The Catholic Church Ate My Hamsters!

Guill · 12-01-2012 02:24AM

When you can look at the world though an open mind then you will see the damage that religion has done and continues to do, it may not be directly targeted at you, but it is damaging all the same.

Father Damo · 12-01-2012 02:27AM

Guill wrote: »

When you can look at the world though an open mind then you will see the damage that religion has done and continues to do, it may not be directly targeted at you, but it is damaging all the same.

Of course.

Cults, Scientology, fundamentalist Islam and Southern States Apple Pie Christianity are certainly destroying lives.

I think even the most rabid frothing athiest wouldnt argue against the assertion that the catholic church does alot more good than bad these days in terms of humanitarian work to people of all faiths.

AngryBollix · 12-01-2012 02:27AM

Father Damo wrote: »

And you should read this

I would certainly agree that athiesm has a place in American society. At the moment right wing Protestantism from the south is arguably a bigger threat to the western world than millitant Islam, seeing as lunatics like Sarah Palin have come reasonably close to getting a presidential berth. In Europe our nearest miss was Dana doing poorly in attempting to secure a ceremonial position.

On the one hand you highlight "right wing protestianism" as a bigger threat to the western world than militant islam without mentioning the fact that these right wing protestants wouldnt be in a position of international political power and influence without the support of the majority of the american electorate. While religious persuasion is often a factor in the outcome of US elections it isnt the be all and end all.

Butterface · 12-01-2012 02:27AM

You're using the word athiest to describe people who are fervently anti-Catholic. Not all athiests are anti-religion. You should change the wording on your post, so as not to spread your ignorance.

chucken1 · 12-01-2012 02:28AM

ScienceNerd wrote: »

Rugby and Limerick... glad I just stocked up on cans thanks

I was just pointing out that the pubs were open

Paparazzo · 12-01-2012 02:29AM

Kepti wrote: »

What is your definition of a militant atheist? And why is it only acceptable to be one if you've been molested by a priest?

Good point. Similar to my Hitler one.

Father Damo, if I didn't like some paedo in the newspapers, would I be pathetic because ne never actually molested me?

Father Damo · 12-01-2012 02:32AM

Butterface wrote: »

You're using the word athiest to describe people who are fervently anti-Catholic. Not all athiests are anti-religion. You should change the wording on your post, so as not to spread your ignorance.

But that is my exact point. If people dont believe in religion, fair enough. I will get my kids christened out of tradition, but do I believe in it? I havent a clue, its simply something I have never given much thought to. I also dont know whether I believe in aliens, or ghosts. Or whether Nostradamus was right or a chancer. I just dont engage with things I cant see for myself and I dont let it rule my life.

But there is a difference in not believing and engaging in cult like hero worship of Richard Dawkins, buying his sh1te books and filling his bank account. Its cult like behaviour in itself. I think Christopher Hitchens put it best in saying about his impending death that he didnt believe in God or heaven but that he wouldnt mind a surprise :pac:

joshrogan · 12-01-2012 02:32AM

AngryBollix wrote: »

Whatever point you tried to make has been utterly invalidated by the use of a wikipedia article. Surely you could have done better

What is wrong with using Wikipedia outside of academia?

Father Damo · 12-01-2012 02:34AM

Paparazzo wrote: »

Good point. Similar to my Hitler one.

Father Damo, if I didn't like some paedo in the newspapers, would I be pathetic because ne never actually molested me?

Say there's 200 million priests in the world, and 5% of them are paedophiles, that's still only 10 million.

Had to throw the Ted one in there

People seem to forget that when all this was happening in the industrial schools there was Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, the Gardai, the health boards....there was all these different organisations who failed to act or turned a blind eye to what was happening, not just the church.

AngryBollix · 12-01-2012 02:34AM

Guill wrote: »

When you can look at the world though an open mind then you will see the damage that religion has done and continues to do, it may not be directly targeted at you, but it is damaging all the same.

What about the flip side to that coin?

While nobody can deny the harm that has been caused in the name of god and religion, decent people of faith have improved the lives of those around them and done good work which is sometimes overlooked

GLaDOS · 12-01-2012 02:34AM

Father Damo wrote: »

But there is a difference in not believing and engaging in cult like hero worship of Richard Dawkins, buying his sh1te books and filling his bank account.

