Qhimm.com Forums
Off-topic forums => Completely Unrelated => Topic started by: Kudistos Megistos on 2010-04-02 20:03:34
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36149297/ns/world_news-europe
facepalm.jpg
Really, the Catholic Church should stop some of its clergy from speaking in public; many of them have a serious case of foot-in-mouth syndrome (http://abcnews.go.com/International/catholic-bishop-williamson-unrepentent-holocaust-denial/story?id=9717252). :roll:
-
might wanna delete a backslash off of that address.
Sounds like a publicity stunt to detract from the issue at hand to me.
"Didn't you know that priests were molesting children for some time now?"
"ermm...uh......ANTISEMITIC COMMENT!"
"Gasp! Some guy the pope is now distancing himself from made an anti-semitic comment! Let's all pay attention to him now!"
Then again, my theory that "religious leader" is synonymous with "ignorant pompous asshole" as well as "politician", "lawyer", "law enforcer", and "bane of society" may be true...
-
Sounds like a publicity stunt to detract from the issue at hand to me.
"Didn't you know that priests were molesting children for some time now?"
"ermm...uh......ANITSEMITIC COMMENT!"
"Gasp! Some guy the pope is now distancing himself from made an anti-semitic comment! Let's all pay attention to him now!"
I would never have thought of that, but it seems like something someone might do. :D
However, it doesn't seem to have ever worked.
Then again, my theory that "religious leader" is synonymous with "ignorant pompous asshole" as well as "politician", "lawyer", "law enforcer", and "bane of society" may be true...
Yeah, that probably is true. :P
-
Religion = meh.
If Scientology had been written 1000+ years ago, if might actually be a religion instead of a money grubbing nutjob cult, now imagine if the Bible had only been written in the last hundred years, it'd just be dismissed as a load of fairy tales, same could be said for all religious text tbh.
I mean how do we really know the events of the bible or indeed any other "sacred" texts actually happened, hell, how do we know they weren't all written by the same guy.
-
Religion = meh.
If Scientology had been written 1000+ years ago, if might actually be a religion instead of a money grubbing nutjob cult, now imagine if the Bible had only been written in the last hundred years, it'd just be dismissed as a load of fairy tales, same could be said for all religious text tbh.
I mean how do we really know the events of the bible or indeed any other "sacred" texts actually happened, hell, how do we know they weren't all written by the same guy.
I like the Tao. It says all throughout it that it's a useless book, and that if you really want to be in harmony with the Tao, you've got to do it yourself.
Then again I wouldn't classify Taoism as a religion, so I suppose that's still true...
-
Religion = meh.
If Scientology had been written 1000+ years ago, if might actually be a religion instead of a money grubbing nutjob cult, now imagine if the Bible had only been written in the last hundred years, it'd just be dismissed as a load of fairy tales, same could be said for all religious text tbh.
I mean how do we really know the events of the bible or indeed any other "sacred" texts actually happened, hell, how do we know they weren't all written by the same guy.
I like the Tao. It says all throughout it that it's a useless book, and that if you really want to be in harmony with the Tao, you've got to do it yourself.
Then again I wouldn't classify Taoism as a religion, so I suppose that's still true...
Much like how contrary to popular belief, Buddhism is a philosophy and not a religion
-
Yet another apology (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1160914.html) :-D
Really, they should hire someone (or a team of people) just to make apologies for clergy who offend people. Whoever they hire would have a full time job. :D
Also, comment #11 to that article is quite interesting...
-
Yeah, the clergy seems to be digging a hole on some recent issues. Which i find very unfortunate, being catholic myself. I think that the church is still stuck in the 1500's when state law and ecclesiastical law were seperate.
-
Then again, my theory that "religious leader" is synonymous with "ignorant pompous asshole" as well as "politician", "lawyer", "law enforcer", and "bane of society" may be true...
O noez! Sum gai frum a grup ta t evey1 watchs & pepols beliv maeks mstakies!! Ther4, evrthng grup, gai &nd hes folowrs saiz nd dos HAVE TO BE WONG!!!!
My fingers are seriously cramping from typing that. :P
Do you not see the gaping flaws in that logic? You're assuming that these people, mainly "religious leaders", "politicians", "lawyers", "law enforcers", etc. are all "ignorant pompous assholes" because one of them is. Granted there's no evidence that refutes the occurrence of the Holocaust and there is evidence that it happened so this one guy's a total idiot. That doesn't mean he speaks for every member of that group he claims to be part of. No, I'm not Catholic (I'm non-denom Christian), but I see some virtue in SOME of their tenants. Others just seem.....bizarre to me.
