Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiGlobal homeless cannot afford opiate: religion
Human beings are not naturally predisposed to opiate: religion. They are pushed. The masses of human beings hunt for distraction because they have been made to believe that, as human beings, they are worthless, hopeless, helpless vessels in need of messiahs crafted in a variety of shapes, shades and shams by self-righteous men.
Distraction surrounds us. Information and image producers, television propagandists, popes and priests and their pomp, mind-altering agents and agencies: warmongers and suicide bomber coaches, pharmaceutical companies and physician carriers, liquor makers and merchants, dope dealers and street hustlers, they're all the same. They exist to distract and destroy, whichever comes first, human mind/spirit and its potential.
We know this because we the masses would rather bend the knee than stretch the mind (Someone smarter than I originated that line). We don't solve problems; we pray or cross our fingers-methods equally ineffective in solving problems. We seem to have been proselytized that way.
If popes and priests and rabbis and imams had ever been seriously interested in ending global misery of the masses, ending war and violence, they would have done so long ago. Lord knows they are big enough and powerful enough and peopled enough, and they have siphoned off enough money from people of all economic strata and circumstances to have created world prosperity. But instead they have existed on creating misery. They are the leeches on world societies. They write the books, religious texts etched in stone, blessing the poor while fleecing them into wandering destabilized upheavaled desperate homelessness.
The spectacle of a government leader this week kissing the ring of a religious man was disgusting (there ought to be a law against it) and a glaring image and illustration of WHY women remain among the oppressed in a misery sanctioned and sanctified for an eternity. Who bought that robe and ring and shining chariot of distraction? The masses.
Americans may soothe themselves with papal distraction. But there are suffering people in the world who suffer because of that opiate: religion. Among them are the world's refugees and displaced millions.
Twenty-six million (and counting) is the estimated number of people displaced within their countries by armed conflicts and violence. At the end of 2007 the figure was the highest global total in a decade, according to a Norwegian Refugee Council report.
In Asia, Africa and South America people fled their homes mainly to escape long-standing internal conflicts. By the end of 2007 the numbers of Internally Displaced People (IDPs) were staggering and still growing with "no breakthrough in reducing their number or measurably improving their situation":
5.8 million in Sudan
Up to 4 million in Colombia
Almost 2.5 million in Iraq
1.4 million in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
1 million in Somalia
In more than 50 countries-particularly among women and children-people were often "victims of the gravest human rights abuses." Along with being continually attacked the people suffered "hunger, disease and the effects of inadequate shelter."
Norwegian Refugee Council Secretary-General Elisabeth Rasmusson in releasing the report raised the alarm saying the international community had failed to address challenges and obstacles "coherently through diplomatic engagement, humanitarian assistance and development programmes. Our knowledge of, interest in and response to people trapped in protracted displacement situations," she warned, "is far from impressive."
Also in Geneva this week the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees met in conference highlighting Humanitarian Needs of Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons inside Iraq and in Neighboring Countries.
Speaking before international representatives High Commissioner António Guterres called Iraq's wandering homeless "the most significant displacement in the Middle East since the dramatic events of 1948." What happened in 1948 was western powers ignored Arab opposition and established an Israeli State on Palestinian land. War broke out between Arabs and Israelis. Palestinians lost their homes and their means of making a living. Today, Guterres continued, "one in eight Iraqis have been driven from their homes"; some 1.9 million of them "are currently displaced inside the country and up to 2 million others have fled abroad." Last year "Iraqis became the largest group of asylum-seekers in industrialized countries, a position they last occupied in 2002."
Non-Iraqi refugees inside Iraq are also in dire straits. "Palestinians in particular have been targeted amid the violence, with over 600 victims so far and over 15,000 unable to escape."
This humanitarian wandering crisis of homelessness and upheaval-from all parts of society: rich and poor, elderly and children, hopeful professionals and struggling widows-borne mainly by the Iraqis also is being borne by neighboring states, Guterres said. The suffering of the displaced grows by the day. And "host communities are straining under this extraordinary burden."
Without any meaningful help from outside, Guterres reported, the Syrian Arab Republic and Jordan have provided most of the protection and humanitarian assistance. More than a million Iraqis have sought safety in Syria, up to 750,000 in Jordan. Refugees have crossed into Egypt, Lebanon, Iran and Turkey and the arrivals have had an overwhelming impact on economies, society and infrastructures.
Somehow a papal "love of immigrants" strikes hollow in this context of man-made suffering. In the presence of such suffering, a pageantry of praying and laying on of hands and crossing fingers-not to mention the monetary waste-is no less than criminal.
Guterres concluded his opening speech to the conference with a call to constructive action:
These refugees fled widespread violence-not a State policy of persecution.
The humanitarian dimension of the problem can no longer be overlooked.
We have no other agenda than the people-the people who suffer and need protection, assistance and a solution to their plight.
We know that humanitarian problems are symptoms of a disease whose cure can only be political [that is: not surges or continued violence].
All of us-representatives of governments, international organizations and civil society-are now compelled to act.
Will the rabbis and preachers, priests and popes, imams and "religious" government leaders act differently this time? Or will they continue handing out "blessings" on the poor they create enriching themselves "saving" them?
102 Comments so far
Show AllFair enough. Try to stay a good person, Ddell, no matter what you choose to believe.
RSJ
I have always examined my life, which has kept it uncomplicated. What should I be looking into myself for, exactly?
If you don't know about the persecution of Catholics in Iraq, go to the Antiwar.com website for yesterday. There have been numerous articles on Iraq and Kosovo in the past. How did you miss them?
Do you realize that communist leaders have killed millions of people over the years as compared to the 30,000 killed in the Spanish Inquisition? Godless people are far worse to their fellow man than those with religion.
The Church will never be forgiven for the acts of the pedophiles who infiltrated the seminaries, but hopefully the next generation of priests will follow their vows.
Yes, the money of parishoners was spent to defend the priests, which was hurtful to many, but in some instances the accusers were lying and it was incumbent upon the Church to get to the truth.
Thanks for the comments, but neither of us will convince the other. Bye.
I feel so many things about organized religion.
First, it is not for me. I tried out several religions as a child. Most of the brokers (clergy) I encountered in my life have been lacking as givers of spiritual guidance. Most have not been particularly kind or wise. I heard more bigotry and hard-hearted comments in church than on the street.
Second, it is often a scam in which the money of poor people goes to support extravagent pageantry and a group of freeloaders such as priests, ministers, monks or rabbis. Did you see the Pope's constant costume changes, and the red Prada shoes!!?? This is not anti-Catholic. The Russian Orthodox church is a similar theatrical production, the actors being randy priests.
Third, I would not say the two above things face to face to many people I know. People who work hard and get little, or who have suffered personal tragedies or who take care of sick relatives year after year believe in religion. Sometimes that belief is all that keeps them going. All I can do is lend a hand to show that you do not have to attend church or shout "God Bless America" to be a good person. And I will talk about earthly issues and about policies and offer counter arguments when the conversation slips over into prejudice.
Ddell413 (April 24th, 2008 4:17 pm) wrote: "What harm does it do for me to believe what my religion teaches? Do you think my life would be richer or more rewarding if I believed otherwise?"
