Question: Why should a non-Catholic be upset over the death of

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

a pontiff any more than the death of say, Billy Graham, the Dali Llama, Jim Jones, Sun Yung Moon, David Koresh or any other spiritual leader?

Granted, the above list is painted with a mighty wide brush, but they all had the same thing in common: They represented their own interpretation of a way of living.

At least two of the above led their people into death. Other Pontiffs did the same. So did other "reformed" Christians. Our current Pres is doing a pretty good job of selling death as a moral option at the moment. I guess I'm leading to the ultimate (in the bizarro times in which we live) question(s)...

Does following another absolve one from responsibility from wrong action? And, Just because a belief is old and venerated, is it right?

[Redstone]

1. I don't follow. Can you explain how your last two

questions relate to the subject of your post? I don't see the connection.

Thanks.

Redstone

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

3. They were rhetorical....

[Mz Pip]

2. I don't think anyone

is really upset. The Pope had been ill for awhile and it's not like this was unexpected. It's not really being upset to acknoledge and pay tribute to the passing of a world figure.

Putting the Pope in the same catagory as Jim Jones doesn't really fit. He had a following of around 1000. The pope has a following of millions.

I am no great supporter of organized religion but i do have to acknowledge that John Paul II was important to millions of people around the world.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Dookus]

4. I think it's unreasonable

to expect non-believers in general and non-catholics, more specifically, to somehow "mourn" the death of this Pope.

I have, and continue to, offer my condolences to those who revered him, but that does not mean I will let the immediate re-writing of history to go unchallenged. He was not a liberal. He was one of the most powerful forces for conservatism in modern times.

That said, I will not go to a Catholic discussion board and criticize his papacy. But I think it's really naive to expect that on a liberal discussion board, there will be any sort of unanimity of grief.

Minor tweak: It was David Koresh, not Michael.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

5. Oops.... Thanks, going to correct as we speak.

[Career Prole]

6. Ah, yes. If a soldier should be expected to disobey an unlawful order

from his superior officer should the same standard apply to a church official and the "flock"?

If you look at the Catholic order forbidding contraception, I believe that one is likely being roundly disobeyed. Just a hunch, of course...nothing empirical I can point to. :eyes:

[oppositionmember]

7. I'm a lapsed Catholic and I don't give a shit.

Really. Good guy, but mainly wrong about things.

[Inland]

8. I'll feel bad about the Dalai Lama

Because I like him. He seems like a decent enough person.

I think JP was a decent, compassionate man who thought and felt deeply, and had many admirable traits.

Billy Graham--he seems decent enough. He doesn't rap people on the knuckles like the other fundies.

Jim Jones was a homicidal maniac.

See the common thread? It isn't religion.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

10. I would have to disgree....

While methods and dogma seemed to be different, the base upon all that was built was the same between Koresh, Jones, Graham and the Pope.

[Inland]

12. Yeah, that little difference as to methods and dogma.

So what's left?

Jones and Koresh are homicidal madman who believed themselves God, and the others weren't.

At least I think the Pope and Graham aren't/weren't homicidal. Do you?

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

16. Of course I don't.

I guess what I'm trying to infer is that many religions lend themselves to the madmen as well as the saints and all points between. It's a powerful tool/instrument and is often used to less than honerable ends.

So many tragedies have occurred under the auspices of "God" or religion.

For me, it's scary stuff that seems to teter on the edge when people see religion as an instrument of power (or the gaining of power).

[Undercover Owl]

9. I'm not upset.

Tom Y-J:
Let's see: You are frustrated because you think there is an expectation that you are supposed to be upset at the pope's death? You aren't sad that the pope's dead, and you think people might judge you for not being sad?

As a fellow non-Catholic, I don't feel a bit upset, either. It's okay to not be sad.:grouphug:

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

11. LOL....

That's good!

[Undercover Owl]

13. LOL

I wasn't exactly sure what your point was, on your original post, so I just took a guess. I was being kind of tongue-in-cheek.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

14. Hehe...

We need more tongue in cheek and thicker skins around here.

[JanMichael]

15. Two questions? Answer to numero uno: I'm not at all upset.

There is no concievable reason why I should be either.

Answer to numer dwa: No and no.

[Sgent]

17. Although not upset

I mourn the passing of Pope John Paul II.

From my religious perspective, he was the shining example of the righteous gentile. He was a friend to my people (the Jews), and has done more to alleviate the tensions -- often times deadly -- between my faith and his than anyone in the last 1000 years.