The Hazards of Belief

silverharp

religious brain fart ahead...

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/melbourne-priest-apologises-for-derogatory-comments-about-jill-meagher-20150327-1m9q0i.html

A Catholic Church official has apologised after a priest told parishioners that had murdered Melbourne woman Jill Meagher's faith been stronger, she would have been "home in bed" and not walking down a street on the night she was brutally raped and killed.

The controversial homily was reportedly delivered during an end-of-term service at St Christopher's Primary School in Airport West on Friday when the priest held up a newspaper article with an image of Ms Meagher's killer, Adrian Bayley.

Radio station 3AW reported that the priest made the comments to an audience of about 100 people, saying that if Ms Meagher had been "more faith-filled", she "would have been home in bed" and "not walking down Sydney Road at 3am".

Bayley raped and killed Ms Meagher in a Brunswick laneway in September 2012. He was sentenced to life in prison, with a minimum term of 35 years.

PopePalpatine

I swear, I'm up against a brick wall in the "Existence of God debate" thread in t'udder forum. It's the same old bigotry equating atheism with Nazism.

I'd say that "brick wall" would have no problems with General Franco, because "he was a good catlick leader, begorrah, heil McQuaid."

Brian Shanahan

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I swear, I'm up against a brick wall in the "Existence of God debate" thread in t'udder forum. It's the same old bigotry equating atheism with Nazism.

I'd say that "brick wall" would have no problems with General Franco, because "he was a good catlick leader, begorrah, heil McQuaid."

So was Hitler up until he topped himself. In fact Nazism was very highly represented by good catlicks, such as Fritz Thyssen, Heinrich Himmler, Josef Goebbels, Reinhard Heydrich, Heinrich Muller (two of the architects of die Endlosung der Judenfrage and main movers in the SS), Arthur Seyss-Inquart (Austria's leading Nazi, later Governor of the Netherlands when it was under Nazi occupation), Franz von Papen (the idiot that went into coalition with the Nazis in Jan '33, then leader of the catholic Centre Party, and later a mid-ranking Nazi political leader), Klaus Barbie (head of Gestapo in Lyon, comitted a number of massacres there), Hans Frank (governor of the General Government {rump Poland} during the war, looted the country and gleefully deported Jewish and Polish "untermenschen" to the gas chambers, anybody who read Fatherland will recognise the name as a central party to the Wannsee Conference which kicked off the holocaust), Julius Streicher (owner, publisher and editor of Der Sturmer, alongside Der Volkisher Beobachter as the two main Nazi newspapers), Rudolf Hoess (commadant of Auschwitz, Rudolf Hess was protestant), Martin Bormann (Hitler's BFF and head of the Party Chancellry, essentially Nazi Germany's chief civil servant). Some of these (only a small minority) denounced their catholicism at some point, but they were all catholics up into joining the party at least. And as you can see they were all prominent leading members of the party (or in the case of von Papen, allowed Nazi Germany to happen and later joined them).

As regards atheism in Nazi Germany, here is the official (rigourously policed) line: Atheists were heavily persecuted in Germany for three reasons, 1) they were a lot more likely to be left-wing (godless communism and all that), 2) they were indepenedent thinkers for the main part and 3) they were a lot harder to brainwash because they were less likely to be part of groups part of the Nazi milleu. While never officially proscribed, atheism like with a lot of other things the Nazis didn't like would get lots of people a one way ticket to a KZ for hard labour until death or the end of the war.

robindch

Arizona state senator reckons that Americans should be forced by law to attend "a church of their choice":

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/26/arizona-state-senator-sylvia-allen-suggests-law-making-church-attendance-mandatory-for-everyone/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGvctqvDsag

Hotblack Desiato

FFS

Are people who come out with stuff like that really as stupid as they sound, or is it just a blind spot which causes their brain to turn off whenever anything related to religion is being discussed? I'm thinking the latter.

Kivaro

robindch wrote: »

Arizona state senator reckons that Americans should be forced by law to attend "a church of their choice":

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/26/arizona-state-senator-sylvia-allen-suggests-law-making-church-attendance-mandatory-for-everyone/

Woohoo, mandatory flying spaghetti monster church attendance every Sunday.