None, I suppose, unless it blinds you to the suffering religion also causes. As far as your life being richer or more rewarding, there's always that quote about the unexamined life not being worth living.
"The trouble with our world today, as far as I can determine, is too many people with an uneducated conscience."
I agree, but I don't think belief in organized religion necessarily instills a conscience. As we've seen in history with every religion, just the opposite appears to be the case.
"I don't see any evidence of the kind of mistreatment by the Catholic Church as you have written, but I do see Christians being purged from countries such as Kosovo and Iraq, and probably more. You are talking about ancient history, not the present time."
Priests in the Catholic Church have caused suffering within recent memory to young boys by preying on them sexually. The Pope apologized for this, but didn't bring up that $2 billion in church donations were used to defend these pedophiles, as well as the fact that they were often shuffled around to different parishes rather than dismissed from the priesthood. Christians are being purged from Iraq these days? First I've heard of that -- what is your source for that story? In America, you have no chance of being elected president, or even a US senator or governor, if you declare yourself publicly to be either an atheist or agnostic. It some cases it can even affect your employment. Does that seem fair to you?
"How do I know what will happen to those who don't believe non-believers will go to hell? The Church says you must go through the Father, so as much as I would prefer everyone go to heaven, that may not be the case."
The Catholic Church also insisted at one time that the world is flat and the sun orbits the earth. People were executed at the time for daring to disagree. How do you know they aren't wrong this time as well? Jesus said judge not lest you be judged and that you would be judged by the same measure you use to judge others. Although the Catholic Church has become more open and tolerant, I think they still maintain that they are the only path to heaven. Does this mean the other 5 billion inhabitants of this planet are going to hell?
"And why would I need a 'new perspective on religion?' This is the religion of my birth and has gotten me through life very well, thank you."
You're welcome. It's that kind of curiosity that brought us out of the caves, and adherence to archaic doctrine that eliminated slavery.
"If there is life on other planets, why haven't we seen or heard evidence of it?"
We've barely penetrated the space in our own solar system. The nearest star, Proxima Centauri, is 4.22 light-years away; in other words, it would take us 4.22 years traveling at the speed of light (approx. 186,000 miles per second) to reach it. As the NASA website says: "The Voyager 1 spacecraft is on an interstellar mission. It is traveling away from the Sun at a rate of 17.3 km/s. If Voyager were to travel to Proxima Centauri, at this rate, it would take over 73,000 years to arrive. If we could travel at the speed of light, an impossibility due to Special Relativity, it would still take 4.22 years to arrive!" In our knowledge of the universe, we are roughly in the same circumstances as the European cave-dwellers five thousand years ago -- there were vast undiscovered territories surrounding them that they didn't know existed. And, BTW, NASA has confirmed there once was some form of life on Mars.
"According to Dr. Hawking, the life on other planets is unintelligent life, so if it wasn't God who created our dear earth, how did it come this far?"
That would be a pretty dumb thing for Stephen Hawking to say, since he would have no way of knowing what kind of life exists on a planet a thousand light-years away. I think you may have misinterpreted his remarks. I don't know what kind of force created our existence, but it could very well be the Deistic God of Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin -- a God who created the physical laws of the universe, set it in motion, but does not get involved in the personal lives of his creations nor demand obedience or worship to any particular creed.
"Frankly, I don't analyze my faith very much, I just try to follow it and be a good person. Maybe that's all God asks."
Sorry, I thought you might want to know something about what you believe in so strongly. As far as what God asks, I refer you to the Galileo quote I posted in this thread previously.
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
– Galileo Galilei
Since churches have jumped into the political arena they should not have the advantage over secular America by being tax exempt. There's nothing more to add to this statement.
RSJ:
What harm does it do for me to believe what my religion teaches? Do you think my life would be richer or more rewarding if I believed otherwise?
The trouble with our world today, as far as I can determine, is too many people with an uneducated conscience.
I don't see any evidence of the kind of mistreatment by the Catholic Church as you have written, but I do see Christians being purged from countries such as Kosovo and Iraq, and probably more. You are talking about ancient history, not the present time.
How do I know what will happen to those who don't believe non-believers will go to hell? The Church says you must go through the Father, so as much as I would prefer everyone go to heaven, that may not be the case.
And why would I need a "new perspective on religion?" This is the religion of my birth and has gotten me through life very well, thank you.
If there is life on other planets, why haven't we seen or heard evidence of it?
According to Dr. Hawking, the life on other planets is unintelligent life, so if it wasn't God who created our dear earth, how did it come this far?
Frankly, I don't analyze my faith very much, I just try to follow it and be a good person. Maybe that's all God asks.
Ddell, believe me, I think all organized religions are equally stupid, so I am not singling out the Catholic Church, it just happens to be the point of the artcle we're commenting on.
The Bible is an interesting place to start: You are confident God wrote it, from what I can tell. If you do a little research, you'll find it was written at different times and by different hands and then, of course, went through translations from ancient Aramaic to Hebrew to Latin to Greek. A mistranslation along the way could drastically affect the meaning of the Bible you're reading in English today. Here's a brief summary:
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mbible1.html
The New Testament, at least the first four books, were written by men yet to be identified and the first book wasn't written until 68 years after Jesus's death. The other books, such as the Epistles of Paul, were just that -- letters, and even Paul is said not to have considered them as sacred, yet much of the current church doctrine comes from these letters. (Example: Jesus said nothing regarding homosexuality -- it was Paul who is primarily responsible for making that a Christian taboo.) I suggest for your own edification as a believer, you go to Google and read some history of the Bible and Christianity not written by the religious.
"You take a lot on faith in your life, don't you? The election is one example. Do you have scientific evidence that the person you vote for will do what you think is right for the country?"
It's true, I will vote on who I perceive to be the best candidate based on the qualities they demonstrate during the campaign.
However, I will not demand anyone who doesn't agree with my choice be killed or maimed, nor that they be sent to jail, nor that they be forcibly converted to my way of thinking, nor that they be prevented from running for elective office. All of these things have happened as a result of religious beliefs. Also, I can see and hear the candidate speak; such is not the case with an Invisible God, unless he happens to be talking inside your head which, as we've seen, can lead to all sorts of problems.
Catholic and other Christian charities have done much good, but then there is the ugly intolerant side of Christianity that we've been delving into here. Do you sincerely believe, for instance, that anyone who is not a Catholic is going to hell, or will suffer in any way should there be an afterlife?
The universe, as we're coming to understand it, is vast beyond our comprehension with billions of galaxies containing billions of stars and light-year distances we can barely calculate. Our Sun and Earth are only grains of sand in this eternity of creation -- does it make sense to you that a God would create this abundance only to focus his attention on the occupants of this tiny mote and whether we properly perform some ritual or another?
If you haven't already, read "Zorba the Greek" by Nikos Kazantzakis and "Lives of a Cell" by Lewis Thomas -- they might give you a fresh perspective on religion.
Bonafide, not bonifide.
The Bible is my reason for believing, as well as the teachings of the Church Fathers.
I have also been influenced by reading the lives of the saints, in particular Mother Elizabeth Seton.
No, I wouldn't send you money unless you were a bonifide needy case, and my looking for your reward after death wouldn't matter, because you aren't God.
