Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Pope does not like atheists

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    2Scoops wrote: »
    I simply object to the subtle implication that scientific progress is bad guy when it's really mankind's track record regarding moral and ethical progress.

    If you could point that part out to me it would be just swell! If you can't, then I can only assume that this is just a case of you interpreting something based on your personal dislike of the man and what he represents.
    2Scoops wrote: »
    I'm also guilty and reading too deeply into things at times because I'm concerned with the subtleties of language and how they can affect people.

    Ah! A guardian against subtle implication. It's a shame though, that you are unable to link your misreading of the Popes message with your own admission that you are guilty of reading too deeply into things.

    I know... seems that you are such a stalwart against the misuse of the subtleties of language, why not start off with the deliberately misleading thread title.

    Huzza!


  • Options
    #33
    2Scoops
    Registered Users Posts: 1,845 ✭✭✭2Scoops


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    If you could point that part out to me it would be just swell! If you can't, then I can only assume that this is just a case of you interpreting something based on your personal dislike of the man and what he represents.

    I've already explained my position in previous posts, which you obviously haven't bothered to read closely. I have no particular dislike of the Pope or what he represents, I simply object to his injudicious use of language. Perhaps, in your rush to label me with your preconceived notions of angry militant atheists and their opinions, you missed my point entirely.

    I've admitted my initial error in incorrectly attributing comments to the Pope that were actually from journalists. I agree that his comments overtly appear to be pro-science. I also maintain that he (perhaps unknowingly) is being unfair when he says science "can also destroy mankind and the world unless it is steered by forces that lie outside it" and that itb "opens up appalling possibilities for evil" because it suggests that, un-steered, it will destroy us i.e. that science is inherently dangerous, which I disagree with it.

    And this whole issue was only a very minor part of my first post in this thread which was more concerned with his conflating of atheism, materialism and other modern nasties.
    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Ah! A guardian against subtle implication. It's a shame though, that you are unable to link your misreading of the Popes message with your own admission that you are guilty of reading too deeply into things.

    Hmm, looks like you're too interested in trying to put the boot in than to actually engage in discussion and try to see my point. One last appeal: read my posts. Tbh, I have little further time for you if you cannot grant that small indulgence.


  • Options
    #34
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    I think I'll bow out of this discussion with you now 2scoops, lest you accuse me of not reading any more of your posts :eek: You are obviously content with seeing the spectre of an attack on science floating between the lines of his words. Sure why not PM the Pope and ask him what he meant - I think I saw PopeBenny around here somewhere.


    It's a perfectly logical and reasonable to state that science has the posibility to cause great harm if there is not the moral framework to accompany it. Indeed, I'd argue that this kind of 'under the microscope' questioning is fundamental to science.


  • Options
    #35
    2Scoops
    Registered Users Posts: 1,845 ✭✭✭2Scoops


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    I think I'll bow out of this discussion with you now 2scoops, lest you accuse me of not reading any more of your posts :eek: You are obviously content with seeing the spectre of an attack on science floating between the lines of his words.

    No arguments here.
    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    It's a perfectly logical and reasonable to state that science has the posibility to cause great harm if there is not the moral framework to accompany it. Indeed, I'd argue that this kind of 'under the microscope' questioning is fundamental to science.

    Again, something I completely agree with.


  • Options
    #36
    Splendour
    Registered Users Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭Splendour


    Macros42 wrote: »
    * Interestingly, I was just reading in today's times that 79% of Irish Catholics oppose church teaching prohibiting the use of condoms and 87% said that Catholic hospitals should be required to provide condoms as part of AIDS prevention.


    One of the many things I disagreed with in the Catholic church was their prohibition on the use of condoms. Most Catholics use some form of contraception or another. I don't see how the above comment should be 'news' at all. If fact if anything at all, I personally am surprised at how low the figures are...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    what's materialism got to sdo with atheism? /broken record


  • Options
    #38
    nitrogen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 698 ✭✭✭nitrogen


    He's up there with Bono on people I hate. His smug little creepy face makes me angry. One word: c-u-n-t.


  • Options
    #39
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    He may have a smug creepy face, but let's not lower the tone here with the rest.


  • Options
    #40
    Schuhart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭Schuhart


    cavedave wrote: »
    http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL3016839520071130



    Does this sound like a neoconservative to anyone? We need to believe in God not because he actually exists but because it is a useful lie to tell ourselves.
    I've only actually read this thread now, and feel that the Pope is actually mining much the same vein as myself at present (just taking it from the news item).

