a Christian is, and many groups would exclude others on categorical grounds. I literally am sitting in a house that is on the same street as a Catholic church, a Romanian Seventh-Day Adventist, a church that bills itself as the "gay Christian community" church, a JW hall, and a Mormon church. The span of beliefs there is unparalleled in any other faith tradition other than perhaps Hinduism.
It's the "they're" in your statement that is the problem. I know plenty of Catholics and Christians who'd consider themselves feminists and many would would say they personally are not.
On this we completely agree. But others in this thread have implied otherwise - i.e., that stating someone is a Christian is a bad sign. That is my only objection because it is inherently a pre-judgement of a person's character based on their religious beliefs.
You are again making vast assumptions about 2 billion+ people. Only a percentage (which is a minority) would take Genesis as literal history. You see how difficult definitions are...
Approximately 1/2 of the world's Christians are Catholic (or less, depending on which groups you include in the denominator, such as Mormons, Oneness, Unification, JWs, etc.)
All mentioned wouldn't make 20. Of course there were more atrocities. But the funny fact is that all these crime regimes perished, but church is still here and shining.
It's not prejudgement on character, just about possible lack of knowledge and understanding of that person in case of blind faith. Possible is the key word here.
Just try to realize what a wild assumptions these 2 billion make..
For people set to smear the christian belief it might be, but for mentally and socially healthy humans it is not because the number of - not necessarily christian btw - people who received health care, basic education, etc. by the oh so evil catholic hospitals, schools, etc. is vastly larger than the number of - alleged or real - abuse cases.
And again you paint a christian institution in black only. But I'll admit that the vatican is indeed an easy target and probably one of the darkest zones in christianity. But still vatican != christians.
I see. So where's the book then by anyone reporting directly from the big bang?
Sorry but the bible, while certainly having flaws, still is much, much more solid than the "science" fairy tales which, I kid you not, pulled out about 95% of everything that (according to their fairy tales) exists right out of their a__es (e.g. "dark matter", "dark energy") because actual science proved their earlier fairy tales wrong
Funny that "enlightened modern" people have no problem believing that obvious nonsense (ca. 95% of the universe consists of "magic dust") but consider the bible ridiculous.
Btw. In real life and with normal people I know of very few cases of christians considering themselves somehow superior - but I know plenty atheists who consider themselves superior to christians. Certainly just strange happenstance.
If scientists wouldn't have been oppressed and killed by church throughout the ages, I'm sure we even wouldn't had a problem called COVID in 2020. Progress of science was slowed for centuries.
I see, the (not at all) good old, old story about the oh so evil church hampering science ...
For one that's largely untrue; e.g. the famous Galileo case was different from the rumors. Plus, uhm, actually even the oh so evil catholic church actually has supported science in diverse ways and was/is generally not opposed to science, let alone oppressing scientists.
That said, every kind of regime tends to say, influence, science be it intentional and targeted or indirectly. And btw. the worst and most massive oppression of science and scientists comes from atheists. I happen to know quite a few christian scientists who try hard to keep their religious belief hidden so as to avoid mobbing and damage to their career. Just try to do research that contradicts Darwin and other "scientific" dogmas - well noted, even in "enlightened" western democracies - and you'll learn very quickly how freedom loving atheists are ...
This took a strange turn
"The Inquisition found him guilty of defending Copernican theory as a probability, "vehemently suspect of heresy," demanded him to recant his views and placed him under house arrest for the remainder of his life." Church pleasantly surprised me with this one, really. Conflict between religion and science is preprogrammed, because if you tell something, can't prove it, get angry when someone's questioning your truths and yet tell people to behave in some manner (to research something or not, to restrict something or not) because your hallucination tells you that, sorry, you don't belong in a modern world. At least not as drug addict.
Christianity is a regime, that's completely clear and I agree. I'm not even atheist (don't like an idea of the word "theos" in any form to be associated with me) and I think people often use this word just to consider someone as infidel. No many would put "Atheist" in their professional profiles, because that would as well raise some questions. But putting "Christian" says pretty much enough by itself.
... so someone wrote. What if someone else wrote "Galilei was a child molester and accused of murdering no less than 6 people"? Or in other words, someone saying something doesn't mean it is so. Oh and btw, it wasn't the inquisition, it was a commission led by a cardinal who basically held the position that what Galilei submitted needed some more and better proof. Plus house arrest was an extremely mild verdict back then and it was so mild because said cardinal principally respected Galilei and science in general although he found Galilei's submission to be lacking.
Yeah, right, that's why the church founded and ran and still runs quite many universities and research labs. Classical case of "dislike of science".
A propos, maybe you are the one hallucinating here and acting like "that which doesn't fit my world view can not possibly be true"
Too bad that "God hater" contains the word "God" (Theos), though luck.
If you want to be taken seriously as someone on the side of science (as opposed to a Creator) you should try to meet at least minimal levels of scientific procedure and arguments, like e.g. not consistently bending and twisting things, carefully picking what suits your view, etc.
Amen.
This is even more random than the @Virmach's 2018 thread.
Well, Hitler was an occultist and didn't start the war in the name of atheism.
There's a definition in every dictionary. Dave Chappelle's special two weeks ago read out that it's the belief that men and women should have equal rights. I firmly believe there's ample evidence in the bible where women are not provided equal rights.
The problem is the source material, the bible. The reason there's a new offshoot religion is because they all need to ignore more shit in the bible to swallow it and to reinterpret things that make them feel better. You won't find the gay accepting churches reading out Leviticus and shit.
Sed religious beliefs with name writing style and we have irony.
No. That isn't true. Only in recent times have they changed that to symbolism. For centuries, they treated it like the actual truth and killed people saying otherwise. I went to a Catholic school in the 90's and my teacher also said it was symbolism and I said, no, I can see people all the time make literal references to Genesis ("God said Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" for gay protests). So in the 90's,I looked up some stat and in the 1950's US, more than 50% believed in literal Genesis.
And so even if you take it as symbolic, why don't you care about how the beginning actually started? We know that genes and DNA as well as our upbringing determine who we are. And the first symbol is that if you obtain knowledge, God will be very pissed. Wizard in Oz.
As mentioned above, it's the source material that will always be the problem. Selectively ignoring large swaths of text required.
4.3 billion people out of 7.9 billion people worship the same god.
You're arguing you can do evil and abusive illegal activities and cover it up globally over centuries but it's ok because they also do good using money that the people give them and get back a fraction in return? Buddy, that's about control and power, not helping out of the goodness of their hearts. Don't get me started on Mother Theresa...
Oh, Christ. SMH
Most ironic comment I've ever read in my life. No hyperbole, either.
No, I'm saying that some here paint the church black only, which is wrong.
Sad to hear because that must be a poor life.
.. and still can't fucking get along together!
[Sarcasm edit:]
Whilst we're on the non-Cest Pit (sic) trail..
Why do the various "green" parties not support the (pest) control of World population, the key factor in wrecking the planet?