A lot of atheists (both and anti-religious and indifferent) dislike Dawkins quite a bit.

I think your understanding of Atheism is flawed.

AngryBollix · 12-01-2012 02:35AM

joshrogan wrote: »

What is wrong with using Wikipedia outside of academia?

Relax. It was somewhat tongue in cheek.

later12 · 12-01-2012 02:36AM

Father Damo wrote: »

But if nobody is listening, who cares?

I generally agree with this motto.

The problem is that some people evidently do listen. Catholic morality can, and does, seep into everyday life and influence the public perception of morality at large.

Not only is the illegality of abortion in Ireland likely to be the relic of Ireland's special relationship with Roman Catholicism, but the artifact of that relationship is even to be seen in cases where the state has legistlated relatively recently. One example which comes immediately to mind is Irish divorce law (despite the fact that divorce is finally legal, it still takes a ridiculously long time to secure a divorce in Ireland).

In Ireland, and around Europe, the Christian churches' various positions on homosexuality are reasonably argued to have greatly influenced public morality and therefore fostered a distaste for full gay marriage rights on an ongoing basis.

The influence of the church can affect individuals in society in a non legislative manner as well. It can be seen in the families who have to hide their marital problems from (usually) elder family members, or who keep sexual orientation quiet so as not to upset such family members - the implication for the individuals concerned being that there is something morally questionable about their identity or situation.

Your line of reasoning completely fails to engage with the influence of Catholic philosophy upon Irish society, a philosophy which I feel still resonates with a significant cohort of the population, whether they be direct believers or passive pew fillers.

joshrogan · 12-01-2012 02:36AM

AngryBollix wrote: »

Relax. It was somewhat tongue in cheek.

Next time I demand the use of the :pac:

newmug · 12-01-2012 02:37AM

ScienceNerd wrote: »

Here's some from just the other day

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/09/us-pope-gay-idUSTRE8081RM20120109

So now its wrong to oppose gay marraige?

The word homophobia reminds me more of the incident in Scotland where a gay was handcuffed to a lamppost and set on fire, not an opinion that gay marraige might undermine the place of the family unit in society.

Not everybody is ok with gayness, Catholic or not.

AngryBollix · 12-01-2012 02:39AM

joshrogan wrote: »

Next time I demand the use of the :pac:

Kepti · 12-01-2012 02:41AM

Father Damo wrote: »

But there is a difference in not believing and engaging in cult like hero worship of Richard Dawkins, buying his sh1te books and filling his bank account. Its cult like behaviour in itself. I think Christopher Hitchens put it best in saying about his impending death that he didnt believe in God or heaven but that he wouldnt mind a surprise :pac:

That's akin to saying that Harry Potter fans are like a cult. You're just arguing against a caricature that you've invented.

Bannasidhe · 12-01-2012 02:42AM

newmug wrote: »

So now its wrong to oppose gay marraige?

The word homophobia reminds me more of the incident in Scotland where a gay was handcuffed to a lamppost and set on fire, not an opinion that gay marraige might undermine the place of the family unit in society.

Not everybody is ok with gayness, Catholic or not.

WTF? Its' only homophobia if you're manacled and set on fire?????:eek:

'Not everybody is ok with gayness, Catholic or not' - oh, well. It that case....:rolleyes:

later12 · 12-01-2012 02:43AM

newmug wrote: »

So now its wrong to oppose gay marraige?

You sound surprised that it would be wrong to deny someone the facility of marriage - which to my mind amounts to a tax arrangement, but also next of kin decisions, child custody and adoption law - solely on the basis that the other partner has a pair of balls where his vagina would be.

What exactly is the relevance of that pair of balls to the refusal to grant an individual the right to marriage?

Father Damo · 12-01-2012 02:44AM

later10 wrote: »

I generally agree with this motto.

The problem is that some people evidently do listen. Catholic morality can, and does, seep into everyday life and influence the public perception of morality at large.

I will certainly agree with that one. Living in Australia Ive known alot of English people obviously, and alot of birdss will casually talk about having pulled some lad the night before and going back to his the same way me and the lads would talk about pulling a bird. I could probably count on my fingers the amount of Irish girls who Ive ever heard talking that frankly infront of men, hell in Ireland even slappers get offended by people insinuitating they have been about- certainly would be a leftover from the church thinking Id agree.

