Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: ippy on December 18, 2015, 12:01:23 PM
-
Mother Teresa to be made a saint and they wonder why we, so called, atheists are unable to take religions seriously?
ippy
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-35129463
Yep
Catholics assert there really is such a thing as MAJIC.
-
http://goo.gl/3v0Bgj
-
Mother Teresa to be made a saint and they wonder why we, so called, atheists are unable to take religions seriously?
ippy
By all accounts that woman was no saint at all. Many years ago I met someone who had worked with her and they were not impressed by her treatment of the poor unfortunates under her harsh regime. Painkillers were apparently withheld as MT believed suffering was good for the soul! :o
-
Thanks Shaker
Now that seems to be objective reporting an intelligent man can consider.
-
Dear Shaker,
Some of the doctors who treated Monica Besra, for example, say that there is no evidence of a miracle. They say that her tumour was not fully grown and that her condition responded to medical treatment.
"This miracle claim is absolute nonsense and should be condemned by everyone," Dr Ranjan Kumar Mustafi, of Balurghat Hospital in West Bengal, said. "She had a medium-sized tumour in her lower abdomen caused by tuberculosis. The drugs she was given eventually reduced the cystic mass and it disappeared after a year's treatment."
But I thought the guy was skint, who paid for these doctors, a Vatican conspiracy since day one.
Nevermind, proof if proof is needed that it must be Christmas, another bash Mother Teresa thread.
Gonnagle.
-
I think anyone who has read Christopher Hitchins 'The Missionary Position' will see this as some sort of perverse idiocy by the RCC.
-
I think anyone who has read Christopher Hitchins 'The Missionary Position' will see this as some sort of perverse idiocy by the RCC.
I have read Hitchens.
I have also met and talked with people who have worked with her.
I have no doubt in my mind that she is a saint.
-
I have read Hitchens.
I have also met and talked with people who have worked with her.
I have no doubt in my mind that she is a saint.
Right on cue ...
-
I have read Hitchens.
I have also met and talked with people who have worked with her.
I have no doubt in my mind that she is a saint.
Define saint please - then we all know what we are talking about.
-
Dear Shaker,
Right on cue ...
As was the OP and every other post on this thread, including my own, forum thy name is predictable.
Gonnagle.
-
I have read Hitchens.
I have also met and talked with people who have worked with her.
I have no doubt in my mind that she is a saint.
A saint Alan, of course she is, now don't let it worry you go and sit down in really comfortable seat and have a nice cup of tea, perhaps have a nap.
ippy
-
I think anyone who has read Christopher Hitchins 'The Missionary Position' will see this as some sort of perverse idiocy by the RCC.
Hitchens would be expert in the missionary position both face up and face down............cheers.
-
Dear Vlad,
Hitchens would be expert in the missionary position both face up and face down............cheers.
Speaking ill of the dead, how very dare you, then again nobody wants to make a Saint out of Hitchen.
Gonnagle.
-
Mother Teresa to be made a saint and they wonder why we, so called, atheists are unable to take religions seriously?
ippy
What the Papists do is up to them.
What makes me laugh is that atheists bounce up and down about this kind of thing when pursuant to atheism the dead can neither be rewarded, or punished.
-
Mother Teresa to be made a saint and they wonder why we, so called, atheists are unable to take religions seriously?
ippy
And she's to be made a saint by ... the Southern Baptists?
-
I have read Hitchens.
I have also met and talked with people who have worked with her.
I have no doubt in my mind that she is a saint.
I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.
I think you are wrong.
-
What the Papists do is up to them.
What makes me laugh is that atheists bounce up and down about this kind of thing when pursuant to atheism the dead can neither be rewarded, or punished.
Who's jumping up and down? I douldn't really care if they make her a saint but it is certainly something which is open for discussion on a forum like this surely.
-
Dear Vlad,
Speaking ill of the dead, how very dare you, then again nobody wants to make a Saint out of Hitchen.
Gonnagle.
I have never understood the idea of not speaking ill of the dead, why not if they deserve it?
