Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Richard Dawkins to citizen arrest the Pope

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to new
Atlas79 said:
mo_ugly.jpg
Click to expand...

GumbyLearner said:
This thread is so cool.
Click to expand...

Atlas and GL: I'm finding it difficult to understand what these posts contribute to the thread. Really they just demonstrate complete lack of taste on your part.

I have no time for religion or the Pope, but don't believe reducing any discussion about the subject to such puerile tripe furthers anyone's cause.
 

Attachments

  • mo_ugly.jpg
    mo_ugly.jpg
    23.9 KB · Views: 16
Tink said:
I dont think I Hero Worship, but I see the Pope as a messenger of Peace, and where he walks, helping people - its just a nice feeling
Click to expand...

Tink - I would like to ask you a serious question, and I challenge you to answer it. First I would like to present a scenario.

Your daughter comes home from school shaking with shock and hysteria and tells you her male teacher, whom she liked and trusted, has raped her. You and your husband go straight to the headmaster (let's assume for the sake of the argument you have not gone to the police) who tells you that yes, it is unfortunate, but if you make a fuss it will not look good for the school and the teacher's career will be irreparably damaged. He offers you a compromise - he will move your daughter to a different class - says "tut, tut" a few times, and says that if you go to the police he will take the side of the teacher and deny the abuse.

Until now you have thought of this headmaster as an excellent leader, good community member - does charitable work etc, etc. You now start to find out that this problem, and its coverup have been going on for years.

Here is my question:- Knowing what you now know, would you think this headmaster was a "messenger of peace........helping people.."?

This is not a trick question. The answer is 'yes' or 'no'.

This is what this thread is about
 
Reading all this, it strikes me that a government is at least sometimes justified in lying to its citizens, by omission or by actual misinformation. A raging mob can only be handled by being steered into a fenced pen for a while, where the noise it makes, the bricks it throws etc, will do minimal damage (to inconsqeuential targets). For, once roused, the mob will never be persuaded to set the bricks down and chill out.

Dawkins is a malicious shepherd.
 
Julia said:
Atlas and GL: I'm finding it difficult to understand what these posts contribute to the thread. Really they just demonstrate complete lack of taste on your part.

I have no time for religion or the Pope, but don't believe reducing any discussion about the subject to such puerile tripe furthers anyone's cause.
Click to expand...

They are red herrings,Julia. I know it is puerile tripe, and deliberately provocative in order to get a response. However, if ignored they have no traction.
 
Calliope said:
They are red herrings,Julia. I know it is puerile tripe, and deliberately provocative in order to get a response. However, if ignored they have no traction.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to provoke anything. I apologize for offending you Julia and Calliope. I just thought that the picture of Santa was more relevant to the fairy tales point raised by explod than photos of US presidential brides. FWIW!

I'm done with posting anymore on this thread. I've heard and copped enough from godbotherers in my life and now want to learn more about atheist values to get a more balanced objective perspective of all bloggers. I think ASF is in need of an atheist values thread so others can learn more about being a good atheist.
 
Gumby, what you need to understand is that you've now tangoed with a new bunch of god botherers, but they have no overarching morality to constrain them, and they have a different god. Reason or science or logic, as evidenced by this thread, is nothing to do with it. It is ALL about silencing and attacking the unbeliever. "Why" is a blank that can be filled in later. It feels nice to feel superior to others, that is the underlying orientation of it.

Your call for a set of atheist values is on point. But I don't see why Christian (or whatever) values can't be adopted by those who don't necessarily swallow the Christian story of creation.

The values themselves aren't the problem - if lived up to, they're benign. The charge against the church is that they DON'T live up to the values.
 
I think it is time the anti-atheists woke up to the possibility that they have been taken for a ride. I'm pretty sure that Dawkins, Hitchens and Robertson have no intention of arresting the Pope or anyone else. There is absolutely no way the British establishment would allow that to happen.

These three guys obviously have a sense of humour, and looked around for a way to put the Pope under the spotlight. And it certainly worked.
 
Calliope said:
I think it is time the anti-atheists woke up to the possibility that they have been taken for a ride. I'm pretty sure that Dawkins, Hitchens and Robertson have no intention of arresting the Pope or anyone else. There is absolutely no way the British establishment would allow that to happen.

These three guys obviously have a sense of humour, and looked around for a way to put the Pope under the spotlight. And it certainly worked.
Click to expand...

I think you're spot on Calliope. Dawkins said himself that he didn't expect it to happen, but they wanted to raise some awareness to the fact that a pope is as answerable to the law as the next person. He and his mates will be having a good laugh!!

Look at the anger it has raised here!
 
Ruby said:
Dawkins said himself that he didn't expect it to happen, but they wanted to raise some awareness to the fact that a pope is as answerable to the law as the next person. He and his mates will be having a good laugh!!

Look at the anger it has raised here!
Click to expand...

But all Dawkins has proved is that the pope is NOT as answerable to the law as the next person.