You take a lot on faith in your life, don't you? The election is one example. Do you have scientific evidence that the person you vote for will do what you think is right for the country?
What seems to be your problem with the Catholic Church? Why aren't other religions getting the same scrutiny and condemnation? The Church must be doing something right to have all the bigots on this website up in arms.
You tell me.
So are you saying, ddell, that you don't necessarily believe in the Catholic Church's dogma?
To each his own is fine, but do you have any particular reasons for believing in the Catholic dogma, if you do?
Somewhere out beyond these electric letters floating in cyberspace, I am a real person. I trust you are, too. If I asked you to send me money and in return you'll be rewarded after you're dead, would you believe me?
I'll take a big guess that you'd think I was full of beans and you'd be right. But isn't this what religious dogma and ritual promises?
I'm not attempting to start an argument here, just trying to understand your viewpoint better.
RSJ:
It's not me you are picking on, it's the Catholic Church. That was my point to begin with.
To each his own.
ddell413 (April 22nd, 2008 7:46 am), not to pick on you, since I think we should all have the right as free people to believe whatever we wish, but why have faith in something you cannot prove?
channujames (April 22nd, 2008 8:15 am) thanks for the great quotes.
I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced! John Adams
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the Earth. Thomas Jefferson
Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.... During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits: More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution. James Madison
The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion.
It has been the most destructive to the peace of man since man began to exist. Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses, who gave an order to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and then rape the daughters. One of the most horrible atrocities found in the literature of any nation I would not dishonor my Creator's name by attaching it tho this filthy book. Thomas Paine
I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself from Christian assemblies. Benjamin Franklin
Skekptyk and RSJ:
Religion is an act of faith, not science. Catholics may wonder what will happen when we die, but we try to live according to the teachings of the Church. We know God is merciful to the righteous and doubt anyone who is not truly evil will go to hell.
There is a story about a man on safari who questioned a native stirring a large cauldron why he was wearing a cross. His reply was, "If it weren't for the missionaries, you would be in this pot."
The Church is there to teach us to know, love, and serve God in this world and be happy with him in heaven.
I'm for that.
Ddell413, I'd be interested to know what you think of these five quotes:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?"
-- Epicurus, 341-270 BCE.
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-- Galileo Galilei
"I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education."
-- Wilson Mizner
"I have too much respect for the idea of God to make it responsible for such an absurd world."
-- Georges Duhamel
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
-- Steven Weinberg
Thomas More wrote: "You have a faith in your own judgement. In your belief that there is no God. To me thats a faith."
Yep, that WOULD be a statement of faith, but, again, words matter: I did NOT, and do not, say "there is no God", I simply said that I have no belief in any gods. "I do not believe in God" is significantly different than "I believe there is no God". The former is does not express a belief, the latter does. I do not have enough evidence to be sure there is no God. I don't know why that distinction is so hard to grasp. It is not waffling or meally-mouthed, it is clearly stated.
"I liked Paul Schofield myself! Great, Great movie!!!"
Me, too. That is the Robert Bolt script I mentioned, "A Man for All Seasons". I have it right here on the shelf.
------------------------------------------
Ddell413 wrote: "Is Skeptyk happier as an atheist? I doubt it."
Well, Ddell, I am pretty generally happy, but that is as much a function of my genes and some sertraline as anything else. I was not significantly sadder when I was a practicing Catholic, or when I was a vague spiritual seeker, than I am now.
Yet my happiness is completely beside the point. Perhaps a belief in some version of God would be comforting (as it was for me); that is NOT evidence of existence of that God. I have no evidence for that god, or any others worth the title.
I would love to know there are unicorns, or huge golden retrievers with wings. I would adore a dog I could ride like a horse AND fly like Pegasus. But I can not make myself believe in such things. I really can't. Can you? Maybe you can wish for them, like me, imagine them vividly, want to believe in them, even pretend to believe in them. But can you really, honestly, believe that those winged horse-sized saddle-dogs exist on the earth? I can't. (And, yes, they are extremely unlikely, too, since the tetrapod form is so old and robust in the vertebrates.)
My non-theism is not ornery, or negative, it is a simple absence of belief in gods. I am atheist, a-unicornist, a-demonist...there a whole lot of things I do not believe.
Ddell: "...bigoted posters such as the above, who can't hide their venom in posting about the Catholic Church."
I assume you were not referring to me here. If you were, please point out my venomous anti-Catholicism, since I don't see it. I am ex-Catholic. Not bitter, but bemused. There are many things I love, and some I despise, about the Catholic Church.
"Good luck on your death bed."
Why, thank you. You, too. I hope to have much awareness and little suffering. I hope you have a good death, whatever that means to you.
-----------------------------
Evening Land, in April 20th, 12:30pm post, asked a lot of great questions. Alas, I have no more time to write tonight. We humans live in midgard, a place where our perceptions allow us to survive pretty well, a "not too big, not to small" environment is what we have evolved to be aware of and interact with. It is very nifty that we recently have figured out so much about the various huge and far and tiny and old and fast things that make up the world.
Almost everything that is is beyond our unaided perception, but not beyond our present and potential knowledge. What is truly awesome is that wherever we look, it is all acting basically the same. Chemistry, physics, we keep learning more, refining what we know, but the coherence and predictive abilities hold across time and space, as far as we have looked.
I am thrilled to be living in an age when we have so much to learn, and when we know so very much,. Nature thrills me. Science is cumulative, and we live late enough to be heirs to a wealth of wonders.
-------------------------
Be well,
Skeptyk
---------------------------------------
PS, Ddell: It was my inability to reconcile the merciful God I loved with the idea of eternal hell that led to my first major break with the catechism. I was 10 years old. I figured (in my naive grammar school brain) that a mistake must have been made, that hell is a metaphor (I was just learning about metaphors), because God could not hurt someone forever and ever, since He's God, and that means He's ultimately good.
----------------
I know a lot of atheists who are much happier now, including some who were frankly terrorized by the teachings of their churches. It is horrifying for a child to be told that anyone is going to be tortured. How much more horrifying to be told it may be your parents, friends, or you, who will be tortured.
¿ … where do all of the UN-JUST (but non-sinning) Catholics end up ?
Doom. if you don't believe you have to be Catholic to enter heaven, that's your right. But who is asking you to believe it? It is a tenet of our faith, not yours. If you think a toadstool is a mushroom, that's your right, too.
The message the Pope gave was one of hope, peace, and love. What you chose to hear is not what I heard.
Yes, the Church affects people in the world, but in a positive way, not the negative way you suggest.
How does intolerance make the world better for you?
Seems with the plutocracy's promotion of the Pope's visit to AmeriKKKa it isn't enough to just try and return capitalism to the grand old days of 1900, but to be even more reactionary than that and return to the Middle Ages. At least under feudalism the lords had a responsibility to the serfs. Under capitalism the capitalists have NO responsibility at all to the workers.
¿ … who'd want to even "visit" a heaven filled with just Catholics ?
The Pope just recently reaffirmed his belief of the supremacy of the Catholic religion. One must be Catholic to enter into heaven. This belief then unleashes the practice of Dominion and whoops....another genocide and another rape of Mother Earth justified by the Pope. One could say that death and destruction are Catholic values.
