What’s your most controversial opinion? **Read OP** **Mod Warning in Post #8023**

Don't know if you missed the point or ignored it !!

Education was sort of important to all that progress. if your saying that none of that was linked to Christian institutions you ll have to go back to google,

Liberal democracy didnt just appear out of nowhere , all these things had t start somewhere

John Locke - Wikipedia Puritan educated in a succession of religious schools

the fact that the US has reference to god on its other great religion(money) is the point ??? btw in god we trust has been on us currency since 1864 and is taken from their national anthem

google isnt always your friend :-)

Nobody is entitled to social welfare, simple as that.

Laws can be changed.

My controversial opinion is that Trump and Netanyahu have done the world a service in neutering Hamas, Hezbollah and now Iran.

To all those who celebrated the October 7 massacre- how’s that going for you? x

Ah yes. I definitely missed the point. If you're counting it as a win for Christianity that Locke advocated against Christianity running the government and we now enjoy a the benefits of secular government. But Locke was educated by Christians so it's actually thanks to Christianity that Christianity didn't get what it wanted.

If you're willing to take Christianity losing influence as an example of Christianity making the world better then it's 'heads you wins, tails I lose'.

Any interest in a regime change in Israel who have murdered minimum 50k women and children?

Explain your point or leave it so

Again ? ok

The progress made in western Europe up until the last 50 or so years was due in large part to religious institutions ie collages schools and hospitals and patronage.

Cultural and intellectual progressions like the age on enlightenment while contrary to the church were also facilitated by religious institutions thus shaping modern Europe

now keep the auld passive aggressiveness to your self if you please unless you've taken up moding

How's that different to what i said?

You bought up Locke as an example of an enlightenment character who contributed to the modern world and was educated by Christians. He was educated enough to know Christianity shouldn't control government. Getting rid of Christianity from government has improved the modern world. And you're claiming it as a win for Christianity because they were forced out of the way of progress by someone who was educated aged by Christians, so they facilitated progress.

i don't need to waste any more time going in circles with you

post 8833

Ok.

It's probably best to just say we owe the things we enjoy to Christianity, and everyone nods along and we move on. If someone asks to explain it, it becomes complicated and difficult to articulate. Best not waste any time explaining what you mean. It's simpler that way

All those raped altar boys and girls, all those dead babies shoved into septic tanks, all those fallen women, locked away for decades and their children stolen from them and sold like cattle, the 9 million people killed during the crusades, the blatant sexism that's rife within the entire ethos of the religion, the hypocrisy and cherry-picking of which bits of the bible to follow……..no mention of those, no? Well I'll be…..

No, thanks. If we're getting rid of all religions, we'll start with the biggest one first. Lead by example and all that. If you're happy exterminating one religion, you're happy with your religion being exterminated then also, correct? I mean, it's not like the god-botherers to be hypocrites now, is it?

We'll deal with the western culture of self-hating at a later date…

I’m struggling to make sense of the idea that you would give credit to the RCC for the creation of modern Europe, while at the same time lamenting Western cultures self-hatred. Certainly the RCC has a not-so unique selling point in that it proposes both the problem with Western culture, and claims to provide the solution, but I’m not in the habit of giving credit where it isn’t due, and the development of modern Europe and Western culture was in spite of, rather than because of the RCC. This is particularly evident in terms of the development of modern Ireland.

And if it matters, I'm an atheist of non catholic background, and I'm still giving RCC a pass, not only because it gave us modern Europe, it also had a vital role in helping Ireland survive and get her independence.

It doesn’t matter (though I did find it somewhat amusing that the assumption was made based upon your objection to another religion, as though that could be the only reason for your objection). The RCC did not give us modern Europe, and that wasn’t for the lack of trying to do so with their constant interference in social, political and economic policies of various European countries. Ireland was no exception, where rather than helping Ireland survive and get her independence, the intervention of the RCC was solely intended to serve it’s own interests in propagating itself. Ireland gained its independence from Britain in spite of, rather than because of, the RCC. Regardless of whichever side would have been victorious in the Civil War, the RCC were keen to ensure their continued dominant influence in Irish society, which they managed to maintain quite successfully up until about the time when Ireland joined its other European counterparts who had already long rejected the influence of the Church in affairs of the State.

https://www.jcfj.ie/article/the-catholic-church-the-state-and-society-in-independent-ireland-1922-2022/

If the recognition of the fundamental human right of freedom of religion is what you’re referring to as self-hatred, the implication that the right includes freedom from religion, is a modern interpretation which has long been opposed by the Church, again in the interests of its own self-preservation as opposed to any altruistic motivation to improve Western society. Vatican II was simply recognition by the Church that having found itself up the creek without a paddle and lacking any credible moral authority in Western society, it attempted a more moderate appeal to religious pluralism in an attempt to maintain itself as a credible moral authority, a fairly transparent attempt to remain relevant that its evident has failed spectacularly, as has been borne out by the development of Western society.