So who's going to see the Pope?

Hitman3000

Donald Trump wrote:

If you had a daughter like Ivanka you'd be still trying to give her her weekly Saturday baths too

Thanks for proving you are nothing but a hypocrite.

jigglypuffstuff

Omackeral wrote: »

Also, this God fella... why would he make things hard to understand? Why would he not just lay it out there for idiots like me to understand? Actually, why does he let gay people get persecuted if he's the one that made them that way in the first place? Why does he let kids get leukemia? Sh*t like that.

Firstly I never mentioned God...I don't need to get into a redundant argument....it always has and always will come down to choice. It cannot be proven or disproven

So let me get this straight...if this god you mentioned is to blame...why so

After all...god never makes anyone procreate...

You choose to do that...if said individual did not procreate then no child would be born to get this disease

And let's just say "it" does punish us...do you not think we deserve it? Look at the current state of the planet...it's broken beyond repair...god didn't do that ...we did

seamus

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Sure didn't it all start with Adam and Eve they had 2 sons after that I'm stumped or was the big lad making free with the ribs again. Who knows maybe it's all a metaphor, or maybe we are all characters in the matrix and this is not real.

To be fair to the creation myth, apparently adam and eve had a whole slew of daughters.

Of course, being women, they're not really worthy of mention except in passing, i.e. that their brothers married them.

Donald Trump

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Thanks for proving you are nothing but a hypocrite.

Don't mention it.




Were you one of those saps ringing Liveline yesterday protesting genocide?

Hitman3000

seamus wrote:

Of course, being women, they're not really worthy of mention except in passing, i.e. that their brothers married them.

So they kept it in the family? now I know why a certain ethnic minority here are so religious.

ohnonotgmail

Donald Trump wrote: »

What? Riding your family members?




No. Most of us don't do that.




Over the history of evolution, it must have occurred of course given population bottlenecks and also the simple fact that mutations were able to persist and be passed down - similar as to how people might create purebred breeds of animals.



But now it only happens in places like Offaly. And wherever you live apparently :pac:

went in doubt go off on a bull**** tangent. Good stuff.

Hitman3000

Donald Trump wrote:

Were you one of those saps ringing Liveline yesterday protesting genocide?

Nah, to busy booking tickets, ; )

jmayo

BliainanAir wrote: »

A bigot is someone who tries to stop another practising their religion. You are an intolerant, bigot. Trying to block people attending a mass. You can't dress it up any other way. A childish bigot with a lot of time on your hands.

No the usual term around here for someone that doesn't like a religion or it's followers is a RACIST.

BTW it is ok, hell it is down right cool, to be anti catholic.
But fook me sideways if you dare say anything bad about some other religions.
This is the biggest laugh of all.

The very ones on here having a pop at ordinary catholics who want to go see the pope, are usually on here telling us ordinary believers of another global religion are grand and it is not all believers that are responsible for the terrorism, the treatment of other groups, the misogynistic treatment of women as second class citizens, the paedophilia gangs operating in their communities.

Yet it seems to some all catholics who want to go see the pope are as good as responsible for the paedophilia.
That would have made some sense with the last two popes, but this guy ?

I just wish some people were consistent in their views of religions.

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

You sounded a bit militant yourself yesterday when you said "**** ordinary catholics"

But just you say one bad word about the ordinary members of another religion and watch him jump up and down defending them. :rolleyes:

Donald Trump

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Nah, to busy booking tickets, ; )

Good for you.


We all have to set targets for our achievements based on individual ability.


You will forever go down in the annals of history as the person who was able to fill out some online forms


You go girl!

1hnr79jr65

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

went in doubt go off on a bull**** tangent. Good stuff.

He has proven he is not intelligent enough to respond to anything when he is challenged as per my response to his post on page 40.

Best off ignoring the fool that can't back up any waffle he posts.

Omackeral

pone2012 wrote: »

And let's just say "it" does punish us...do you not think we deserve it? Look at the current state of the planet...it's broken beyond repair...god didn't do that ...we did

Your whole argument is typed manure but this last bit I'll address. ''God didn't do that, we did.'' And who supposedly made us? And who supposedly is all knowing and all seeing? Who supposedly is omnipresent and omnipotent? If the god fella is real, he knows everything that's gonna happen. Conclusion, it's all cock and god is a wanker if he's real.

seamus

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

You sounded a bit militant yourself yesterday when you said "**** ordinary catholics"

I do enjoy an aul pint, it has to be said.