Hatred or animosity toward anything inhibits understanding. On the other hand, to see and understand why something is negative by virtue of its effects is always a good thing. No need to condemnation or heated diatribes, only a recognition of how and why something is bad or pernicious.
The problem with 'evil' is that it most often disguises itself as being good or beneficial in some way. That is why we must be able to discern the true from the false. And, yes, this can be done without prejudice or commendation--though it is rare. In addition, much evil is perpetuated in the name of tolerance, which really equates to repressed (hidden) hatred or animosity.
Belief in unidentified flying objects is just that, belief. It has for the most part very little impact on any human affairs.
Oh please, spare us. Astrobiology is a well developed multidisciplinary science, and we have the entire cosmos, Earth and all of geological history, and human civilization as our guide.
It's a statistical near certainty. When are you going to grow up and join us adults in the real world.
Religion has no rational basis at all.
ddell413", April 21st, 2008 8:03 am, wrote:
"I don't believe in UFOs, but I don't bother people who do or criticize them. If the the Catholic Church is not for you, why do you care? Just stop vilifying it."
Belief in unidentified flying objects is just that, belief. It has for the most part very little impact on any human affairs. Although the Catholic Church is founded on a number of beliefs and practices, it is by no means merely that: it is first and foremost an institution with a very long history, large amounts of property (buildings, land, valuable cultural artifacts, etc.), a sizeable number of functionaries (the clergy), and great influence throughout the world. Its history, as I said above, is one of great darkness, and that darkness overshadows any good it has done and may still be doing.
The Catholic Church is indeed not "for me," but that does not mean it does not affect me, just as there are numerous other institutions which affect even those who do not approve of them.
I am not vilifying the Catholic Church, but rather reporting on its hyprocrital, criminal, and murderous history.
And the beat goes on regarding how bad the Catholic Church is. Never a mention of the good it has done in the world such as feeding the poor, starting schools, hospitals, and hospice care facilities, etc.
All you can focus on is the pomp and rituals. Where is the criticism for the Queen of England? For the Saudi princes? For all the other heads of state in the world? What are they doing to better mankind?
I don't believe in UFOs, but I don't bother people who do or criticize them. If the the Catholic Church is not for you, why do you care? Just stop vilifying it.
AlienBeing (April 20th, 2008 6:52 pm) wrote: "When I want glamour and scenery and cultural diversity in a church service, nothing beats an out island baptist service."
As for myself, AB, I prefer a good black church for the great gospel music and there is usually plenty of attendant 'scenery,' too.
Anita Linker (April 21st, 2008 1:47 am), well said. As Twain wrote, "Heaven for the climate; Hell for the company."
I'd just as soon not go to heaven if I have to hobnob with fundamentalist Christians all the time. What the hell kind of heaven is that?
This website does thrive on bigoted posters such as the above, who can't hide their venom in posting about the Catholic Church.
Nobody here is singling out the Catholics, except for that criminal pedophile child fucking thing. All religions are equally delusional and inane, Catholicism just more delusional and inane than the rest.
When you become delusional, most traditional scientific metrics become totally useless, and it becomes very difficult to measure your irrationality. When I want glamour and scenery and cultural diversity in a church service, nothing beats an out island baptist service.
You guys got the great colorful windows, but your creepy delivery methods really do suck, I would take a prairie Lutheran service over that crap any Sunday.
Ddell413 (April 20th, 2008 5:02 pm), my post was not intended to be specifically anti-Catholic, it was against the organized religions of the world, all of which, especially Christianity, have deteriorated from their foundings. Read the Sermon on the Mount and tell me how this nation and the current version of any large Christian denomination stack up to Jesus' teachings.
I knew a very decent man who was a Catholic priest and made the mistake of trying to teach the words of Jesus to his flock, as well as march to oppose war, hatred and racism in the 1960s, and other notions that were anathema to the church at the time.
He was brought in by his superiors and told that there had been complaints from members of his flock regarding his anti-war, anti-racism activities. He was ordered to stop marching for peace and talking about the Jesus of the Beatitudes. Shortly after that, he quit the Catholic church, tired of trying to fight the power structure. Last I heard, he was still helping people and advocating peace, but he was doing it in the secular arena. He said there were more good Christians, in the way they thought and treated others, among the apostates than in the church.
BTW, Ddell413, why not let us in on your secret -- what does happen after you die? It would seem to be very unChristian of you to hide such knowledge.
If I go to my death knowing I tried to do my best by others and my conscience and live by the Golden Rule, I should have no fear of the hereafter. How many avowed Christians can say the same?
Anthony de Mello is a mystic of note who was once a Jesuit priest. Didn't the Catholic church excommunicate him though?
Is Skeptyk happier as an atheist? I doubt it. Is Bennett? How could she be, considering her bigotry and smallmindedness.
This website does thrive on bigoted posters such as the above, who can't hide their venom in posting about the Catholic Church.
Good luck on your death bed.
Howdy Skeptyk
"So, I do not have faith."
You have a faith in your own judgement. In your belief that there is no God. To me thats a faith. But I've been wrong before.
I have not seen "The Tudors" but I certainly will. I liked Paul Schofield myself! Great, Great movie!!!
There were some really great thoughts expressed on this article, thanks to you all. And especially thanks to the ones that didn't agree with my wife.
A question about this land of ours:
Why are there more churches throughout the country than libraries? Why is it that libraries are often so poorly maintained?
Yes, Religions are predatory, and Capitalism is Predatory, and our government is predatory. And they are all run by men.
We live in a predatory world of patriarchical competition because that's who men are...
DUH!!!
Say what you want but religion can sure get people talking. Look at all of the great posts here. I personally despise religion and the caveats that come even with their good work. But that's just my belief and shouldn't matter all that much to anyone if you were minding your own house or business as it were…
On the Catholic Church.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Catholic Church is essentially a massively corrupt institution. The countless episodes of pedophilia on the part of its clergy, here and in Europe (and who knows where else), and the Church's decades-long enabling (silence is tantamount to enabling) of that behavior and its subsequent inaction in the face of the revelations and criminal trials offer the most recent evidence in support of that indictment. Furthermore, its history is one of eternal shame: suffice it to mention, as canuckchuck has rightly reminded us (4/19, 4:33 pm), the behavior of the Church and of its Spanish faithful in the savaging and the plundering of the Amerindian populations. There are no words to describe the horrors of the conquest of the Americas by the Catholic Spaniards. If you have the stomach to face human debasement of that caliber, read Tzvetan Todorov's book The Conquest of America. And then, more horror, there is the collusion of the Church with the National-Socialist goverment of Germany.
Another remark.
Regarding Skeptyk's post of 4/19, 4:19 pm, I would like to raise the following questions. What counts as evidence, in your estimation – is it what is given to you by the senses, and, say, reliable historical accoutns? How evident is your criterion of what counts as evidence? What does the evidence that the physical universe is law bound, and that the laws that regulate the behavior of matter, can be formulated mathematically and discovered by us tell you? (Please note that the laws that regulate nature and natural things are not immediately obvious and are especially not given to us in sense perception, but must be wrested by hard work, involving all our faculties and inventiveness (in the framing of experiments, for example) over centuries of sleepless nights.)