The influence of the church can affect individuals in society in a non legislative manner as well. It can be seen in the families who have to hide their marital problems from (usually) elder family members, or who keep sexual orientation quiet so as not to upset such family members - the implication for the individuals concerned being that there is something morally questionable about their identity or situation.

One should wonder though, is this Catholic or is this Celtic? How come certain, shall we say, tougher, warrior type cultures like the descendants of Romans, Celts, large swathes of Eastern Europe etc etc seem to replicate stronger religious and moral beliefs in the culture of modern day Italy, Greece and Ireland , whereas the Dutch, French, English etc etc have more liberal views. Were we conservative before the church and found its moral code to be in line with what we had already?

Pace2008 · 12-01-2012 02:50AM

newmug wrote: »

So now its wrong to oppose gay marraige?

It is an outmoded and discriminatory outlook, which I would view along the lines of opposing interracial marriage. In my relativistic moral opinion, it is wrong, yes.

The word homophobia reminds me more of the incident in Scotland where a gay was handcuffed to a lamppost and set on fire, not an opinion that gay marraige might undermine the place of the family unit in society.

That is just an extreme form of homophobia taken to its brutal logical conclusion (assuming that the attack was motivated by the victim's sexuality). I would consider the view that gay sex is wrong to be homophobic as well.

Considering a black person to be inferior by virtue of their skin colour is racist, just not as extreme a form of racism as lynching them. Viewing gay sex as immoral is homophobic, just not as homophobic as setting them on fire.

Not everybody is ok with gayness, Catholic or not.

No, but the vast majority of anti-gay sentiment does seem to come from religious quarters, Catholic or not.

Bannasidhe · 12-01-2012 02:52AM

Father Damo wrote: »

I will certainly agree with that one. Living in Australia Ive known alot of English people obviously, and alot of birdss will casually talk about having pulled some lad the night before and going back to his the same way me and the lads would talk about pulling a bird. I could probably count on my fingers the amount of Irish girls who Ive ever heard talking that frankly infront of men, hell in Ireland even slappers get offended by people insinuitating they have been about- certainly would be a leftover from the church thinking Id agree.

One should wonder though, is this Catholic or is this Celtic? How come certain, shall we say, tougher, warrior type cultures like the descendants of Romans, Celts, large swathes of Eastern Europe etc etc seem to replicate stronger religious and moral beliefs in the culture of modern day Italy, Greece and Ireland , whereas the Dutch, French, English etc etc have more liberal views. Were we conservative before the church and found its moral code to be in line with what we had already?

The Gaelic Irish were far from sexually conservative quite the opposite.

. Sexual Equality

Ancient Irish laws, called the Brehon Laws, provided women full equality with men. That’s right, they could inherit property or bequeath their own; they could marry or divorce the man of their choosing; even the right of a woman to experience satisfaction in marriage was enshrined in its legal framework. In Europe, where burning uppity women at the stake became a national pastime, the Irish attitude to sexual equality between the sexes was nothing short of revolutionary. Stamping out of the Brehon Laws, and with them the rights of women, was finally accomplished under Queen Elizabeth of England.

2. The land of sex and sinners

When it came to matters of love Edmund Spenser, the Elizabethan poet, was appalled by Irish men, who were in the main, he wrote, a bunch of lascivious bisexuals who offered themselves freely to both women and men before his shocked gaze. Spencer enthusiastically recommended the extermination of the Irish race but was himself burned out of his famous castle in County Cork.

Read more: http://www.irishcentral.com/roots/Bad-romance-10-surprising-facts-about-the-Irish-and-sex-128767353.html#ixzz1jCkM4OOQ

Fairly simplistic outline but essentially correct. If you would prefer a more academic source have a read of Fergus Kelly's Guide to Early Irish Law.

joseph brand · 12-01-2012 02:56AM

Father Damo wrote: »

Say there's 200 million priests in the world, and 5% of them are paedophiles, that's still only 10 million.

Had to throw the Ted one in there People seem to forget that when all this was happening in the industrial schools there was Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, the Gardai, the health boards....there was all these different organisations who failed to act or turned a blind eye to what was happening, not just the church.