Omackeral

pone2012 wrote: »

So let me get this straight...if this god you mentioned is to blame...why so

After all...god never makes anyone procreate...

You choose to do that...if said individual did not procreate then no child would be born to get this disease

Ah, so it's Mammy and Daddy's fault that baby has cancer. Cool.

Hitman3000

Donald Trump wrote:

We all have to set targets for our achievements based on individual ability.

Drawing out the easily outraged is also fun.
You may try and stop with the personal attacks, even AH has some rules.

RollieFingers

After the years of cover-ups and abuses from the Catholic Church in Ireland and the priests (Paedophile Rapist In Every Small Town) - I think I'll pass on the opportunity to go and see their dear leader!

Donald Trump

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

He has proven he is not intelligent enough to respond to anything when he is challenged as per my response to his post on page 40.

Best off ignoring the fool that can't back up any waffle he posts.

Ah I never noticed the below. Lets have a look at the genius.

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

1. Religion has held back the human race, fear of magic (SCIENCE) and not in the divine held back much development.
2. There are possilbe instances where religion didnt affect cultures as much as history may lead to believe, non documentation of such instances would have been removed from history by conquering or controling elements. Some believe that athiesm was more widespread over 2000 years ago than today.
3. Some philosophers were actually not religious and damned those that believed in the "gods" for holding back science and society.
4. The romans brought in christian religion and because of their influence at the time the religion spread far across europe where Islam was not present. Islam was far more available back in those days than christianity. The church was the new rome and used religion to control and dominate, steal and start wars.
5. Great art and architecture yes - but alot of that was created by those that were persecuted or forced to use their skill to develop due to time and influence. Alot of the great art was stolen, im sure the vatican has hundreds of years worth of stolen art locked away that the world will never see unless the place gets burned down.
6. Belief is something all societies has had, religion is a control mechanism, and churchs are a control envoirnment, hence why must you buy your way into heaven with collection basket when the church is so filthy rich off the back of wars they endorsed and theft of normal people. A great example is taking gifts from the National Socialists during WW2 and helping some of them escape justice.

All in all the church is a corrupt, controlling, abusive organisation that hides under the guise of a religion but for hundreds of years has been the bully boy driving wars and other nonsense. I would laugh heartily if the vatican burned down.

People dont need churches or priests or bishops or a pope to have a belief. People have the ability to believe or not beileive anything they want.

1) Not true. Given that civilisation has always been a survival of the fittest with the more advanced civilisation dominating and destroying the others, surely a civilisation with no religion would have started, used it's absence of religion to dominate and become powerful.

2) This is not making any point against my argument that religion as a concept helped to drive development. Maybe it does in your head somehow but I cannot account for that

3) I never said that philosophers were religious. I said that "Religion, or at least the topic itself was a driving force behind many of the great philosophers who sought to find answers and understand human nature and the world". Read it again slowly.

4) FYI. Islam started around the 7th century AD. The Western Roman empire started to disintegrate around 300-400 AD. Unless those pesky ISIS fellas invented a time machine, I'm not sure what your point is here. You are showing your anti-Catholic bias, as again, I made it abundantly clear in my post - "I am not talking about any specific religoin as you did not seem to be. You seemed to be talking about the concept of religion which is what I am giving a counterargument to". I quoted it here exactly, including the typo. (Islam is a religion too btw. So if civilisations practising it were developing it and becoming a threat, then that kinda also proves my point - thanks for that)

5) Again, you cannot seem to grasp the concept that I am not talking about treating people good or bad. I gave an argument that "religion as a concept was used to control, subdue and put a structure and order on society". Where does that say it treated everyone fairly?

6) Is just a random boilerplate anti-Catholic whataboutery. It isn't even anti-religious. Just anti-Catholic.



I never said that people need a priest or bishop or a Pope. How on earth did you get that from my post which was just pointing out the error in the statement that "It has held the human race back far to long". It clearly has done the opposite. If you want to argue that it caused hardship for individuals then that is a different argument. Or if you don't like a particular church then that is fine. But don't try to make silly shit up. Because you'll only look like a gobshite if you do.