-
Hitchens would be expert in the missionary position both face up and face down............cheers.
Have you noticed that there is evidence that supports the fact that Cris Hitchens was a real person that really did exist and there hasn't been any signs of him coming back from the dead yet, well, as far as I know.
ippy
-
What the Papists do is up to them.
What makes me laugh is that atheists bounce up and down about this kind of thing when pursuant to atheism the dead can neither be rewarded, or punished.
Who's bouncing? Her character and activities pre-mortem are being discussed, aren't they?
And who the hell still uses a term like 'Papists' these days?
-
Have you noticed that there is evidence that supports the fact that Cris Hitchens was a real person that really did exist
That was just a rumour he spread about himself.
-
CH famously noted that she was a lover of poverty rather than of the poor. Didn't she confess late in life to having doubts about there being a god by the way?
As for the RCs genuinely thinking there to be miracles, well what is there to say?
-
CH famously noted that she was a lover of poverty rather than of the poor. Didn't she confess late in life to having doubts about there being a god by the way?
As for the RCs genuinely thinking there to be miracles, well what is there to say?
Surely Hillside she was attracted to people who had survived because of her innate survivor bias.
-
Chunderer,
Surely Hillside she was attracted to people who had survived because of her innate survivor bias.
That's not what "survivor bias" means.
-
Who's bouncing? Her character and activities pre-mortem are being discussed, aren't they?
And who the hell still uses a term like 'Papists' these days?
1. I thought the discussion was about the RCC canonisation?
2. We do. So the Ulster Protestants, who ironically see our church as just another version of the RCC.
-
Chunderer,
That's not what "survivor bias" means.
I,m taking the piss hillside
-
Speaking as a Catholic, albeit lapsed (& some would say I'm "not a proper Catholic"), I have always had reservations about canonised saints. To be a Saint a person has to perform miracles after death and it seems dodgy to me because not one of us is perfect: at the same time, the Church exhorts us not to try and contact the dead so there are double standards. Suffice, I believe, to remember or read the memories of others, about people who did outstanding work. Apart from anything else, the canonisation process is lengthy and expensive. Surely time and money would be better spent elsewhere. However the traditionalists like it and it doesn't affect me - nor does it affect anyone else who isn't interested.
Mother Teresa is a controversial figure. I have read a great deal about her and have known some who went to India to help in her centre, or one of her centres, years ago. It seems to me that she started off well, with a good vision, but like many people, as her renown grew she felt she could walk on water. The mighty tumble. She can be remembered as a human being who certainly had a vocation to do good. It went wrong in some ways. Lesson to be learned - don't let anyone stay at the top for too long and do not put people on a pedestal.
-
Just out of interest, does anyone know how the investigating officials from the Vatican make the jump from medics saying, "we don't know how little Timmy got better" to, "that'll be a miracle then"?
And while we're at it, do they ever do an audit after the event? What if, say, back in the day the limits of medical knowledge meant they opted for a miracle as the cause but now the medics can readily explain what happened in corporeal terms - do they rescind the sainthood or something?
-
The Holy Spirit makes saints , not the RC church. all Christians are saints, the words are synonymous in the Bible. nuff said.
-
The Holy Spirit makes saints , not the RC church. all Christians are saints, the words are synonymous in the Bible. nuff said.
I totally agree.
God is the ultimate judge, not people who are fallible.
To be a saint is for your soul to enter heaven - and anyone can do this by accepting Jesus Christ as their saviour. Why do people find this so difficult? It is such a graet sadness that so many people reject Jesus.
-
I totally agree.
God is the ultimate judge, not people who are fallible.
To be a saint is for your soul to enter heaven - and anyone can do this by accepting Jesus Christ as their saviour. Why do people find this so difficult?
The fact that you even have to ask such a question says much, Alan
It is such a graet sadness that so many people reject Jesus.
To them? Or just to you?
-
It is such a great sadness that so many people reject Jesus.
To them? Or just to you?
To God
-
To them? Or just to you?
To God
I would have thought you'd believe he was big enough to take it.