Penn

robindch wrote: »

Arizona state senator reckons that Americans should be forced by law to attend "a church of their choice":

"Let us Aaayyyyy"

robindch

A Siberian opera house stages Wagner's Tannhauser. Some religious people became upset, so in February, the Director of Production, Timofey Kulyabin, was prosecuted for:

Novosibirsk State Prosecutor wrote:

[...] publicly desecrated the object of religious worship in Christianity – the image of Jesus Christ in the Gospels [...]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/25/opera-director-charged-by-russian-authorities-with-offending-christians

Then, on Monday of last week, Putin pinned a "Services to the Homeland" medal on the chest of Aleksandr Novopashin, the priest who instigated the complaint. And yesterday, the Russian Minister of Culture fired the theater's Director, Boris Mezdrich for refusing to apologize and replaced him with Vladimir Kekhman, the head of a St. Petersburg theater, who called the production 'blasphemy' which was produced by 'militant atheists':

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/29/russian-director-fired-over-wagner-opera-that-offended-powerful-orthodox-church
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/30/world/europe/russian-theater-director-fired-for-offending-christians.html

Brian Shanahan

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

FFS

Are people who come out with stuff like that really as stupid as they sound, or is it just a blind spot which causes their brain to turn off whenever anything related to religion is being discussed? I'm thinking the latter.

Pandering to their electorate, just like with Lucinda et al over here (for example I'd bet that if Lucinda ever wanted an abortion she'd be the first on a plane to London, and it'd show up exes shortly after).

silverharp

When I see something like below it makes you think how crazy things are , its footage from the one of Yemen mosques that was blown up by suicide bombers the week before last, at the very moment that the bomb goes off they are praying "Death to America", ironic to say the least , I feel sorry for the kids caught up in this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGAT_nMuix8

news source
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3004359/Death-toll-rises-126-Yemen-mosque-bombings-medical-source.html

PopePalpatine

The victims of that bombing were Shia, the perpetrators were Sunni and IIRC members of the local Daesh "province".

recedite

PopePalpatine wrote: »

The victims of that bombing were Shia, the perpetrators were Sunni...

You can tell they are Shia because they commit the heresy of keeping their arms straight down by their sides during the standy-uppy bit of the prayer, whereas a Sunni folds his arms.
Yep, these are the things worth knowing if you ever find yourself in a dodgy neighbourhood while in Yemen.
Both sides there are being played for fools by USA, Israel and Iran.

Hotblack Desiato

There was a protest at Windsor Park on Sunday.

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/international/protest-takes-place-ahead-of-windsor-park-fixture-1.2157642

A peaceful religious protest has taken place outside Windsor Park in opposition to Northern Ireland’s first ever Sunday fixture on home soil.

The Irish Football Association has never before staged an international game on a Sunday but was forced to break new ground by UEFA’s ‘Week of Football’ initiative.

Euro 2016 qualifiers are now spread throughout the international period, with dates allocated automatically by computer.

But the Tyndale Memorial branch of the Free Presbyterian Church has criticised the IFA for failing to seek dispensation and declining to inform local church groups.

Reverend Raymond Robinson, whose congregation held placards and handed out leaflets on Donegall Avenue, told Press Association Sport: "Our opposition is to the breaking of observance of the Lord’s day.

"We believe in the Sabbath being kept holy. It seems more and more that the football agenda is being driven by the television companies and not what God says, or what public opinion is."

MrPudding

Why would a football association need to inform or seek a dispensation from a church group?

MrP

Turtwig

MrPudding wrote: »

Why would a football association need to inform or seek a dispensation from a church group?

MrP

Pfft get with the program EVERYTHING needs special dispensation from God.

Peregrinus

MrPudding wrote: »

Why would a football association need to inform or seek a dispensation from a church group?