He has enhanced his own profile however. ;)
 
Atlas79 said:
Gumby, what you need to understand is that you've now tangoed with a new bunch of god botherers, but they have no overarching morality to constrain them, and they have a different god. Reason or science or logic, as evidenced by this thread, is nothing to do with it. It is ALL about silencing and attacking the unbeliever. "Why" is a blank that can be filled in later. It feels nice to feel superior to others, that is the underlying orientation of it.

Your call for a set of atheist values is on point. But I don't see why Christian (or whatever) values can't be adopted by those who don't necessarily swallow the Christian story of creation.

The values themselves aren't the problem - if lived up to, they're benign. The charge against the church is that they DON'T live up to the values.
Click to expand...

Overarching morality? Christian values?:confused:

What, like stoning adulterers and homosexuals to death?
 
wayneL said:
But all Dawkins has proved is that the pope is NOT as answerable to the law as the next person.

He has enhanced his own profile however. ;)
Click to expand...

He hasn't proven anything yet. However, I think Geoffrey Robertson will put up a good case, expecting nothing to come of it but raised awareness of the whole sleazy Vatican cover-up; and in that they are already highly successful.
 
Ruby said:
He hasn't proven anything yet. However, I think Geoffrey Robertson will put up a good case, expecting nothing to come of it but raised awareness of the whole sleazy Vatican cover-up; and in that they are already highly successful.
Click to expand...

What do you have against Dawkins?

To me he is just a realist.

And well said Waynel. Game, set and match.
 
Atlas79 said:
Gumby, what you need to understand is that you've now tangoed with a new bunch of god botherers, but they have no overarching morality to constrain them, and they have a different god. Reason or science or logic, as evidenced by this thread, is nothing to do with it. It is ALL about silencing and attacking the unbeliever. "Why" is a blank that can be filled in later. It feels nice to feel superior to others, that is the underlying orientation of it.

Your call for a set of atheist values is on point. But I don't see why Christian (or whatever) values can't be adopted by those who don't necessarily swallow the Christian story of creation.

The values themselves aren't the problem - if lived up to, they're benign. The charge against the church is that they DON'T live up to the values.
Click to expand...

At least in the post above you've outlined some points that make sense.

You're right - basic Christian value of goodness, integrity, consideration for others, can be adopted by anyone, Christian or otherwise, believers or otherwise, creationists or evolutionists.
There are many non-Christians who do in fact embrace these values in their day to day lives.

You're also right in saying that the values are not the problem. The charge is that the church doesn't live up to these values.

There's nothing wrong with basic Christian values, in fact they outline a basic guideline for decent living, and the world would be a better place if everyone lived by these values.
The charge against the church that they don't live up to the values is a legitimate charge in some cases, particularly with regard to crimes of sexual abuse of children by priests, and the covering up of these crimes by church officials, and protection of the offenders.

Having said that, Christian churches are involved in many good and admirable deeds for the betterment of humanity. Tink has mentioned some of these within the Catholic church. On another thread I mentioned some of the good things done by another church that I was involved with.

Nevertheless, sexual abuse of children is a crime against humanity, and anyone involved in it should be locked away for the term of their natural life. Those who protect the offenders, cover up their crimes, and place them in positions within the church where they have the opportunity of repeating their crimes, should also be locked up in prison for length periods.

Is the pope one of these people? The available evidence appears to indicate that he is.
 
Ruby said:
Explod....... I am very pro-Dawkins, as you will see if you read my posts.
Click to expand...

Apologies, damned explosions get in the way, scatoma, or similar, I think its called .

The other word triggerred by the excellent post just put up by bunyip is humanism
 
gooner said:
Overarching morality? Christian values?:confused:

What, like stoning adulterers and homosexuals to death?
Click to expand...


In what country is this done today by Christians?

Besides, if true - it isn't, not that something being true or not is a measure for you guys, what matters is if it's a useful slur - it would be just what I said: a VARIATION from those values, not following those values.
 
Mexico Bishop Says pr0n, TV to Blame For Priest Abuse

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - A prominent Roman Catholic bishop in Mexico blamed eroticism on television and Internet pornography for child abuse by priests, in the latest incendiary comments on sex scandals in the church.

"With so much invasion of eroticism, sometimes it's not easy to stay celibate or to respect children," Bishop Felipe Arizmendi said during an annual meeting of Mexican bishops near Mexico City on Thursday.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2010/04/16/world/international-uk-mexico-bishop-abuse.html

At first I thought I had received spam on the Reuters feed, I find this to be an incredible position to take on this issue.
 
Ruby said:
Fishbulb,as usual you are talking nonsense. this is the sort of sweeping generalisation we have all come to expect of you. It's a juvenile tactic people resort to when they know their argument has no legs and they have nothing useful to offer but still try and defend their position.

You don't have to be religious to understand the bible. Many of the worlds great bible scholars are non-believers

Most religious people have never read and have no understanding of the bible or the messages therein. They are content to believe the puerile mash fed to them by their priests.

Have you read the bible?? Do you understand everything in it?? No? I am sure your mother taught you about glass houses and throwing stones!
Click to expand...

And hopefully your mummy taught you that the reason you keep burning your hand is because you keep putting it on the stove repeatedly. The idea is to stop.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top