-
Just out of interest, does anyone know how the investigating officials from the Vatican make the jump from medics saying, "we don't know how little Timmy got better" to, "that'll be a miracle then"?
And while we're at it, do they ever do an audit after the event? What if, say, back in the day the limits of medical knowledge meant they opted for a miracle as the cause but now the medics can readily explain what happened in corporeal terms - do they rescind the sainthood or something?
You've missed the opportunity to bring up survivor bias.
-
Have you noticed that there is evidence that supports the fact that Cris Hitchens was a real person that really did exist and there hasn't been any signs of him coming back from the dead yet, well, as far as I know.
ippy
ippy, I certainly hope that he wasn't 'a real person that really did exist'. That's tantamount to saying that he wasn't fully human ;)
I would have thought you'd believe he was big enough to take it.
He can still be sad, Shaker - and be big enough to take it. It's all part of being a parent.
-
The Holy Spirit makes saints , not the RC church. all Christians are saints, the words are synonymous in the Bible. nuff said.
Yes, I agree with that.
The Catholic Church canonises some people into Saints with a big 'S'. They too state clearly that all believers are saints.
Referring to the poster who asked about the verification of miracles, eg, healing of the sick, I don't believe the 'miracles' necessary in the canonisation process have to be healing. The miracles could concern something other than sick people.
I wish they would stop doing it but it will go on as long as a significant number of the congregation want it.
-
He can still be sad, Shaker
How? What with? What equipment would an allegedly immaterial being have to experience any emotion? In my case feeling sad - or feeling anything - is a complex but investigable interplay of brain chemistry and endocrinology amongst other facets of a body. How does a being purportedly made of nothing (so to speak) manage it?
-
I would have thought you'd believe he was big enough to take it.
God loves you as much as anyone of His creation.
There will be much rejoicing in Heaven when you repent and turn to Him.
-
God loves you as much as anyone of His creation.
There will be much rejoicing in Heaven when you repent and turn to Him.
Since you have made the same point before, I might as well give the same reply as before. On a scale of 0 to 10, from pretty well impossible to as good as certain, how likely do you consider that prospect?
-
A good person or bad, a "saint", come on, what a stupid superstition based idea in the first place, I suppose it satisfies the religosos apparent need for a bit of myth, magic and some kind of mystical goings on, well if it keeps them happy? I just wish they wouldn' keep planting his nonsense on to the sholders of the next generation via very young children.
ippy
-
God loves you as much as anyone of His creation.
There will be much rejoicing in Heaven when you repent and turn to Him.
Stating that as a fact is a LIE Alan, as you only believe that to be true!
-
No one is worthy of being classified as a saint, certainly not that old witch MT. Sainthood is a crazy concept, made even more crazy by having to drag up a miracle or two supposedly performed by the would be 'saint'! ::)
-
Stating that as a fact is a LIE Alan, as you only believe that to be true!
No, it's not a lie, a lie is a deliberate untruth.
-
Since you have made the same point before, I might as well give the same reply as before. On a scale of 0 to 10, from pretty well impossible to as good as certain, how likely do you consider that prospect?
I will continue to pray for a miracle
-
Dear Shaker,
The word papist, Humph is only showing he has a rich and wide vocabulary ;)
Gonnagle.
-
I will continue to pray for a miracle
I really wouldn't bother, Alan. Countless people suffering truly desperate plights and in horrendous misery and suffering do just that, and their prayers fall on thin air as well.
-
I will continue to pray for a miracle
I wouldn't hold your breath! ;D
-
I will continue to pray for a miracle
I can't think of anything more useless than praying for a miracle, perhaps a left handed tea cup.
ippy
-
I can't think of anything more useless than praying for a miracle, perhaps a left handed tea cup.
ippy
Especially when you could use those microseconds to add something interesting, useful and above all secular on this forum.....eh, Ippy ;)
-
Especially when you could use those microseconds to add something interesting, useful and above all secular on this forum.....eh, Ippy ;)
You don't seem to be getting the point of much these days Vlad things like this post, secularism etc, you're not really there and no I wont be elaborating on this post.
you work out a few things for yourself.
ippy
-
You don't seem to be getting the point of much these days Vlad things like this post, secularism etc, you're not really there and no I wont be elaborating on this post.
you work out a few things for yourself.
ippy
I always show my working out Ipples......You ought to try it sometime.