MrP

They don't. They're being criticised by a church group for failing to seek a dispensation from EUFA, exempting them from the rule requiring the game to be on a Sunday.

obplayer

Peregrinus wrote: »

They don't. They're being criticised by a church group for failing to seek a dispensation from EUFA, exempting them from the rule requiring the game to be on a Sunday.

In other words the church group believe they all should have followed the rules of that church. Why does that church feel that EUFA should grant a dispensation because of a particular church' rules? If the local gardening club had complained about the fixture because it interfered with their weekly meetings would it have made the news in anything but the most derisory tone?

Peregrinus

obplayer wrote: »

In other words the church group believe they all should have followed the rules of that church. Why does that church feel that EUFA should grant a dispensation because of a particular church' rules? If the local gardening club had complained about the fixture because it interfered with their weekly meetings would it have made the news in anything but the most derisory tone?

Because an international organistation like EUFA is, or ought to be, sensitive to local feelings and customs?

Whether people ought to play football on Sunday or not is not EUFA's problem. But if, in a particular society, there's a sizable chunk of people who won't play on a Sunday, or won't attend a game on a Sunday, then that's obviously an issue that people who want to organise football matches would be stupid to ignore. It makes no difference, for this purpose, whether people's feelings about Sunday football are religious, cultural or other. The protest in this case was essentially "you could have sought an exemption, and by not doing so you disregarded the wishes and desires that section of your followers who would like to attend this game, were it not organised for a Sunday."

This isn't just for bible-thumpers. We had the World Gay Games in Sydney a few years ago. Tonga sent a fa'afafine netball team. Fa'afafine is a third gender - fa'afafine are biologically male, but present as (mostly) female and fill (mostly) female social and sexual roles. Their fixtures had to be rescheduled because they wouldn't play on Sundays, out of respect for the Queen of Tonga, who is a Methodist.

obplayer

Peregrinus wrote: »

Because an international organistation like EUFA is, or ought to be, sensitive to local feelings and customs?

Whether people ought to play football on Sunday or not is not EUFA's problem. But if, in a particular society, there's a sizable chunk of people who won't play on a Sunday, or won't attend a game on a Sunday, then that's obviously an issue that people who want to organise football matches would be stupid to ignore. It makes no difference, for this purpose, whether people's feelings about Sunday football are religious, cultural or other. The protest in this case was essentially "you could have sought an exemption, and by not doing so you disregarded the wishes and desires that section of your followers who would like to attend this game, were it not organised for a Sunday."

This isn't just for bible-thumpers. We had the World Gay Games in Sydney a few years ago. Tonga sent a fa'afafine netball team. Fa'afafine is a third gender - fa'afafine are biologically male, but present as (mostly) female and fill (mostly) female social and sexual roles. Their fixtures had to be rescheduled because they wouldn't play on Sundays, out of respect for the Queen of Tonga, who is a Methodist.

Then the answer to whether there's a sizable chunk of people who won't attend a game on a Sunday will be found by checking the attendance figures. As for those who won't play on a Sunday we already know the answer to that. If you don't want to play then don't. If you don't want to attend then don't. EUFA have presumably made a decision that pandering to the church in NI was no longer necessary. The complaints of the church about this are simply complaints about loss of privilege. As for Tonga. I don't care.

Peregrinus

Yes. I'm of the Anthony Trollope view on this question:

Mr. Slope merely opened his eyes wider, and slightly shrugged his shoulders. He was not, however, prepared to give up his darling project.

"I fear there is a great deal of Sabbath travelling here," said he. "On looking at the 'Bradshaw,' I see that there are three trains in and three out every Sabbath. Could nothing be done to induce the company to withdraw them? Don't you think. Dr. Grantly, that a little energy might diminish the evil?"

"Not being a director, I really can't say. But if you can withdraw the passengers, the company, I dare say, will withdraw the trains," said the doctor. "It's merely a question of dividends."

