So who's going to see the Pope?

pone2012 wrote: »

Well generally an opinion requires substantiation... so I'm waiting...

So far you've done nothing except prove your ignorance and display your intolerance

It's got miracles and sh*t in it. How come none of those things happen now that we have camera phones on our person? That was easy.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm curious if people would feel the same if it was a Trump rally here.

Would people object if protesters were block booking free seats to make the rally look empty?

I'd still have the same objection, that it is just being done to spite other people. There's plenty of people I don't agree with, or ideologies I don't agree with, or ideologies I am vehemently opposed to, say feminism or socialism for example, but I would rather people see for themselves why those ideologies are terrible, than deny anyone the opportunity to make up their own minds.

They're not ideas I would either be interested in or support, but I'm not so insecure in myself and my own ideas that I can't handle someone having different beliefs or sharing a different ideology to my own.

pone2012 wrote: »

Perhaps the miracles are coded in esoteric symbolism and language and you have misinterpreted them greatly

For one...the water to wine at the wedding is about changing the mindset from mundane things such as reflecting objects...to lucid experience...or flow ( in Psychological terms)

We can discuss others....but the fact that the majority of people take the Bible literally and attempt the discredit it based on that is quite silly really

That really is quite silly

Hitman3000 wrote: »

It's quite funny to think that a pair of Penguins walked all the way from Antarctica to get on the Ark.

:eek::pac:

pone2012 wrote: »

Well no... it's a metaphor... however...one requires a certain level of intelligence to correctly interpret it

Perhaps you lack such intelligence im not sure? The posts you make certainly suggest so

so i'm not smart enough to understand the big book of fairy tales. gotcha.

pone2012 wrote: »

Well no... it's a metaphor... however...one requires a certain level of intelligence to correctly interpret it

Perhaps you lack such intelligence im not sure? The posts you make certainly suggest so

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

kunst nugget wrote: »

Adam and Eve… God creating the earth in six days… Noah living until 350 years of age… I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that maybe these things aren't true.

Not forgetting Enoch who never actually died. He is still alive.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it is simple biology. though i'm not surprised you dont understand how that works.

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:

Hitman3000 wrote: »

You miss some of the comments your namesake made about his own daughter? Think I would have choose a different name if I were trying to occupy some high moral ground.

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

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?

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.

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:

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.

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.

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