Comment 1) It is important to distinguish among religion, organized religion, and religiosity (the religious sentiment that anyone may have). Although these phenomena entertain certain relations, they are different. A person may have religious sentiments without being a member of any religion, and, even more so, of any organized religion. Conversely, we are all acquainted with the religious hypocrite, the person, that is, who is a dues-paying member of an organized religion, but does not pay heed to the commands of his or her faith in the conduct of his or her life, and does not believe one iota in God. Think of the mafiosi who are members of the Catholic Church. Think of George W. Bush's behavior on the world scene and in his days as governor of Texas (for instance, his derisive, mocking comments on television in response to the woman on death row who begged him to spare her). Et cetera.
On to comment 2) Although Klimt brought up this point (4/19, 6:45 pm), it must be emphasized, contra PowerSlave, that PowerSlave self-servingly confuses secularism and atheism. Secularism is primarily a position about the governance of human beings, whereas atheism is a position about God and, more widely, about religiosity. According to secularism, we are to govern ourselves by ourselves, i.e., by our own means and deliberations, in accordance with rules and regulations agreed upon by all, and not by the issuances and enactments of some one religious group. Secularism separates religion from the affairs of governance of the community. Furthermore, secularism, in its more noble forms, tolerates both the religious person and his or her faith, and the atheist.
I understand Papal Pomp,
By Carolyn Bennett just as well as I understand
most posters to her article and the Holy Trinity, the Ascension and the Virgin Birth and spiritualism, which is to say: "not at all".
Economic systems, capitalism being the present dominant form, devised by humans seem to be subject to human weakness, aggressiveness,
fear, and greed.
Socialism seems a better alternative till one considers that whomsoever gets power also gets corrupted.
Let's face it; the Church is one of the world's biggest businesses. Many of the revolutions from Henry VIII's organizing a national church to the present were either government decrees and/or social movements that were aimed at expropriating the vast landholdings of the Church.
Today its landholdings, investments, stocks, bonds, etc. are vast and global. Why do you think the last Pope's anticommunist drive coincided with Thatcher's and Reagan's. This planned coordinated drive probably needed the previous (to John Paul) healthy and detent-oriented, liberal pope to die a sudden and convenient death. He wasn't with the program.
Of course, John Paul was against any form of liberation theology. He turned a blind eye to the 1980s massacre of Central America. Condemning the priests, nuns and layworkers who attempted to stop the massacres, oppression and starvation. None of these martyrs, such as Archbishop Romero, are on the fast track to sainthood.
However, all church's with large numbers of members tend to become trasformed into big businesses. And they can to do so rapidly because of the usual nontax status and other goodies that are handed to them.
In return, its CEOs give their flocks a dose of feel-good, and membership into an exclusive spouse, mistress,housing and/or job network plus access to a faith-based charity when in need.
Chess Games -- de nada
I was inspired by VMULIER's posting and the tipping point commencement felt ineffably.
Power_Slave -- Is your nom de plume descriptive, a self-fulfilling prophesy, or what ?
Namaste
There are many intelligent comments, observations, and arguments presented in the foregoing postings. The postings are well worth reading and meditating upon.
The question of religion and religiosity is extremely complex; I shall content myself with making a couple of remarks, in one or more posts below.
The article by Bennett is obviously polemical, and, as far as I am concerned, there is room for that sort of polemic, even though I do not share many of Bennett's generalizations about the religious phenomenon. The article is a necessary antidote, however, to the ridiculous pieties and banalities about religion that one all too often is subjected to, and to the sheer thoughtlessness that passes itself off as religion in this country
There are many intelligent comments, observations, and arguments presented in the foregoing postings. The postings are well worth reading and meditating upon.
The question of religion and religiosity is extremely complex; I shall content myself with making a couple of remarks, in a separate post.
Hi suhail. This notion was first purposed with regards to the surfs and Christianity long ago (before that too?). The church was said to keep those in poverty and oppression from rebelling. In that way, it became a tool for the 'upper classes,' intentional or not.
I remember writing an when attending a Catholic college long in the 70's, and my professor initially gave me an "F." When I went to see him in his office about it, I told him that I believed he gave me that grade I did because of my premise and not the quality of my paper. He admitted it was partially true, but that my paper had 'errors' as well. He let me make the corrections and upped my grade to a "B." We had a good relationship after that.
Without anyone telling me, I've always had a hunch that this was true of 'organized/ordinary' religion, and is somewhat true now, even of the religious right.
I am unsure of what this article is trying to say - is the author trying to blame the misery of people around the world on religion, or specifically the Pope ? That strikes me as being pretty lame, if not totally disconnected from reality.
Religion is but a tool to separate from our true power and identification with it, so as to subjugate our lives to meekly following authoritarian and patronizing hierarchy - so sad, to bad, the artificial affront to self-based faith is crumbling as it proves incapable of adapting to a vastly changing reality.
--Very nice, Namaste. A good case in point is that vast majority who say they 'worship' Jesus are also sadly separated from his 'greatness,' by not understanding that the same state of enlightenment is available to them. And as a consequence they become the antithesis of everything he stood for.
As for logic and reason, it has its place, but where thought goes wrong is in forming a 'center' that believes itself separate--and often superior--to another; this is what some have called "the illusion of ego."
Idiotic comment by Power_Slave, blaming secularism and atheism for mass killing. He/she should learn history.
Organized religion has been the second greatest cancer afflicting humanity, right after capitalism, but not far behind. Catholicism in particular (and I was raised Catholic) has been the most dangerous and damaging cult ever conceived by humans. The crusades and the Inquisition were heinous crimes against humanity.
As an atheist and peace loving individual today, I enjoy clarity of mind and purity of character. I'm happy to be free of imaginary friends and not haunted by holly ghosts, saints or angels. Let's pity and educate weak-minded buffoons like Power_Slave.
"Former" CIA agent OsamaBL, orchestrated the mainly Saudi bombings on US soil, because he was MAD at the U.S. for doing to the Palestinians -years ago- what the U.S. is now doing to another population of people, this time in Iraq IN retaliation for 9/11. Some cold, cruel irony here.
It is correct to blame Bush(U.S. policy) and the Pope(judgement and neglect of the "least" amongst us; official policies that increase suffering). However, Where are the Saudi and other Arab leaders voices in this? Are they to QuieTly absorb all these refugees?
The Pope is part of bigger exploitative religious circus, including the Catholic Church. I mean, come on, false celibacy under the guise of homosexuality and child molestation?? And if you ever went to private Catholic school, you know firsthand about the cruelty of those dressed in their 'sacred' robes, but that's beside the point.
If you go to the Philippines, for example, you see much larger scale exploitation. The people live in shacks, while the Church builds comparatively elaborate places of worship. Perhaps worst of all, though, is that they discourage the use of birth control, while the poor there keep having children they cannot feed. This no doubt goes for other places as well, including Mexico and central America.
Now, let's not give the religious right here a free ticket either. Many Churches are equally exploitative in their own way.
'Nuff said.
Will the Catholic church help a poor woman who wants an abortion by feeding, clothing, and educating the child of an unplanned pregnancy? I think we all know the answer to that. Yet they expect people to breed like rabbits in an over-populated world, not use birth control, and never ever get an abortion even though the birth of a child would be detrimental to both mother and child. That doesn't sound compassionate to me.