BTW, wars are terrible things. But military, wars and their aftermath also drive technological (and social) development and always have done. Please read that sentence before jumping on your horse and thinking those words said what you want them to mean, rather than what they actually say


Verdit:
Must try harder

c68zapdsm5i1ru

To be honest those booking up tickets with the purpose of tricking the organisers and leaving them with a hugely disappointing turn out and then boasting about their cunning plan on Facebook and on chat forums can't be the brightest lights on the tree.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

the celtic tiger wrote: »

Not sure why people in this thread cannot give a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer, without trying to intentionally put down other people's religion.

I won't be attending OP, but it's a big thing for a lot of people, and good for them that they got the opportunity to see the Pope.

You see, this is what tolerance, intelligence and an open mind sounds like.

Some posters could take note.

Donald Trump

Baylee Angry Kneecap wrote: »

To be honest those booking up tickets with the purpose of tricking the organisers and leaving them with a hugely disappointing turn out and then boasting about their cunning plan on Facebook and on chat forums can't be the brightest lights on the tree.

Ah sure look. It's like how a group of 6 year olds think they discover something for the first time and think how clever they are.



I mean, relatively they might be clever, but only relative to other saps who don't know how to use a web browser to fill out an online form.

BliainanAir

Don't make it easy for these intolerant people by turning the debate into one on what the Bible is about, metaphor versus truth.

They've been hanging around anti Christian fora long enough to learn a few tired cliches like 'penguins walking from the Antarctic' and 'the fairy in the sky' etc.

The real issue is these great progressive liberals want to deny people civil liberties. They are trying to stop Catholics seeing the pope. So it's all fine and dandy allowing the LGBT community to marry but the Catholics, the vast majority who are guilty of nothing, hound them.

Omackeral

BliainanAir wrote: »

Don't make it easy for these intolerant people by turning the debate into one on what the Bible is about, metaphor versus truth.

They've been hanging around anti Christian fora long enough to learn a few tired cliches like 'penguins walking from the Antarctic' and 'the fairy in the sky' etc.

How is it intolerant to question logic? It's ignorant to just accept things blindly. I think they call that 'faith'.

BliainanAir wrote: »

The real issue is these great progressive liberals want to deny people civil liberties. They are trying to stop Catholics seeing the pope. So it's all fine and dandy allowing the LGBT community to marry but the Catholics, the vast majority who are guilty of nothing, hound them.

So we've ignorance and irony in the one post. Bravo.

Taytoland

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

Donald Trump wrote: »

Ah now. That's awful silly stuff.


By all means, go ahead and argue that religions is not needed today or whatever you want to argue. We can debate on that. But don't say such silly things as "it has held the human race back far too long".


How many great civilizations can you tell me that did not have any religion? The answer is none. Because religion as a concept was used to control, subdue and put a structure and order on society. And that structure went hand-in-hand with civilization and development. Whether that be in ancient Greece, Egyptian, Inca, whatever.


Religion, or at least the topic itself was a driving force behind many of the great philosophers who sought to find answers and understand human nature and the world.



And in a more direct tangible sense, churches/monasteries have been repositories and centres of learning in Europe at least for hundreds and hundreds of years. And for a large part of that were the only ones doing it.



How much of the great art and architecture do we directly owe to systems of religion?





So religion went hand-in-hand with the progress of civilisation. You might not like to hear that as you probably think that you are special and it doesn't matter to you. But as a concept and a structure, it has added greatly to where we are today.


I am not talking about any specific religoin as you did not seem to be. You seemed to be talking about the concept of religion which is what I am giving a counterargument to





(Yeah yeah, some shite about Galileo and the world being flat and Crusades etc. blah blah. )

• Religion has held back the human race, fear of magic (SCIENCE) and not in the divine held back much development.
• There are possilbe instances where religion didnt affect cultures as much as history may lead to believe, non documentation of such instances would have been removed from history by conquering or controling elements. Some believe that athiesm was more widespread over 2000 years ago than today.
• Some philosophers were actually not religious and damned those that believed in the "gods" for holding back science and society.
• The romans brought in christian religion and because of their influence at the time the religion spread far across europe where Islam was not present. Islam was far more available back in those days than christianity. The church was the new rome and used religion to control and dominate, steal and start wars.
• Great art and architecture yes - but alot of that was created by those that were persecuted or forced to use their skill to develop due to time and influence. Alot of the great art was stolen, im sure the vatican has hundreds of years worth of stolen art locked away that the world will never see unless the place gets burned down.
• Belief is something all societies has had, religion is a control mechanism, and churchs are a control envoirnment, hence why must you buy your way into heaven with collection basket when the church is so filthy rich off the back of wars they endorsed and theft of normal people. A great example is taking gifts from the National Socialists during WW2 and helping some of them escape justice.