-
I always show my working out Ipples......You ought to try it sometime.
I'm sure you try Vlad, but most of your posts attribute things that have nothing to do with secularism, to secularism; whenever you happen to mention secularism they illustrate your very limited understanding of the subject.
ippy
-
I'm sure you try Vlad, but most of your posts attribute things that have nothing to do with secularism, to secularism; whenever you happen to mention secularism they illustrate your very limited understanding of the subject.
ippy
My posts are against those using secularism as cover for a Stalinist anti theist agenda
-
My posts are against those using secularism as cover for a Stalinist anti theist agenda
Like I said clueless.
ippy
-
Mother Teresa to be made a saint and they wonder why we, so called, atheists are unable to take religions seriously?
ippy
Well, if you knew your bible you would have known that those who belong to Christ are all, already SAINTS.
So the Church on earth cannot make her what she would already be....
7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
I guess you don't take religion seriously at all... otherwise you would have already known the People of God are all saints already...
-
Just out of interest, does anyone know how the investigating officials from the Vatican make the jump from medics saying, "we don't know how little Timmy got better" to, "that'll be a miracle then"?
They suss out what the Pope wants them to say, usually yes, and deliver the required verdict in standard form.
Miracles are boringly similar nowadays. The old mass-produced medieval saints were pretty formulaic, but they had a wider repertoire than modern ones.
Of course "serious" Catholic theologians smile and look down on "popular piety", but they aren't going to rock any boats. Not that C of E clergy are much different. There's some deep cynicism in there somewhere, and always was.
-
Well, if you knew your bible you would have known that those who belong to Christ are all, already SAINTS.
So the Church on earth cannot make her what she would already be....
7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
I guess you don't take religion seriously at all... otherwise you would have already known the People of God are all saints already...
2
ippy
-
Like I said clueless.
ippy
I have already explained in what sense it is Stalinist.
In his major work The Christians Atheist Bamber Gascoigne recalls with some horror that Stalin ordered no visible sign of religion. There are people who have been on this forum who echo Stalin.
-
I have already explained in what sense it is Stalinist.
In his major work The Christians Atheist Bamber Gascoigne recalls with some horror that Stalin ordered no visible sign of religion. There are people who have been on this forum who echo Stalin.
Such as?
-
Well, if you knew your bible you would have known that those who belong to Christ are all, already SAINTS.
So the Church on earth cannot make her what she would already be....
7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
I guess you don't take religion seriously at all... otherwise you would have already known the People of God are all saints already...
So Sass is a saint? Oh blimey a herd of pigs has just flown passed my window! ;D ;D ;D
-
So Sass is a saint? Oh blimey a herd of pigs has just flown passed my window! ;D ;D ;D
"those who belong to Christ are all, already SAINTS".
Since it's so unlikely that there was any such thing as a christ, although there is a very remote, very remote almost invisible chance there might have been, wouldn't that make it equally unlikely that there is any such thing as a saint?
Floo did you notice since my scoring system of how many assertions there are per Sassy post, there's fewer assertions coming from that direction, or is it me imagining things?
I thought she managed very well with that last post of hers, well I mean only two assertions, that's good for Sassy.
ippy
-
I have already explained in what sense it is Stalinist.
In his major work The Christians Atheist Bamber Gascoigne recalls with some horror that Stalin ordered no visible sign of religion. There are people who have been on this forum who echo Stalin.
Looking forward to the day religisos come to their senses is just a tad different to banning religion outright.
ippy
-
"those who belong to Christ are all, already SAINTS".
Since it's so unlikely that there was any such thing as a christ, although there is a very remote, very remote almost invisible chance there might have been, wouldn't that make it equally unlikely that there is any such thing as a saint?
