General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAs an agnostic Jew, I'm a big fan of one Jesus quotation:
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Grateful for Hope (a host of the General Discussion forum).
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
I think it's a good rule of thumb for atheists and agnostics to follow. If you really want to broad-brush DU Catholics--not simply the Church hierarchy, but ordinary left-leaning people who admit to going to mass--as enablers of pedophilia and supporters of genocide and other such rot...
...well, it's not like nonbelievers have an unblemished record, especially in the last century. I don't want to start a pissing contest, but if we're allowed to tie them to the worst aspects of their worldview, they're allowed to tie us to the worst offshoots of ours. (Undiluted Ayn Rand Objectivism is only the tip of the iceberg, unfortunately.)
This is the part of being a nonbeliever where I take a slightly different tactic from others I know. Sure, you CAN bray on and on about "that invisible man in the sky that all you idiots believe in!" but isn't that just prosthelytizing under a different name? My belief in a universe without a definite Creator is self-evident to me, and I don't see the need to browbeat strangers into coming to my conclusions.
But whatever. Feel free to call me holier-than-thou below, ironically or otherwise. Let me just say that even though I believe in a rational scientific universe, I still find it humongous and awe-inspiring and troubling enough to agree with Jesus on one more point: a little bit of humility is never a bad thing.
demosocialist
(184 posts)Jenoch
(7,720 posts)I have seen in recent days on DU featuring this Romainian girl. Now I wonder how many other videos she has posted and on what subjects.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)TeeYiYi
(8,028 posts)TYY
HarveyDarkey
(9,077 posts)I've been subscribed to her on You Tube for ages & am friends with her on Facebook.
She's a very intelligent young woman, and not to mention gorgeous.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)El Supremo
(20,436 posts)It was not in any of the earliest known versions of John or any gospel. It was added later. We don't know why.
Schema Thing
(10,283 posts)Martin Eden
(15,622 posts)(sorry, couldn't resist)
Cirque du So-What
(29,724 posts)It's still a heckuva good precept, regardless of its basis in scripture. As a recovering protestant, I always had a problem with the dogma relating to salvation insisting that faith alone is sufficient. How can anyone purporting to be a good Christian lead their life seemingly oblivious to the teachings of Jesus - teachings that I've seen practiced by atheists, agnostics & people of other faiths more often than among so-called 'Christians?' I find it far more honorable to follow what Jesus taught than to act like a misanthrope and claim 'forgiveness' based upon belief.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Melinda
(5,465 posts)Christ was not a bigot, period; Wisdom should always prevail. I appreciate your post, thank you.
Schema Thing
(10,283 posts)But I must admit to having mild and sometimes more than mild irritation at all the papal hoopla of the past several weeks.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)That's right--nothing.
Anti-GLBTQ bigotry isn't Christian, it's just bigotry.
Cirque du So-What
(29,724 posts)Jesus had quite a lot to say on the subject of money, for example:
I don't see too many adherents to so-called 'prosperity gospel' doing anything remotely like this, and I see more of the Pharisees and money-changers in society than anything resembling what Jesus taught. Instead, the bigots of society turn to the Old Testament and cherry-pick admonitions from Leviticus or Deuteronomy while turning a blind eye to the rest of what is contained therein, flaunting their mixed fabrics in polite company as they do - all the while feasting upon pork and crustaceans.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)The problem many of us have with Christian organizations of all flavors is their nearly universal refusal to do anything their god told them to do.
Assuming that he ever even existed, that Jesus guy had a few very explicit, hard and fast rules. Rules that, if they were followed, would make the people that believe in him really good people.
Maybe the real problem is that "no liability clause". You can do anything you want to anybody you want as long as you say you're sorry before you die.
amuse bouche
(3,672 posts)el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)I hope one of isn't "We are mad at the Catholic church, not the members of the Catholic Church." There have been at least a few posts that are mad at both.
Bryant
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)That identifying a fantasy as a fantasy is proselytizing. That humility is the province of religiosity.
As for the members of these fantasy clubs, the one inescapable truth is that the club can't exist without its members. So whether they agree with the bosses or not, they are culpable for the actions of the club.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Because of course proselytizing believers believe that those who disagree with them are factually in correct as well. That said, your last paragraph does make it pretty clear where you come down on the issue of believers in general, and, I assume, DU believers in particular.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Identifying a thing is not an attempt to convert or recruit.
And your weak attempt to twist my statement into an attack on DUers "in particular" doesn't hold any more water than the rest of this nonsense.
Just read your book, follow your rules (especially the one about keeping it to yourself), and we'll all get along fine.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)I don't mean you are targeting Catholic DUers or religious DUers specifically - you are just attributing to them all the criticisms you have of Catholics or religion in general. I apologize for my bad word choice.
Bryant
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Add the still prevalent atheist bigotry and stunning ignorance of almost all believers in regard to their own beliefs and this topic becomes one that I'll be happy to see go back to its own forum.
Now, if we can only get the guns out of GD, we can go back to screaming about politics.
Thanks.
Jeff In Milwaukee
(13,992 posts)The problem many of us have with Christian organizations of all flavors is their nearly universal refusal to do anything their god told them to do.
It's not his fault that many of his followers are loud-mouthed dolts. And I say that as a Christian myself.
If you look at the New Testament as a general guide for living your life ("The Jefferson Bible" and all that), then this Jesus guy becomes more than just a series of reasons to despise and oppress other people. It's all the extrapolting that has been done in his name that causes the problem.
Or in the words of the Doobie Brothers:
Doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo
Doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo
Doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo
Doo doo doo doo doo doo
Jesus is just alright with me
Jesus is just alright, oh yeah
Jesus is just alright with me
Jesus is just alright
sendero
(28,552 posts).. try the vast majority.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)To which he replied:
Mother, sometimes you really piss me off.