-
Then again, my theory that "religious leader" is synonymous with "ignorant pompous asshole" as well as "politician", "lawyer", "law enforcer", and "bane of society" may be true...
O noez! Sum gai frum a grup ta t evey1 watchs & pepols beliv maeks mstakies!! Ther4, evrthng grup, gai &nd hes folowrs saiz nd dos HAVE TO BE WONG!!!!
My fingers are seriously cramping from typing that. :P
Do you not see the gaping flaws in that logic? You're assuming that these people, mainly "religious leaders", "politicians", "lawyers", "law enforcers", etc. are all "ignorant pompous assholes" because one of them is. Granted there's no evidence that refutes the occurrence of the Holocaust and there is evidence that it happened so this one guy's a total idiot. That doesn't mean he speaks for every member of that group he claims to be part of. No, I'm not Catholic (I'm non-denom Christian), but I see some virtue in SOME of their tenants. Others just seem.....bizarre to me.
I see how you could get that impression, but that's not what I mean. I mean granting people authority doesn't work. When you give somebody power over someone else, that opens the door for corruption. Religious leaders, Politicians, Law enforcers, all of these people have the delusion of being mightier than thou, and thus use their self-granted powers to manipulate the eager masses.
I'm not (just) talking about priests raping kids or ignorant comments, I'm talking about holy crusades (which for some odd reason, I never learned about in high school), the holocaust, the "inquisition", Nuclear warfare, beatings, genocides, and other serious acts of inhumanity that have occurred throughout history that have been sparked by the unnecessarily overwhelming pride and ignorance of those with authority.
All this crap about senators cheating on their wives and holy fathers giving their choir-boys surprise buttseks is just the tip of the iceberg.
Don't get me wrong though, I'm not an anarchist, as I don't know that that'd be any better than the systems we've come up with today, I'm just pissed that people in high places can get away with some of the sh*t that they pull. There are so many people that I would pay good money to punch in the face for the suffering that they've caused; President Truman and his entire cabinet (if anybody wants to debate me on this one, I welcome you to try), every pope in history, Adolf Hitler... I would mention Pat Robertson, but he hasn't actually done anything that I'm aware of, he's just...well...an ignorant pompous asshole.
EDIT: one more thing that always bothered me...where in the bible does it even say anything about a Pope? When did Jesus say "Now go forth and choose somebody to re-interpret my words and tell people how to follow my teachings"? I've got nothing against the teachings of any religion (well...I'm not gonna mention Scientology), because they were all spawned from humanity. They teach of the virtues of living, of morality, of compassion, but the modern implementations of some such religions display the exact opposite sentiments. People read too literally into the text and manipulate the words for their own gain, when the truth is that it's not about the words, it's about the message, which, among all of the religions I've studied, I'd say is fairly consistent.
[sigh] sorry, I get kind of worked up when it comes to these kinds of things.[/rant]
-
titeguy3, I completely agree with everything you just said.
-
Scientology ain't a religion, it's a cult.
Correct me if I'm horribly wrong on this. Around the year of 0 AD, Jesus declared the apostle Peter as the "rock" on which he would build his church. In other words, Saint Peter was the first leader of the Catholic Church. To this day, popes are elected to be his successor. In a way, Jesus did tell Peter to broadcast his teachings far and wide. Unfortunately, that all happened 2,000 years ago, and with a current lack of reliable people to clarify the divine and indisputable meaning of every word in the bible, the pope can only teach what he believes, however spot on or far off he might happen to be.
But anyway, the whole issue of corrupt religious leaders is perhaps appropriately ironic. The whole concept of religion (as I grasp it) is that humans are imperfect. Every pain and misery we feel is due to the imperfection of the mortal world. Our leaders are no more holy than we are, and the immoral things they commit demonstrate, on a very visible scale, just how far we have to go (or that getting that far is simply impossible).
-
When you give somebody power over someone else, that opens the door for corruption. Religious leaders, Politicians, Law enforcers, all of these people have the delusion of being mightier than thou, and thus use their self-granted powers to manipulate the eager masses.
The fish rots from the head down, eh?
I do believe that the hierarchical set-up placing people in power has an innate fallacy - being there's no way to ensure the people in power are inherently "good".
However, as things are, we need the regulators. If we left everything to laz a fare, then we'd get more scandals like Enron or Freddie Mac or any number of for-profit schools. - Only they wouldn't be "scandals" because there would be no one around to "blow a whistle" to.