Floo did you notice since my scoring system of how many assertions there are per Sassy post, there's fewer assertions coming from that direction, or is it me imagining things?
I thought she managed very well with that last post of hers, well I mean only two assertions, that's good for Sassy.
ippy
;D ;D ;D
-
Looking forward to the day religisos come to their senses is just a tad different to banning religion outright.
ippy
yes and I suppose that is how far certain peoples agendas go. But not many on here and certainly no one associated with BHA or NSS.
-
There are people who have been on this forum who echo Stalin.
Name names.
-
Name names.
They know who they are.
-
They know who they are.
So you were lying. Glad we got that cleared up.
-
So you were lying. Glad we got that cleared up.
lying that there are people on here wanting no public or political forum for religion. What do you think the BHA and NSS are supporting and who don't you think supports their agenda on here.
How can a secular humanist or anybody believe that a totally secular society doesn't support their life stance or world view......'Freedom from religion' and all that.
-
yes and I suppose that is how far certain peoples agendas go. But not many on here and certainly no one associated with BHA or NSS.
Well Vlad I must tell you I'm an active member in both the NSS and the BHA, and I also think it would be wrong to ban religions no matter how potty they might be.
There are a lot more of what you refer to as atheists in both organisations than any others and I don't know of anyone in either one that has even suggested religions should be banned, if anyone is a secularist, well they wouldn't be secularists if they wanted religions banned, because that's nothing to do with secularism.
That's yet another reason for telling you that you don't understand what it is secularism is all about, if you did know you wouldn't be writing so many silly posts about it.
ippy
-
So you were lying. Glad we got that cleared up.
Lying that there are people on here wanting no public or political forum for religion. What do you think the BHA and NSS are supporting and who don't you think supports their agenda on here.
How can a secular humanist or anybody believe that a totally secular society doesn't support their life stance or world view......'Freedom from religion' and all that.
-
Lying that there are people on here wanting no public or political forum for religion. What do you think the BHA and NSS are supporting
Secularism, which isn't what you think it is.
and who don't you think supports their agenda on here.
By far the great majority, I should think.
How can a secular humanist or anybody believe that a totally secular society doesn't support their life stance or world view......'Freedom from religion' and all that.
Learn what secularism actually is and get back to us.
-
Chunderer,
lying that there are people on here wanting no public or political forum for religion. What do you think the BHA and NSS are supporting and who don't you think supports their agenda on here.
How can a secular humanist or anybody believe that a totally secular society doesn't support their life stance or world view......'Freedom from religion' and all that.
Completely barmy. No-one would ban the religious from saying whatever they want to say - set up a stall on the street, march up and down Oxford Street wearing a sandwich board, publish whatever pamphlets you want to publish - knock yourself out. None of that is threatened by anything the BHS or NSS have to say. What they do object too though (and I agree with them) is the claims of some religions to have privileged access to the attention of the rest of us - teaching their personal faith beliefs to children as if they were facts for example.
It's a simple enough distinction, but it passes you by entirely - private members clubs and their outputs are no-one's business but their own; demanding to be be taken seriously on the other hand are a different matter.
If you seriously think there to be someone here who is "Stalinist" - i.e., who would ban the former - why be so coy about naming this mystery person?
-
Chunderer,
Completely barmy. No-one would ban the religious from saying whatever they want to say - set up a stall on the street, march up and down Oxford Street wearing a sandwich board, publish whatever pamphlets you want to publish - knock yourself out. None of that is threatened by anything the BHS or NSS have to say. What they do object too though (and I agree with them) is the claims of some religions to have privileged access to the attention of the rest of us - teaching their personal faith beliefs to children as if they were facts for example.
It's a simple enough distinction, but it passes you by entirely - private members clubs and their outputs are no-one's business but their own; demanding to be be taken seriously on the other hand are a different matter.
If you seriously think there to be someone here who is "Stalinist" - i.e., who would ban the former - why be so coy about naming this mystery person?