MH1
(19,156 posts)treat women as second-class citizens.
(unless you consider taxes, for the treatment of women thing, but those are, after all, legally required unless I move to another country.)
On the other hand, I recced this thread because I think it is rather shallow to treat members of a religion as if the only thing that matters is the bad things their religion does; and because I think this is a conversation that needs to be had.
On the other hand, I cannot fathom why anyone would contribute to the Catholic Church generally, when the Catholic Church is guilty on so many counts - BUT just because I can't fathom something doesn't make it wrong. There may be mitigating factors of which I know nothing. Also, many people probably donate to specific efforts of the Church rather than to the general fund. In those cases the ethical math is less clear; and it is not for me to judge anyway. (Another good Jesus quote is along the lines of, "judge not lest ye be judged", or "judge others as you would be judged" depending on the translation.)
DavidDvorkin
(20,589 posts)And I'm an ex-Jew who is willing to cast that stone even though I'm not without sin when it comes to grammar.
El Supremo
(20,436 posts)I prefer the NRSV: "Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.
DavidDvorkin
(20,589 posts)Shame!
OriginalGeek
(12,132 posts)Might as well be reading from the Necronomicon!
KJV or NO V!
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Hekate
(100,133 posts)As I tell my grandson, now 8 y.o., "Jesus was a very wise teacher of compassion."
DrDan
(20,411 posts)unwilling to accept differences in beliefs/non-beliefs
gotta question how liberal/progressive they actually are
sangsaran
(67 posts)Wrong beliefs lead to wrong action.
It's only right to make sure an idea is correct before we believe in it.
Lex
(34,108 posts)would expect liberals/progressives to embrace them?
Being liberal/progressive doesn't mean embracing sexism, homophobia, racism, and any number of other things.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)my point is that l/p's should be accepting of others with differing views regarding religious beliefs
Good heavens - get real
Lex
(34,108 posts)So why be accepting of that?
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Fuck that shit.
Martin Eden
(15,622 posts)I am not without sin, but I cast verbal stones at the neocons who believe they were justified in LYING to the American people to launch their Project for the New American Century with their invasion of Iraq. They believed the war would transform the Middle East for the better and enhance America's standing as the leader of the free world.
I am not without sin, but I cast verbal stones at those who believe that global warming is a hoax, or the president is a marxist born in Kenya, or health care reform included death panels to kill granny.
Are those beliefs simply different than my own and equally valid?
I would argue that some beliefs held by millions of people are demonstrably false and NEED to be stoned out of existence, if possible.
I do not include belief in God or the divinity of Jesus as demonstrably false. My own agnosticism is based on the impossibility of conclusively proving or disproving such beliefs.
But the heiracrchy of the Catholic church deserves stones cast at them as long as they fail to do everything within their power to eradicate the sexual abuse of children by their priests.
We can't depend on sinless human beings to cast those stones (they are more likely to be powerless victims of the abuse).
sarisataka
(22,694 posts)"Love your neighbor as yourself"
I have found gems of wisdom in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Shintoism, and several secular -isms. Last year I found participating in a Menorah lighting and listening to the Rabbi to be enlightening on several levels; yet I have no desire to convert to any other belief.
I do wish more people could accept the wisdom of a philosophy, even when they do not follow or even disagree with the philosophy. A broken clock...
sangsaran
(67 posts)...Honest question.
sarisataka
(22,694 posts)... honest answer.
I visit a therapist regularly; my career involves the use of firearms and my demographic is extremely high re: suicide risk. I have no urge to injure myself or anyone else, but it is beneficial to get an outside opinion.
I have also found help where I did not realize I even had issues. I understand my brothers and sisters who were in Viet Nam, fight or flight is hard to turn off when you don't even realize it is on.
Everyone has value even when they do not see it. If this applies to you or someone you know, encourage them to talk to a professional.
sangsaran
(67 posts)Too true.
Martin Eden
(15,622 posts)... at first glance I thought the series of posts was a schizophrenic debating himself
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)when they think their 'beliefs' give them justification to ban contraceptives, abortion, same sex marriage, you bet I'm going to 'browbeat' those beliefs.
That said, half of Catholics approve of same sex marriage. In spite of their 'religious beliefs' (dogma).
I have seen implications of protectionism, and acceptance around the child abuse stuff... Not sure what to think about that. But around the political issues, like same sex marriage, people here on DU savaging the pope based on his own statements, church dogma, etc, are not criticisms of the individuals that claim to be catholic. They can hold differing views on these issues. But the church leadership, and the official church dogma deserves those slings and arrows, because their official position is to crap on civil liberties in multiple dimensions, and that just can't go unopposed.
As far as condemning every tithing member of the church for the protectionism of pedophile priests... That might be a bridge too far. At most I would say to them 'you need to fucking clean your house', based on the behavior of upper church leadership working actively to relocate and protect those priests. It is within their power to do so, or abandon it and strike out on their own, retaining their faith, but abandoning the church hierarchy that has actually already abandoned them. But I don't believe that makes them complicit in the abuse. I see lots of them working to correct this problem, and that's good. It just needs to percolate up to the leadership.
Maybe have another inquisition, looking for, instead of heretics, root out child abusers.
backscatter712
(26,357 posts)I guess that means nobody is allowed to criticize anybody, ever? That's just silly.
After all that's gone on in the RCC, I think we have the right to criticize.
nolabear
(43,850 posts)Lex
(34,108 posts)when he slurs gay folks.
wryter2000
(47,940 posts)Exactly! Thank you so much.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Grateful for Hope
(39,320 posts)This thread would be a much better candidate for the old Meta forum. Thanks.