Unless we are all going to run around and hunt for ourselves, we need to a system with leaders. Is capitalism the best option we could have? I'd argue not. But it's the system that we're stuck with.
tl;dr if we are going to live in a system based on exchange of goods & services, then we need people to enforce the rules of trade. Unfortunately the enforcers can be just as corrupt as the rest of us. But I'd rather trust big government to rule than my banker or a CEO (yes my view tainted by recent events).
No I don't think our current system is good - but I also do not think cutting off the head of the human race is the answer.
-
I also do not think cutting off the head of the human race is the answer.
This is actually what my girlfriend advocates. "People should just die."
She especially felt that way after seeing this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0).
-
Scientology ain't a religion, it's a cult.
But Tekkie.X just explained it very well, and your later comments surprise me that you would make such a statement. There's no real distinction between a religion and a cult. A cult boils down to a religion someone doesn't like. Not to say Scientology doesn't have several document flaws, but calling it a cult doesn't really help the discussion.
I mean granting people authority doesn't work. When you give somebody power over someone else, that opens the door for corruption. Religious leaders, Politicians, Law enforcers, all of these people have the delusion of being mightier than thou, and thus use their self-granted powers to manipulate the eager masses.
Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes
The major problem - one of the major problems, for there are several - one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather or who manages to get people to let them do it to them To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must WANT to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem.
-
Scientology ain't a religion, it's a cult.
But Tekkie.X just explained it very well, and your later comments surprise me that you would make such a statement. There's no real distinction between a religion and a cult. A cult boils down to a religion someone doesn't like. Not to say Scientology doesn't have several document flaws, but calling it a cult doesn't really help the discussion.
Except there really is a huge difference. A real religion has different goals from a cult, at least the way the words are commonly used (ignoring technical definitions). Almost always, a religion exists for its people, whereas a cult exists for its leaders.
Compare: Roman Catholicism in its purest form (ignoring any corruption in leaders, we're only talking about church teachings and laws), is about worshiping the Lord, the betterment of people on Earth, and long-term happiness in Heaven. It was founded by somebody who personally had quite a bit to lose and NOTHING to gain from doing so. Scientology, on the other hand, teaches as one of its fundamentals that its members are supposed to give it money, and in fact was founded by somebody who had A LOT to gain from doing so, and was even on record as having previously stated that he could get rich by starting a fake religion.
tl;dr - Generally, religions help their members, cults extort them.
-
You'll be hard-pressed to find a definition of the word "Cult" that doesn't use the word "religion"
It's a synonym with bad connotation... like "honest" and "blunt" or "pride" and "conceit"
-
If you want to talk literally, religions and cults are actually very similar... until you pile on all the connotations associated with them. Strictly speaking, they both refer to a group of individuals committed to a particular ideal, but...
A "cult" suggests a group of misled and/or extreme individuals who have ditched society's conventions to follow something they are devoted to mind and soul. An example of a cult to me would be the Ku Klux Klan. They're a Protestant Christian group, yet they've gone so far beyond the teachings of the bible that I wonder if they've ever opened one. When the teachings of a religion are warped, twisted, or otherwise manipulated... That is when religious cults arise. But Scientology isn't a religious cult. It's something entirely new.
I don't know enough to compare Scientology to something as insane as the KKK. But a "religion" suggests a group of people seeking meaning and guidance in order to accomplish some form of enlightenment, usually involving morals and devotions of a harmless nature. If I use Christianity as an example of this, then the KKK would be an example of a small sect of this religion that has acquired cult status thanks to its destructive ways. Unfortunately, with such a large religion, it's inevitable that many members will stray from the original point of the fellowship.
This is becoming a long post, so I'll stop. Point is, based on the connotations I associate with the words, I see Scientology as being closer to the "cult" side of the spectrum. Yes, I'm biased :P Flame me now.
-
(http://pointsinthepaint.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/hair-on-fire.jpg)
You have been flamed. :lol:
-
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_sLS8t-JRerY/SbS_i2Q0hUI/AAAAAAAAACI/CvNK4KSrxoA/s320/lolwut+pear.jpg)
-
...
Correct me if I'm horribly wrong on this. Around the year of 0 AD, Jesus declared the apostle Peter as the "rock" on which he would build his church.
...
lol yeah, if you read it it goes something like this:
"...thou art Peter [Petros], and upon this rock [Petra] I will build my church..."
This was based on Simon's confession and is a play on words, just like the any other parables Jesus taught. Simon confessed by the spirit of God, according to Jesus, and it's upon this faith he would build his church. JESUS is the friggin rock here!!
From Greek: Petros = Peter = a rock or a stone. Petra = a rock, cliff or ledge.