Note ......'Freedom from religion'
Do you want religion to have public and political influence of the kind that capital enjoy's do you want to see the Salvation army banned from it's work in poor and deprived areas. Do you want to have people who talk about their faith influencing their politics removed from politics?
-
Chunderer,
Note ......'Freedom from religion'
Or from fascism, or from...
What's to note?
Do you want religion to have public and political influence of the kind that capital enjoy's do you want to see the Salvation army banned from it's work in poor and deprived areas. Do you want to have people who talk about their faith influencing their politics removed from politics?
What on earth are you even trying to say here? I "want" people to be free to express whatever views they wish to express. What I don't want is for some of those people to have state-sanctioned special rights to force them on others.
Why is the distinction so difficult for you to grasp?
-
lying that there are people on here wanting no public or political forum for religion. What do you think the BHA and NSS are supporting and who don't you think supports their agenda on here.
You asserted that there were people on this board who took a Stalinist approach to secularism. You've been asked by Shaker and me to name these people and you have so far refused to do so.
The reason for your refusal is, of course, that you were mouthing off in that nasty reflexive way that you do and what you said was a lie. And you were too stupid to understand that you would be called out on it.
-
No sign of you on this thread any more Vlad, penny droped?
ippy
-
No sign of you on this thread any more Vlad, penny droped?
ippy
Droped?
-
They suss out what the Pope wants them to say, usually yes, and deliver the required verdict in standard form.
Miracles are boringly similar nowadays. The old mass-produced medieval saints were pretty formulaic, but they had a wider repertoire than modern ones.
I particularly like what St Thomas Aquinas did with those pilchards.
-
Did he drope the can?
St Augustine's attitude towards those apples makes me shudder.
(No idea what M Teresa thought about either, she probably approved)
-
Did he drope the can?
St Augustine's attitude towards those apples makes me shudder.
(No idea what M Teresa thought about either, she probably approved)
:) He was supposed to have converted some pilchards into herring on his deathbed - he thought the pilchards were the best 'herring' he'd ever tasted. This was the second 'miracle' (his works themselves being the first), that allowed him to be promoted to sainthood.
-
Funny innit the way these Saints only cure people they happen to bump into rather than just invent a cure for everyone...
-
Funny innit the way these Saints only cure people they happen to bump into rather than just invent a cure for everyone...
I don't know much about RC saints but don't they do miracles both remotely and posthumously? I just mention it cos it's the kind of thing that gets Hillside typing angry messages to the board.
-
Droped?
An inability to spell is nowhere as bad as not being able to understand something as simple to understand as secularism.
An inability to admit you've got it wrong, when it's so obvious you have; I think you must have got the picture by now Vlad.
Well I hope so for you're sake.
ippy
-
An inability to spell is nowhere as bad as not being able to understand something as simple to understand as secularism.
An inability to admit you've got it wrong, when it's so obvious you have; I think you must have got the picture by now Vlad.
Well I hope so for you're sake.
Ah, Threats.......
Ippy
This is a secular society Ippy so everybody understands it. What isn't understandable is the control freakery of the BHA and NSS organisations whose members are committed to the removal of religion. Hence the sentiment ''freedom from religion.''
As far as I am aware the BHA at least supports the cinema ban of Christianity and so that is the commencement of media banning.
As Peter Hitchen's says it is part of the rage against God.
-
Chunderer,
What isn't understandable is the control freakery of the BHA and NSS organisations whose members are committed to the removal of religion.
Just out of interest, why do you keep lying about that?
-
This is a secular society Ippy so everybody understands it.
Actually (a) no it isn't - England has an established state church with the monarch as its head, and (b) not everybody understands it - you clearly do not.
I daren't even get into the difference between de facto and de jure secularism lest your teeny-tiny head 'splodes.
What isn't understandable is the control freakery of the BHA and NSS organisations whose members are committed to the removal of religion. Hence the sentiment ''freedom from religion.''
Religious strictures not being imposed upon those who do not adhere to that religion does not equal the removal of religion.
As Peter Hitchen's says
Ah yes, the unfortunate one of the two. Dropped on his head as a baby or something of the kind, I assume.