- Anthony Trollope, Barchester Towers

Having said that, if potential customers/supporters of the Irish Football Association feel their views and values are being disregarded and they are being alienated from the game by this disregard, it's perfectly reasonable for them to demonstrate to call attention to the fact, and to object to it. If a business had taken some decision which disregarded the sensibilities of its gay and lesbian customers and they protested to draw attention to the fact, would you be taking the same view?

pauldla

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes. I'm of the Anthony Trollope view on this question:

Mr. Slope merely opened his eyes wider, and slightly shrugged his shoulders. He was not, however, prepared to give up his darling project.

"I fear there is a great deal of Sabbath travelling here," said he. "On looking at the 'Bradshaw,' I see that there are three trains in and three out every Sabbath. Could nothing be done to induce the company to withdraw them? Don't you think. Dr. Grantly, that a little energy might diminish the evil?"

"Not being a director, I really can't say. But if you can withdraw the passengers, the company, I dare say, will withdraw the trains," said the doctor. "It's merely a question of dividends."

- Anthony Trollope, Barchester Towers

Having said that, if potential customers/supporters of the Irish Football Association feel their views and values are being disregarded and they are being alienated from the game by this disregard, it's perfectly reasonable for them to demonstrate to call attention to the fact, and to object to it. If a business had taken some decision which disregarded the sensibilities of its gay and lesbian customers and they protested to draw attention to the fact, would you be taking the same view?

Very poor analogy there, P, if I may say.

Peregrinus

pauldla wrote: »

Very poor analogy there, P, if I may say.

Depends on the specifics of the decision being protested about, surely?

obplayer

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes. I'm of the Anthony Trollope view on this question:

Mr. Slope merely opened his eyes wider, and slightly shrugged his shoulders. He was not, however, prepared to give up his darling project.

"I fear there is a great deal of Sabbath travelling here," said he. "On looking at the 'Bradshaw,' I see that there are three trains in and three out every Sabbath. Could nothing be done to induce the company to withdraw them? Don't you think. Dr. Grantly, that a little energy might diminish the evil?"

"Not being a director, I really can't say. But if you can withdraw the passengers, the company, I dare say, will withdraw the trains," said the doctor. "It's merely a question of dividends."

- Anthony Trollope, Barchester Towers

Having said that, if potential customers/supporters of the Irish Football Association feel their views and values are being disregarded and they are being alienated from the game by this disregard, it's perfectly reasonable for them to demonstrate to call attention to the fact, and to object to it. If a business had taken some decision which disregarded the sensibilities of its gay and lesbian customers and they protested to draw attention to the fact, would you be taking the same view?

But it is not customers/supporters of the Irish Football Association who have made their views known, they can vote with their pockets. It is the church who are complaining, once again, that the world no longer follows their rules and orders the way it used to. And if any other group / club / sect had complained they would not have been treated with anything other than derision so the church is still being deferred to, if only in the amount of press coverage they are given. Religion is dying in educated countries and the religious really don't like it. "Down with this sort of thing!" is the cry.

pauldla

Peregrinus wrote: »

Depends on the specifics of the decision being protested about, surely?

I don't know, I'm still trying to get my head around your comparison between sexuality and sporting interests. How is being gay like wanting to watch a soccer match?

Wow, that sounds like the opening of a really bad joke.

Peregrinus

I’m just making the point that a constituency that feels marginalised or disregarded is likely to be pissed off about it, and both reason and realism suggest that we shouldn’t be surprised if they call attention to their pissed-offedness through a protest. And I don’t think their right to protest about being pissed off depends at all on whether we identify with, or agree with, the group concerned.

For these purposes, the comparator group for the point I’m trying to make doesn’t have to be defined by sexual orientation; they could be defined by any shared characteristic at all. But sexual orientation is just as useful in making this point as any other characteristic.

The fa'afafine netball team that I mentioned in post 5869 was characterised by both gender identity/sexual orientation and religiously-inspired practices. Would we say that they would be entitled to protest if their gender identification had been disregarded or disrespected, but not if their religiously inspired practices had been disregarded or disrespected? That seems very hard to argue.

Absolam

obplayer wrote: »

But it is not customers/supporters of the Irish Football Association who have made their views known, they can vote with their pockets.