In other words, Peter was a little stone in the cliff. Hardly a pope. He was even married, and it's highly doubtful he ever was in Rome.
And, hey, even Peter are calling us stones [Petros]: (1 Peter 2:5) "Ye also, as lively stones, are build up spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." I guess we're all popes, huh?
-
Well, different people have different interpretations. That's why religions tend to have a lot of separate sects branching off of them.
-
Well, different people have different interpretations. That's why religions tend to have a lot of separate sects branching off of them.
True. But, imho, the catholic interpretation of the bible is really f***ed up. Many of their traditions actually goes against what the bible teach. The very idea of a pope is blasphemous lol. If you look at history it's pretty evident that doctrines has been invented. for instance purgatory: In 1546 the Vatican declared the apocrypha holy, mainly to justify the purgatory doctrine.
(Just to be clear: I don't mean to offend anyone here. People are entitled to their own opinions, and I have nothing personal against any catholic.)
-
I feel like if anyone takes offense to the things we're saying about the pope, they should seriously re-consider why exactly it is that they hold him with such high regard after reading things like this. I feel like the pope serves for too many people as a "Bible for dummies", but the message of the bible isn't something you can sparknote, it's something you have to come to realize yourself and live by.
-
might wanna delete a backslash off of that address.
Sounds like a publicity stunt to detract from the issue at hand to me.
"Didn't you know that priests were molesting children for some time now?"
"ermm...uh......ANTISEMITIC COMMENT!"
"Gasp! Some guy the pope is now distancing himself from made an anti-semitic comment! Let's all pay attention to him now!"
Then again, my theory that "religious leader" is synonymous with "ignorant pompous asshole" as well as "politician", "lawyer", "law enforcer", and "bane of society" may be true...
stephan harper
-
http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5415
... is planning a legal ambush to have the Pope arrested during his state visit to Britain “for crimes against humanityâ€.
The pair believe they can exploit the same legal principle used to arrest Augusto Pinochet, the late Chilean dictator, when he visited Britain in 1998.
the law vs. the pope, this is gonna turn out strange if someone pulls through with it.
-
http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5415
... is planning a legal ambush to have the Pope arrested during his state visit to Britain “for crimes against humanityâ€.
The pair believe they can exploit the same legal principle used to arrest Augusto Pinochet, the late Chilean dictator, when he visited Britain in 1998.
the law vs. the pope, this is gonna turn out strange if someone pulls through with it.
That's funny. But not exactly the right way to handle things. The pope is just a figurehead. All in all he's probably a nice guy--I wouldn't know, I've never met him, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. It's what the Pope stands for--the fact that the concept of a pope even exists that's the problem.
Doing something like arresting the pope will just make a lot of people seriously dislike you. Although who knows, having the Pope go to a white collar prison might send a message to the Catholic Church and make them learn from their mistakes....
........
......BAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAA oh man I had myself going there... the church... learning from mistakes.... Ha! As if they're not too egocentric to even admit to having made mistakes...
-
It's what the Pope stands for--the fact that the concept of a pope even exists that's the problem.
Call me old fashioned, but I would very much like to see the pope in a "pound-me-in-the-ass" prison.
He is made of the same meat, bones and gray matter that I am comprised of, he is not worth more in flesh than any other human.
If parliament or congress where condoning, hiding and protecting child molestation there would be reform.
-
Call me old fashioned, but I would very much like to see the pope in a "pound-me-in-the-ass" prison.
If the crimes of the catholic church were to all be amassed onto the pope and prosecuted legally, he wouldn't go to prison, he'd go to Guantanamo.
-
Don't point the accusing finger at the whole Catholic Church, now. There are plenty of innocent, well-intending people in there (as there tends to be with a very large group). It's kind of like saying, "A group of Canadians stole my car! Canadians are bad people!!"
The sex-offending priests should be the ones going to jail. After all, they seem to enjoy rape.
-
Is there a specific reason you chose canadians to make your point with?
-
No. Sorry if it offends anybody. You can mentally replace that with anything you like and it would still get my point across. "Westerners", "Easterners", "Weathermen", "Video gamers", "Cyclists", "Pokemon trainers", whatever :)
Point being: Choose a large group of people, you will usually get a majority of innocent, well-intending people and a minority of not-so-innocent people. There must be at least a few criminals in Canada (just to use an example), but don't let them damage the reputation of the whole country because they're a tiny part of the population. Likewise, I think (despite my previous comments) that it's getting a bit too anti-Catholic in here, originally because of something stupid a Catholic said, and now moving on to Catholic sex offenders...