It's obvious most religious people do not want to face the truth! It can be duly noted by the first person who commented Power_slave. All the misery in the world is atheist's faults. Never mind all the starving homeless masses the Catholic Church has personally created with it's birth control policies.
I will have to agree with the author. Most of the misery in this world can be laid at religions' doorstep. And most of them could care less. They are getting rich off of poor people's suffering. They are thriving off of creating misery. Because that's the only hope the poor have that they might die and go to a better place. In fact, the Catholic Church celebrates human suffering. That's why I gave up on religion quite a few years ago. It seems If that's merciful then I want no part of it.
One of the most amusing images I've seen in a very long time appeared above the fold on the front page of the San Diego Union Tribune this week.
There, in full color, was a choreographed, costumed procession rivaling any Hollywood extravaganza. A legion of cardinals parading the way for the Pope's mass for 50,000 in a US ballpark.
PLAY BALL !!
KILL THE UMPIRE !!
GIMME A BEER !!
PASS THE COLLECTION PLATE !!
bring a wholesome, critical perspective to the subject that proved to be far beyond the critical skills of Carolyn Bennett.
Oh fuck your corrupt and fabulously wealthy pope. He thinks religions can answer natural questions as well as science, he shut down the papal observatory, and he's a blatant creationist as well as a former NAZI.
He's one pathetic FUCK of a pope compared to John Paul.
All believers should insist on more collaborations from our world's religions, but especially from those who believe in the One God who makes all one.
Fuck your 'One God', your messiah and your so called 'book'.
Pass or fail?
Power_Slave (April 19th, 2008 10:27 am) wrote: "When Religion manages to kill as many as secularism has this century, then we should consider banning it." [...] "Religion couldn't kill this many if it tried…"
Aside from Maoist and Stalinist Communism being religions unto themselves by exalting the Supreme Leader as god, aren't you forgetting the hundreds of millions who have died or killed for their religion in just the past two centuries? Hitler and Mussolini professed a belief in Christianity, yet destroyed over 50 million human lives between them. The Japanese Empire during WWII worshipped their emperor as a living god on Earth and sent millions more to their graves. Before that there were various holy wars undertaken for the defense of the Pope or a particular sect; the horror of the Spanish Inquisition; the gore-drenched clearing of America by Puritans and others claiming it was God's will; the enslavement and murder of Africans, also done with the supposed blessing of the Almighty; and the bloody domination of most of the globe at one time or another by countries like Great Britain, France, Spain, Germany and the United States -- all claiming they are Christian nations. Also read of all of the smiting and smoting in the Bible -- it's been a massacre in the name of some god or another for all of recorded history.
At least since the Roman Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity in 312 AD and subsequently received 'special dispensation' to kill his enemies, the Christian religion, for the most part, has worked to underwrite and reinforce the power of monarchs and despots. The American experiment, founded as a secular government separating church and religion, was established partly to avoid the gruesome religious wars that had raged across Europe for centuries. (Of course, these wars were really about territory, riches and property, but ostensibly they were religious battles.)
I think we'd all be better off without organized religion. (Notice I didn't say without belief in a higher power or a 'disorganized' religion.) Without God/gods or the Devil to blame for their actions, people would have to take personal responsibility for the horrible things they do. It's a different matter to say "It says in the Bible" and "It's my fault."
The fact is, there's been only one Christian -- and, as Mark Twain said, they caught and crucified him early.
BTW, what would the media be saying if Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor, had been leading a church that covered up for members who were molesting children and then spent a fortune of his congregation's donations to defend them?
Good post, Skeptyk, and if you want to read what God thinks of humanity, and gambling, just read the OT Book of Job from the Bible next time you're in a motel room. (It'll be in the night table drawer.)
Canuckchuck (April 19th, 2008 4:42 pm), you remind me of that story about the little boy whose cat died while he was at school. His mother, knowing his heart would be broken, buried the cat before he got home and, when the kid arrived, told him his pet had died, adding, "Don't worry, dear, your cat's in heaven with God now."
The kid replied, "Oh, yeah -- what's God gonna do with a dead cat?"
Canuckchuck (April 19th, 2008 4:45 pm), LOL -- or Republicans.
TurnoffyourTV (April 19th, 2008 5:37 pm), I think if god is anywhere, he or she is that voice inside your head telling you not to be a jerk. I like Emerson's line: "Sensible ... and conscientious [people] all over the world [are] of one religion."
Mcmackle (April 19th, 2008 5:53 pm) I'll believe Benedict XVI is serious when he sells off the Vatican's riches, gives the proceeds to the poor, and preaches as a pauper, as Jesus did. Until then, he's just another well-paid peddler of phony piety.
The Pope should reread this part of the NT, along with the Bush Administration:
"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also..."
-- Jesus in Matthew 6:19, KJV.
They might also review this little tidbit:
"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon [wealth or worldly things]."
-- Jesus in Matthew 6:24, KJV.
AndrewP (April 19th, 2008 8:26 pm), I have encountered such sincere and altruistic persons such as yourself in Catholicism and other faiths, but you must admit you are out-weighed by those who treat the priesthood as a job no different than working for AT&T. I admire you for sticking it out and trying to make the world a better place, but I suspect you would be busy doing good works even if you had no religion.
Religions per se and religious dogma is and has always been dreadfully contentious......no wonder WARS are waged in it's name or as a cover for more evil intentions by ignorant simple minded or brainwashed people...quoting Namaste "....meekly following authoritarian and patronizing hierarchy - so sad, too bad...
VMULIER -- Your sincerity and depth of HEART is a far better CHOICE for our intention (than mere thought and reason - how droll and uninspired), and I so (totally) agree with:
SIOUXROSE's comments ">Bravo! Your post transcends the discussion that too often gets tripped up by reason, as if the human MIND is the answer to the great mysteries. The HEART is the path to the greater Truths!"
I still can sense the dim vestiges of imprinted _" S P I R I T U A L I S M "_ being somehow unclean, or to be done in closed off caves of DARKNESS, which is just the opposite of its promise and reward.
¿ How disgusting to have had the greatest part of my being
disassociated and aligned with evil ?
Religion is but a tool to separate from our true power and identification with it, so as to subjugate our lives to meekly following authoritarian and patronizing hierarchy - so sad, to bad, the edificial affront to self-based faith is crumbling as it proves incapable of adapting to a vastly changing reality.
¿ Perhaps it is actually our ascendent spirit
-- that grows beyond mere confines of "organized" anything --
that prompts and motivates the neoCONuts to prepare for
the END of ALL that they KNOW ?
Namaste
" Saul Friedman April 19th, 2008 10:55 am
We are still paying for the crusades. And weren't 9/11 and the Iraq war a couple of faith-based initiatives?"
To some extent, I agree that we still pay for the Crusades, but what we are instead and really paying for is the ancient beast known as the Roman Empire, which existed long before Jesus of Nazareth was born, with a history totally or quasi-totally of wars of aggression for conquest and domination, i.e., EMPIRE.