So, as long as the the Tyndale Memorial branch of the Free Presbyterian Church are actually customers/supporters of the Irish Football Association their protest is entirely legitimate? Is there any reason to think they're not?

obplayer wrote: »

It is the church who are complaining, once again, that the world no longer follows their rules and orders the way it used to. <...> the religious really don't like it. "Down with this sort of thing!" is the cry.

From the article it seems the cry was more like "We'd like to be considered", which is not nearly as catchy, but does support the notion that they had some interest in the game itself....

pauldla

Peregrinus wrote: »

I’m just making the point that a constituency that feels marginalised or disregarded is likely to be pissed off about it, and both reason and realism suggest that we shouldn’t be surprised if they call attention to their pissed-offedness through a protest. And I don’t think their right to protest about being pissed off depends at all on whether we identify with, or agree with, the group concerned.

For these purposes, the comparator group for the point I’m trying to make doesn’t have to be defined by sexual orientation; they could be defined by any shared characteristic at all. But sexual orientation is just as useful in making this point as any other characteristic.

The fa'afafine netball team that I mentioned in post 5869 was characterised by both gender identity/sexual orientation and religiously-inspired practices. Would we say that they would be entitled to protest if their gender identification had been disregarded or disrespected, but not if their religiously inspired practices had been disregarded or disrespected? That seems very hard to argue.

But sexual orientation is the characteristic you chose to use in your analogy; and I still think it is a poor analogy. 'We are pissed off because they are holding a sporting event on our Sabbath' is hardly the same as 'We are pissed off because Acme Inc. is refusing gay customers because they are gay', is it?

Of course, people are entitled to protest. I have not argued otherwise. You may remember the stirring protest by FAI fans after the Thierry Henry incident a few years back. Should we treat all such protests as equal in value, or attempt to assess them on their merits and on the perceived wrongs being protested?

Incidentally, I note that this is arising because of an international game. Presumably local sporting events have been held without protest down through the years?

Peregrinus

pauldla wrote: »

But sexual orientation is the characteristic you chose to use in your analogy; and I still think it is a poor analogy. 'We are pissed off because they are holding a sporting event on our Sabbath' is hardly the same as 'We are pissed off because Acme Inc. is refusing gay customers because they are gay', is it?

No. But why are you assuming that the specific disregard that is being protested about is a refusal to serve gay customers? I'm suggesting that gay people (and their friends) might reasonably protest about any decision which reflects a disregard of the desires, wishes and preferences of gay people.

pauldla wrote: »

Incidentally, I note that this is arising because of an international game. Presumably local sporting events have been held without protest down through the years?

Actually, I don't think the IFA hosts Sunday games. Or, I think the current position is, they only schedule games for Sundays if both teams are agreeable - which many teams in the league are not. One of the reasons why the Free Presbyterians and their ilk might feel a particular sense of outrage here is precisely because historically the IFA has been sensitive to their views and values, and they have a somewhat proprietorial attitude towards it.

I think the argument is basically this; if you have a sizable chunk of potential players/supporters who won't involve themselves in Sunday games, and you go ahead and organise Sunday games, you are effectively deciding that you do not want, or do not care about, the participation of this group. But if your objective is the promotion of the game, you should want the widest possible participation of both players and supporters; you should aim to be inclusive. If people don't want to pay on Sundays, you shouldn't be making decisions about whether their reasons are good enough or not; you should be trying to organise matters so that they don't have to play on Sundays. And they'll be pissed off if they don't perceive you to be at least trying to do that.

Absolam

pauldla wrote: »

Incidentally, I note that this is arising because of an international game. Presumably local sporting events have been held without protest down through the years?

A quick glance at their fixtures list shows no matches on Sundays this year or last, which does indicate a bit of a preference. But I'm no soccer fan, so I don't know if soccer matches are ever played on Sundays anyway?

Peregrinus

Absolam wrote: »

A quick glance at their fixtures list shows no matches on Sundays this year or last, which does indicate a bit of a preference. But I'm no soccer fan, so I don't know if soccer matches are ever played on Sundays anyway?

The FAI routinely schedules games for Sundays. Bloody Catholics!