-
Every group has its downfalls. Christians are annoying as hell, Muslims have far too many extremists, Catholics rape little boys, Scientologists want to rule the world. Nothing to be sorry about
-
Don't point the accusing finger at the whole Catholic Church, now. There are plenty of innocent, well-intending people in there (as there tends to be with a very large group).
"If all the crimes of the catholic church." Are you saying that everyone in the catholic church has committed crimes against humanity? I'll admit, though that you can replace almost any religion there and achieve the same effect. The only reason I said "the catholic church" is because we were talking in the context of the pope.
Christians are annoying as hell
pun intended?
Muslims have far too many extremists
see: on tv. we didn't know shit about Muslim extremists prior to 9/11
Catholics rape little boys
And Hitler had a horrible taste in facial hair. That's the least of their issues.
-
Muslims have far too many extremists
see: on tv. we didn't know sh*t about Muslim extremists prior to 9/11
See: no other religion rioting in the streets accompanied by death threats to those who don't conform to their style of thinking. At least not in modern day society. This was all well and good back in 1100 and 1200 AD, but the rest of the religions have taken on more peaceful forms of conversions.
Sorry, I just hate chosen ignorance and close-mindedness, and it seems to be getting more and more popular worldwide [/pessimism]
-
Catholics rape little boys
I have done no such thing, that I recall.
-
Catholics rape little boys
I have done no such thing, that I recall.
Funny thing is I havn't either. Maybe we arent really catholic?
-
Muslims have far too many extremists
see: on tv. we didn't know sh*t about Muslim extremists prior to 9/11
See: no other religion rioting in the streets accompanied by death threats to those who don't conform to their style of thinking. At least not in modern day society.
rebuttal. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan)
EDIT:
<---Make a wish.
-
All Catholics rape little boys. All.
rebuttal. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan)
That's ok though because I believe in the KKK's value system. They also aren't nearly as "dangerous" as they used to be. It's now more of a point of view than lynching and burning crosses.
-
rebuttal. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan)
That's ok though because I believe in the KKK's value system. They also aren't nearly as "dangerous" as they used to be. It's now more of a point of view than lynching and burning crosses.
Hm? I don't know everything about the KKK, but just the name of the group is so badly tainted now that it'd be shameful to voluntarily be a member of it on any grounds. Seriously, they've caused more terror and distress in their day than Muslim extremists have done in ours. Yeah, um... EDIT: Didn't think that one through enough before posting :P
If a point of view is blatantly racist, then I don't see what's not wrong with it. I try to respect others' opinions, but to consider yourself superior based on something so negligible as skin color... anyone who does that (consciously) ought to stop it right now.
-
Catholics rape little boys
I have done no such thing, that I recall.
Funny thing is I havn't either. Maybe we arent really catholic?
Obviously not; you two must be lapsed Catholics or something :D
And a few words on Islamic extremism...
Islamic extremists have been causing far more trouble over the past few decades than the KKK ever did (the KKK were always small fries). I'm not sure about the exact extent of the death and terror caused by the KKK, but I wouldn't be surprised if 9/11 alone caused more destruction than they ever did. If not, I feel I must point out that what has happened with Islamic terrorism in the west is just the tip of the iceberg.
Over the past few days, scores (or is it hundreds?) have been killed in Russia, six years after those hundreds of people (half of them kids) were killed in the school in Beslan (of course, that wasn't just a religious thing). God knows how many thousands have been killed in Sudan. The number of deaths due to religious extremism on the Indian subcontinent since the partition has been ridiculous (mind you, that's a two/three/over 9000 way thing). Terrorists and even governments in the Middle East have been trying (and failing. Hard.) to finish the job that Hitler started with the Jews (who were in Israel first). And let's not forget the biggest victims of Islamic extremism, other Muslims (usually less extreme ones).
The point obesebear makes about Islamic extremism being more common today is a very important one. In these arguments, too many people try to excuse terrorists by pointing out what Christians did hundreds of years ago. Frankly, that doesn't matter.
Of course, they're not the worst. No. There's a religion which has a far worse problem with militarism. It's those damn militant atheists! I mean, members other religions may hijack funerals to preach hate, or cover up for child abusers, or set themselves on fire, or try to wipe Israel off the map, but the other day Richard Dawkins called someone else's beliefs stupid! Clearly, atheists are the real extremists in the modern world! :-D
[/gets called racist and gets back to procrastinating]
-
Go study as I should be doing right now, you racist!!!
-
As intelligent as your posts are, your finals are gonna need that intelligence more than we are :) And I'm sure that pile of books in the library direly misses you rite nao.