And those Crusades did not involve the original, primitive Church, for that Church no longer existed; except wherein members [individually] kept their faith and social values in line with what the primitive Church's writers said Jesus had said. Francis of Assisi was among these Christians who worked on being and remaining true to Jesus, and from what I've read, he usually did not attend the elite churches, instead having used abandoned churches in the countrysides.
It's not the church that corrupted Rome, but the state of Rome that corrupted the church. It was the Roman elites who appointed or saw to the appointing of their sons, nephews, and other elitist brats they knew, to the top positions in the church; it was not the general members of the church who did this, but the Roman elites.
As for, "And weren't 9/11 and the Iraq war a couple of faith-based initiatives?", I'd say that the most critically true answer is 'NO!'. Religion was used again, but fraudulently, for disguisement, or camouflage, and for gaining public supporters the news media would report on, and many others would criticise. The 9/11 attacks were the 'New Pearl Harbour' needed, strategically, for launching the escalation of the GWoT; and note that I said 'escalation', instead of 'commencement', for the latter was years before Bush was criminally appointed Pres. in 2000.
That may have been done to "benefit" the leadership of the state of Israel, while certainly not done to benefit most Israelis, including most of the Jewish Israelis; and definitely was not done for RCCs for the Pope, John Paul II, clearly and loudly enough opposed the even threat of war on Iraq, critically opposing and without a flaw present in his words about this.
And it wasn't done for Islam. After all, some people might pretend that it was done because of the Western-and-Israel crimes against Palestinians and the people of Lebanon, but this'd make no sense. After all, Usama Bin Ladin and other Al Qa'ida leaders, among possibly or surely many other members, were trained via the CIA and the Pakistani ISI; it's apparently the USA that saw to the Taliban coming to power in Afghanistan; and they'd surely know that if they attacked the USA, then it would strike back and hit Islam hard. It wouldn't make sense for them to strike the USA because of the situation in Palestine, while knowing that other primarily Muslim countries would be consequentially hit with superpower war machinery.
In any case, that people are fooled by the [appearances] of all of this being due to religion have cause to be fooled, for they're not dreaming up what appears to them; but it's only appearances, not telling the onlooker what's really underneath or behind. It's to look at a black box and think that what you see on the outside surface tells you everything that is inside. Sometimes, we have to lift the hood to examine what's underneath in order to be able to diagnose and repair problems. Don't lift that hood? Then you opt to not bother understanding the problem; therefore opting to also not try to do anything about repairing the problem or failing (or failed) system.
" Daniel David April 19th, 2008 11:13 am
In order for us to change the official national behavior of the USA for the better, we need American Catholics and other American Christians to switch their votes from the neo-conservative (Republican) side to align with liberals.
It's hard for me to see how this article helps us attract those voters and make that progress."
Valid conclusion, imo; but as for "American" Catholics significantly voting for the RP, while the DP has proven to be no better, perhaps even worse, I wonder what the voting statistics are on the RCs in the USA.
I see people saying U.S. RCs need to stop voting RP, but providing not stats to back up this call.
But DP has proven NO better, and maybe it is historically worse; something I've read before, but not recalling the author or article, I can't provide a link to it. Nonetheless, the DP's not really been better for many decades ... en masse already.
" vmulier April 19th, 2008 11:51 am
Ms. Bennett's analysis is apt. Religions are predatory."
That is BUNK. It's immediately obvious that vmulier does not even know what 'religion' means, for religion is related to the same root as 'relationship' is; it's not necessarily organised on an individual basis, alone, and is not an institution. Organised or institutionalised religions is the fitting way to refer to what vmulier and many others mean.
Religion can be as personal, individual, as philosophy can be. Both can be and have been institutionalised too. Communism is not an institution to begin with, but does pertain to how a state may be defined in terms of governance and very much with respect to economy, poverty alleviation, etc.; and it can be democratic, or not, for the comparisons for communism are socialism and capitalism. Humans corrupted humanly instituted churches or religions, govts, and every other institution of human making; just that the corruption varies, for it can be minor to cancerously severe.
Yet the present GWoT is not religiously based. Again, the religious front we're given for viewing is camouflage much more than truthfully telling us who the real movers of these wars of aggression are and what their real purposes are; and their purpose is NOT religion, but GREED. There's Zionism, and some of the neocons are Jews and dual-citizens, having also citizenship in Israel, oddly; not having thought that U.S. govt officials of such high offices could be anything other than only U.S. citizen. After all, it's the highest offices of not the UN, but the USA.
But those neocons have more in mind than only simultaneously "benefiting" (oxymoronically) the leadership (not the citizenry, general population, but the leadership) of the quasi-superpower state of Israel.
See, that military power and the insanity, 'blood cult' insanity of the leadership of Israel provides the Western elites with a majorly powerful ally, so base, right there in the Middle East; very strategic location.
If they want Israel, this strong military power in our world (something like 5th), to expand, then the real purpose might not have anything really to do with the religious, Biblical belief about Zion, the 'Holy Land Promise', but for strategic military power in the Middle East. Look at the expansiveness of PNAC and, I suppose also fitting anyway, Zbigniew Brzezinski's book, 'The Grand Chessboard'. What ever there is for the "sake" of Israel's leadership in those materials is surely very, very little.
They want conquest and domination over the whole world; not to expand Israel for any more reason than for this Empire expansion program of the Western elites.
Bush is NO Christian; it doesn't matter how many times he attends church, he's still and more than obviously not Christian. He's a FRAUD, just like the rest of his family, Clintons, etc., are all frauds in not only political but also religious terms, like quasi-thoroughly.
He doesn't care about Israel; he's unable to [care] about anything. Caring and him parted ways LONG ago; as also applies to the rest of his family. To care requires the ability of loving, and this is far beyond his capabilities. Whatever love you think he displays about his daughters is not love, but a man who's psychotically confused, ignorant, etc., and easily manipulated by his pupeteers. He's incapable of true caring and love.
But he'll do as told, and he's directed to be a president who stands with the Israeli leadership. They're strategically needed by the real, while hidden ruling elites of the U.S. govt; and more than only it for govts.
Wherein I said, above, that religion and communism are not institutions or organised, the above was not wholly correctly or sufficiently stated. Communism is a social philosophy that is organised in terms of thought, how it's thought out, what is defined to be required, .... And of course govt is needed in order to apply the concept of communism. But it's first, of all, a view expressing how society should work for there to be elimination or else avoidance of disparity between rich and poor, etc.; the purpose is elimination of socio-economic injustices, and thereby improvement of society, a step in the direction of being more [civilised].
And religions consist of organised thought, beliefs, that is, they, especially when demythologised, are coherent views on society and the life after the temporal world, although maybe not all religions have any focus on the after-life (I'm not sure, not being anywhere near expert on religion[s]).
By demyth'ing religion I'm not think of, f.e., the Christians treating the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth as myth, but teachings within Christianity and which are contrary to Scripture; hence, f.e., 'Mother of God' is a full mythical reference in Christianity, for true Christianity has not such personage at all, based on Scripture. And Scripture is the foundation; containing some flaws, one or more of which Jesus exposed as being things to not do.
For additional juxtaposite sort of education, but the [real] kind, not the errors in Bennett's view, I just did a little Web searching to see what'd turn up for recommendable articles and found the following.