All in all the church is a corrupt, controlling, abusive organisation that hides under the guise of a religion but for hundreds of years has been the bully boy driving wars and other nonsense. I would laugh heartily if the vatican burned down.

People dont need churches or priests or bishops or a pope to have a belief. People have the ability to believe or not beileive anything they want.

You could literally replace religion with ideologies, political parties. Political parties are all about group think, trying to beat the "other", the enemy etc. The Soviet Union under Lenin and Stalin outlawed religion and it was hell on earth for civil liberties and freedom.

BliainanAir

Omackeral wrote: »

How is it intolerant to question logic? It's ignorant to just accept things blindly. I think they call that 'faith'.



So we've ignorance and irony in the one post. Bravo.

You've just pointed out that you are no better than the worst elements in the church. At least they don't resort to trying to book places at Pride marches. Can you not see the irony?

You're as brainwashed in your viewpoint as the most eccentric religious.

Donald Trump

Taytoland wrote: »

You could literally replace religion with ideologies, political parties. Political parties are all about group think, trying to beat the "other", the enemy etc. The Soviet Union under Lenin and Stalin outlawed religion and it was hell on earth for civil liberties and freedom.

None of that negates my point.


The original point was that religion

has held the human race back far too long

That is clearly wrong.


Am I saying that it is the best system? - no
Am i saying that is it the only system? - no


Just that it clearly played a role as a tool to

control, subdue and put a structure and order on society

From that control and structure, civilisation made advancements.


If you want to argue that communism/ political parties/whatever would be a better way to achieve that, well then lets debate that. But it doesn't negate my points.



This is what I said

How many great civilizations can you tell me that did not have any religion? The answer is none. Because religion as a concept was used to control, subdue and put a structure and order on society. And that structure went hand-in-hand with civilization and development. Whether that be in ancient Greece, Egyptian, Inca, whatever.

Is it wrong? Have there been any major successful civilizations in which some form or religion did not appear? You have to ask yourself why they all seemed to have religion.



Am I saying that religion meant that everyone was treated just and fairly - no. I am not. I am mrerely responding to the point about the religion holding back the human race for far too long.


What's happening is that there are bigoted anti-Catholics who are looking for some confirmation bias to help them justify their bigotry. You can be anti-Catholic and still admit that religion as a concept has helped more than hindered the human race over our history.





Edit: Sorry, I think you were agreeing with me. I may have misunderstood your angle. My response is still valid. Just not directed to you!

Strazdas

Taytoland wrote: »

You could literally replace religion with ideologies, political parties. Political parties are all about group think, trying to beat the "other", the enemy etc. The Soviet Union under Lenin and Stalin outlawed religion and it was hell on earth for civil liberties and freedom.

And as ideologies go, the basic Christian one for example was / is a good one. Love one another, practise forgiveness, look after the poor and the needy etc. Jesus never preached hatred or intolerance, his basic message was a very positive one.

Many political ideologies sound a lot worse than this.

BliainanAir

Why don't some of the ticket booking heroes protest when people climb Croagh Patrick on the last Sunday in July? If you really want to make a statement about your hatred of Catholicism, irrationality and superstition.

No. That would take courage. Something lacking in our annonymous internet warriors. Besides you might get a few slaps.

Ah no, the protest of the pampered for you lot.

uck51js9zml2yt

These idiots block booking tickets are the antithesis of those they claim to hate for their "indoctrination of the masses"

In simple terms ....so they can understand.....its a case of the pot calling the kettle black!

jigglypuffstuff

Omackeral wrote: »

Why did God make me an imbecile so? That's his fault surely?

Nobody made you an imbecile... If you are one you have chosen that path.... although you do display it consistently in your posts

jigglypuffstuff

seamus wrote: »

Metaphors are fiction.

No metaphors are a figure of speech used to describe something...

I.e apples and oranges... unless you're suggesting that fruit everyone's eating is imaginary?

seamus

BliainanAir wrote: »

Why don't some of the ticket booking heroes protest when people climb Croagh Patrick on the last Sunday in July?

Probably because the Pope is busy that weekend?

Your inability to understand what the actual issue is, is pretty clear.

Nobody is protesting against, or targeting, Catholics. And you can all claim that all you like, but it's untrue.

The protest is targeted specifically against the organisation which is headed up by the Pope.