    I happened to be browsing a book by Daniel Dennett at lunchtime, but I didn't buy it as I happened across a sequence where he seemed to be saying 'its insulting to suggest that people would only be moral because of religion'. I might be misjudging the book from that quick browse, but I got that sense of annoyance again that we can sometimes dodge this issue.

    I mean, what's insult got to do with it? If I'm engaging people in discussion about morality and its basis in a free environment, then I expect insult is something to be left at the door and the debate to be free to go wherever it needs. And if we come to the conclusion that religion is a necessary lie, what of it? Would we rather adopt a pose of hurt rather than engage, as best we can, with the consequences of what we believe?


  • Options
    #41
    estebancambias
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭estebancambias


    So the leader of the Church is expected to like Atheists? I am sure he does not have a problem with Atheists but with their beliefs, after all you have been influenced by the Devil. That is why I do not understand when people say 'Surely God would not mind us thinking critically' Well no he would not but when your being misled by Satan, I would argue you are not thinking 'critically' at all. You have been led down the wrong path, but I hope the God I invision will not hold this against you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    condra
    Registered Users Posts: 3,849 ✭✭✭condra


    estebancambias wrote: »
    That is why I do not understand when people say 'Surely God would not mind us thinking critically' Well no he would not but when your being misled by Satan, I would argue you are not thinking 'critically' at all.

    LMAO. You really are deluded. Thanks for the giggle though.


  • Options
    #43
    Wacker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,057 ✭✭✭Wacker


    estebancambias wrote: »
    after all you have been influenced by the Devil

    I guess that explains why I carved a pentagram into mt forearm instead of buttering my toast this morning. It looks slick, but smarts like you wouldn't believe. And we're the experts on not believing.


  • Options
    #44
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,350 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    I have to agree with the Nazi-Pope on this one, while respecting the Pope's own religious beliefs. Like I was posting in another thread: God is a fairly fundamental concept to the unkown, if nothing else. The concept drives us with the comfort of knowing that some higher being has a grander plan for us to be revealed further on into the future. I can see why thats so alluring.

    I don't see this as a rejection of atheism personally.


  • Options
    #45
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    estebancambias wrote: »
    I am sure he does not have a problem with Atheists but with their beliefs, after all you have been influenced by the Devil.

    :D


  • Options
    #46
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    estebancambias wrote: »
    So the leader of the Church is expected to like Atheists? I am sure he does not have a problem with Atheists but with their beliefs, after all you have been influenced by the Devil. That is why I do not understand when people say 'Surely God would not mind us thinking critically' Well no he would not but when your being misled by Satan, I would argue you are not thinking 'critically' at all. You have been led down the wrong path, but I hope the God I invision will not hold this against you.

    This may sound stupid but it came to be when I read your post. If the devil/satan is so bad/evil why doesn't God in all his power kick his ass back to hell? Actually if he knew us mere mortals were being led down the wrong path why would he even care?


  • Options
    #47
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    estebancambias wrote: »
    after all you have been influenced by the Devil.

    Seriously, if you wish to stop sounding like a loon, you've got to stop making such outlandish statements.


  • Options
    #48
    estebancambias
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭estebancambias


    You have not been directly infiltrated by the devil, but subliminally the devil has influenced you.


  • Options
    #49
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    estebancambias wrote: »
    You have not been directly infiltrated by the devil, but subliminally the devil has influenced you.

    and again....:D


  • Options
    #50
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    do you think timothy mcveigh was the devil?


  • Options
    #51
    estebancambias
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭estebancambias


    No he was not the devil.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    estebancambias wrote: »
    You have not been directly infiltrated by the devil, but subliminally the devil has influenced you.
    I know this won't go down well with you, but could you not have been infiltrated by the devil? You're posts here are incredibly negative and to a point, hateful. These are traits I'd associate with the Devil. Is it possible you're being mislead into believing you're working for him up there, but are actually and agent for him down there.


  • Options
    #53
    Gegerty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭Gegerty


    I love the pope, his coming to power in Attack of the Clones to me was a very under estimated turning point in the war against the Rebellion.


  • Options
    #54
    Gegerty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭Gegerty


    estebancambias wrote: »
    No he was not the devil.

    Of course not. It's not as if he was in the Hitler youth or anything :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #55
    condra
    Registered Users Posts: 3,849 ✭✭✭condra


    estebancambias wrote: »
    You have not been directly infiltrated by the devil, but subliminally the devil has influenced you.

    Incase you don't understand why everone is laughing, it is because you are making statements without backing them up with evidence or a logical explanation.

    Here's an example of such a statement:
    All Christians are going to Hell.


Advertisement