"Pope worries that big powers control decision-making
Apr 18 04:18 PM US/Eastern
By VICTOR L. SIMPSON
Associated Press Writer"
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D904G5L80&show_article=1
That's Pope Ben. XVI speaking at the UNGA on Friday, and his words are wholly fine, surely to be welcomed and by everyone.
There's only one thing he said, and according to the above article, that I disagree with, and it's wherein the article says:
"He said the United Nations plays a key role in monitoring how well governments protect their citizens.
"Indeed, this is coming to be recognized as the moral basis for a government's claim to authority," the pope said. ""
While he may be right in theory, for what he speaks of is what the UN is supposed to represent, based on paper, reality is starkly different. Maybe he's barely, if at all, aware of the dark reality involving the UN, with the UN acting in very criminal, deceitful, etc., terms; like it's so-called peace-keepers [often] not being this, but the dark contrary, f.e. There are plenty of examples.
I wouldn't be surprised if he's barely, if at all, aware of these dark Western powers-UN realities, their many crimes against humanity. After all, he's likey not spent any time reading from alternative sources, surely always sticking with msm or like news sources, and on Vatican advisers who are often enough FAR from being saints. After all, he's only person and the Internet, the www part, has been around since only 1993, and it took some years before [many] people made serious use of this mass comm. tech.
But the rest of the AP article is wholly fine; with a brief word on some anti-RCC or anti-Pope Hindu whining in NJ and about the RCC converting Hindus in India, as if the church could ever force people to covert. The Hindu govt would surely act if the church was reported [forcing] Hindus to convert.
The church might be able to do that through its ties with Western capitalism, imperialism, corporatism, ..., something like that; but only if the church tried to do something like this, and then only if it could convince employers in the areas of India where the church is supposed forcing Hindus to convert to not hire anyone who refuses to convert.
In that case, who's more guilty, the church, or the employers for going along with church bs? The employers, of course; for they could just tell the church's clergy there to "fly away ... parasites!". After all, such clergy would be parasites of the unhealthy kind, for they'd be acting with the imperialists, capitalists, corporatists, corruptors and predators of societies; very malignant parasitism.
But I doubt that the church is capable of altering society in India to the point of being able to cause social changes leading to Hindus being denied equal human rights as citizens of India and then Earth.
Nonetheless, the Hindu in NJ should realise that the Pope is not responsible, and that's if the conversions happening in India are unjustly forced, or simply forced, which I doubt to be true. Maybe it is, but I will need proof to believe force is being used.
ALSO, Bennett's mistaken about the following.
"Human beings are not naturally predisposed to opiate: religion. They are pushed."
'Opiate', for religion, and as per Karl Marx, was not meant as use of heroin, f.e., is often or usually thought of today, but in terms of relief from pain, suffering; someone provided a good reminder of this week. Included in that person's words is that Marx was not speaking in anti-religious terms; again, only saying that people or many religious people do use religion for relief from pains, sufferings.
And humans [are] predisposed to seeking relief from pain, sufferings, sorrows, injustices, ....
So Bennett doesn't know what she's talking about; or else she does to considerable degree, but while not expressing herself well, for .... Again, my first post above explains, I think enough.
VMULIER: Bravo! Your post transcends the discussion that too often gets tripped up by reason, as if the human MIND is the answer to the great mysteries. The HEART is the path to the greater Truths!
" Sarvananda April 19th, 2008 9:19 pm
Thank you, Carolyn Bennett. It is wonderful and refreshing to hear some really straight talk in these twisted times."
ONLY IT IS NOT 'straight talk', and my above post explains this surely enough.
"The notion that there is ONE RIGHT path to truth is the poison of our times and of the last several millenia."
That's not the teaching of the RCC anyway, for when the Pope erroneously says that the RCC is the sole way to Salvation, he's not saying there's only one path to finding truth. Plain common sense combined with enough years of experience in life tells us that truth can be found following various paths. After all, there's NOTHING really religious about 'truth', while 'Salvation' and Heaven are definitely religious topics.
Sarvananda, you need to work on your logic, and should try to provide informative, useful comments, instead of kiddy-minded cheerleading.
My above post provides a fine starting point.
TO AndrewP: I commend you for your years of service to the poor as a Catholic priest. (I attended Catholic schools through the 12th grade.) But you represent a tiny fraction of believers of all faiths. A majority of believers are indifferent to the plight of the poor except for obligatory lip service and an occasional prayer. And a large segment of "believers" are actively exacerbating global misery in one way or another. Meanwhile, some who work with the poor are non-believers. So your good works as a priest do not validate religion in general.
As to the Catholic Church, in your 60 years of service, you couldn't help but see that much of the world's disease, genocide, war, rape, enslavement, starvation, brutality, inhumanity, etc. could be alleviated by encouraging responsible family planning (using modern scientific methods of birth control) and, when necessary, abortion. The Church's continued prohibition against using these tools to help counteract human suffering is an abomination more reprehensible than any evils you can dredge up in the bible.
Thank you, Carolyn Bennett. It is wonderful and refreshing to hear some really straight talk in these twisted times. Organized religion has been the enemy of religiousness--putting people's own discoveries in straight jackets. And to claim that secularism has claimed more lives than religious crusades is not only erroneous but misses the point. The notion that there is ONE RIGHT path to truth is the poison of our times and of the last several millenia.
Carolyn Bennett's article is okay in terms of the facts on internally displaced refugees, and so on, but we know that all of these human rights abuses were crimes rooted in state, imperialism, capitalism, the MIC, a little "benefit" for the leadership of the state of Israel, while not for [Judaism], etc., so not for religion. Even if right-wing, ... religious leaders and laity sided with the underlying or root wars of aggression, these still were commanded and conducted by state, and most likely would be committed anyway. And not only people of any of the religions Bennett refers to in her article supported the war on Iraq, as well as the one on Afghanistan.
They, the imperialist elites, only employ religion and not for learning, trying to improve themselves, ..., but for cover, distraction, disguisement most of all; all things that are not good, but damn wrong. They employ religion fraudulently.
If the wars of aggression and Western imperialism, capitalism, ... being exercised by Western states and corporations, with their many millions of shareholders going along for the profitable "ride" or drive, if all this being done all over our planet was not done, then the problems she specifically refers to in the article would not exist; or if any did, then it'd still be next to not at all compared to what we have today.
Religion did not corrupt Rome and make it into a beast; religion did not make Rome's leaders launch conquests for domination; etc. It's Rome that employed religion for empire's "sake". It's the Roman elite families who appointed their sons, nephews, and other known brats, to become the RCC's high-ranking clergy; it's not the primitive, original church that forced this, for Rome was too powerful to be able to force it against its will, in this sort of way anyway. Or so I've gathered so far anyway.
Not only is it unjustified to claim that the religious leaders of the religions she refers to commanded these Western wars of aggression, imperialism, etc., for they did not command these affairs; she also faults [all] religious leaders of the religions she selectively or subjectively refers to, as if all of them are the same, think the same way, have the same views on life, religion, philosophy, etc. She's seriously exaggerating and 'stereotyping', which normally means [overly] generalising, which in turn infers having an erroneous and therefore unjustified view; except for the portion that is truthful, though while this often applies to a minority, sometimes relatively to very tiny.
We know the