/facepalm

When a church has enough power and influence, they tend to get away with a lot of things. Just because the ugly tentacles of the church never touched you, doesn't mean that they do not warrant criticism.

I know a few gay people, and when I hear the church's opinions on this matter, it angers me. My own Dad (church goer) calls gay men paedophiles.

He also approves what the church teaches on the use of condoms.

Pope Benedict XVI said:

HIV/Aids is a tragedy that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which can even increase the problem

Some of us don't like cruelty, injustice and wrongdoing. The church is guilty of all this and more.

joseph brand · 12-01-2012 02:57AM

newmug wrote: »

So now its wrong to oppose gay marraige?

The word homophobia reminds me more of the incident in Scotland where a gay was handcuffed to a lamppost and set on fire, not an opinion that gay marraige might undermine the place of the family unit in society.

Not everybody is ok with gayness, Catholic or not.

Father Damo · 12-01-2012 03:00AM

joseph brand wrote: »

/facepalm

When a church has enough power and influence, they tend to get away with a lot of things. Just because the ugly tentacles of the church never touched you, doesn't mean that they do not warrant criticism.

But its hardly happening in Ireland 2012 is it.

[QUOTES] My own Dad (church goer) calls gay men paedophiles.

[/quote]

As would a few lads in their 20s who drink in bars I drink in.

Most of whom probably havent been to mass since their teens and have forgotten how to bless themselves. Im not sure the church has anything to do with it.

He also approves what the church teaches on the use of condoms.

Pope Benedict XVI said:

HIV/Aids is a tragedy that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which can even increase the problem
.

Several African politicians have made similar claims. It is the fault of the individual if they decide to go on the word of these wannabe magicians rather than medical advice.

Chuck Stone · 12-01-2012 03:00AM

Father Damo wrote: »

A millitant athiest is someone who has some sort of victim wish about their childhood.

Father Damo wrote: »

I think even the most rabid frothing athiest wouldnt argue against...

Father Damo wrote: »

But there is a difference in not believing and engaging in cult like hero worship of Richard Dawkins, buying his sh1te books and filling his bank account. Its cult like behaviour in itself.

So what you've effectively done in this thread is reverse the polarity of reality and attempted to paint people who reject institutional religion as the ones who are intolerant members of a cult?

That's a very impressive distortion of reality that is.

later12 · 12-01-2012 03:04AM

Father Damo wrote: »

. Were we conservative before the church and found its moral code to be in line with what we had already?

Yes, I think that's likely to have been very much the case.

It's likely that Christianity partially formalised a social system which had already existed in Ireland, changed a little of what was different, and retained other aspects for itself.

But no human being is born at a specific point along the scale of conservatism. Philosophy is not genetic. Catholic morality has traditionally been Irish society's acquired phenotype, not its innate one. It self perpetuates down the generations through observed actions and social customs, not bloodlines.

Would Catholic-influenced morality still self-perpetuate in the total absence of the Catholic Church? Possibly, yes. But at least it would be more exposed to question and criticism, not dressed up in the garb and sanctity of a religious faith which almost legitimises it simply because it's someone's faith, and that's off limits.

Overheal · 12-01-2012 03:05AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

So what you've effectively done in this thread is reverse the polarity of reality and attempted to paint people who reject institutional religion as the ones who are intolerant members of a cult?

That's a very impressive distortion of reality that is.

Hence the allegory of the cave.

I hope this guy gets irony.

Father Damo · 12-01-2012 03:06AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

So what you've effectively done in this thread is reverse the polarity of reality and attempted to paint people who reject institutional religion as the ones who are intolerant members of a cult?

Im just more amused at Irish people rebelling against something that in 2012 Ireland is a non existant problem! We could have done with all this in the 1950s when there was actually something to rebel against. If anything the church killed itself off by putting little to no importance in indoctrinating kids through the schools.

Overheal · 12-01-2012 03:07AM

Father Damo wrote: »

Im just more amused at Irish people rebelling against something that in 2012 Ireland is a non existant problem! We could have done with all this in the 1950s when there was actually something to rebel against. If anything the church killed itself off by putting little to no importance in indoctrinating kids through the schools.

Is that you agent Smith?

The Catholic Church Ate My Hamsters!

Comments