-
Chunderer,
Just out of interest, why do you keep lying about that?
Be fair, Blue, it seems comprehension isn't his strong point.
-
Actually (a) no it isn't - England has an established state church with the monarch as its head, and (b) not everybody understands it - you clearly do not.
I daren't even get into the difference between de facto and de jure secularism lest your teeny-tiny head 'splodes.
Religious strictures not being imposed upon those who do not adhere to that religion does not equal the removal of religion.Ah yes, the unfortunate one of the two. Dropped on his head as a baby or something of the kind, I assume.
Freedom from religion Shaker.......are you not committed to it?
-
Hi Rhi,
Be fair, Blue, it seems comprehension isn't his strong point.
Indeed, and nor is honesty. Be nice for example if he actually identified these supposed "Stalinists" he so casually mis-labels.
Oh well.
-
Ah yes, the unfortunate one of the two. Dropped on his head as a baby or something of the kind, I assume.
Only if his brother was holding him................cheers.
-
Freedom from religion Shaker.......are you not committed to it?
I am indeed for those who seek it, exactly as I'm committed to freedom of religion (though I would make some changes to the latter in the name of the former, if I had my way) for those who seek it.
-
Hi Rhi,
Indeed, and nor is honesty. Be nice for example if he actually identified these supposed "Stalinists" he so casually mis-labels.
Oh well.
Ah yes. I and I think JeremyP had a go at that one. No dice, of course.
-
I am indeed for those who seek it, exactly as I'm committed to freedom of religion (though I would make some changes to the latter in the name of the former, if I had my way) for those who seek it.
Stalinist changes i'll be bound.
-
Ah yes. I and I think JeremyP had a go at that one. No dice, of course.
Isn't that just him copying a word he's heard used without knowing what it means? Because otherwise it'd be really quite rude of him.
-
Chunderer,
Stalinist changes i'll be bound.
And wrong.
-
Isn't that just him copying a word he's heard used without knowing what it means?
Oh goodess, yes. He does that all the time.
-
As far as I am aware the BHA at least supports the cinema ban of Christianity and so that is the commencement of media banning.
Actually it was a ban by a cinema advertising distributor and it was a ban on all adverts of a political or religious nature (and they included adverts for atheism in that).
Your ability to lie through your teeth is matched only by your inability to grasp that we all see through the lies.
-
Actually it was a ban by a cinema advertising distributor and it was a ban on all adverts of a political or religious nature (and they included adverts for atheism in that).
How do you feel about that?
-
Isn't that just him copying a word he's heard used without knowing what it means? Because otherwise it'd be really quite rude of him.
I know exactly what "stalinist" means and I know that nobody on this board fits the bill, not even Vlad himself. I knew he would be unable to come up with the names because that post was just his usual content free trolling.
-
I know exactly what "stalinist" means and I know that nobody on this board fits the bill, not even Vlad himself. I knew he would be unable to come up with the names because that post was just his usual content free trolling.
Supporting Freedom from religion is Stalinist.
-
I know exactly what "stalinist" means and I know that nobody on this board fits the bill, not even Vlad himself. I knew he would be unable to come up with the names because that post was just his usual content free trolling.
Obviously you know, Jeremy. Vlad clearly doesn't though.
-
Obviously you know, Jeremy. Vlad clearly doesn't though.
Supporting the nature of England is Starlingist.
-
Supporting Freedom from religion is Stalinist.
No it isn't.
-
Supporting Freedom from religion is Stalinist.
No it isn't.
If Shaker wants to be free from religion, I support it. That does not make me a Stalinist.
If you want freedom of religion for you, I support that too. I do not support the right of you to impose your religious "ideals" on people who don't want anything to do with them.
-
No it isn't.
Try substituting the word religion with some other groups people belong to and I think you'll find that sounds Stalinist and offensive to people in those groups.
The Americans have a term. The phrase automatically makes religion ''sound like a bad thing''.......and by extension Stalinism not a bad thing since that is precisely what is going on.
-
No it isn't.
If Shaker wants to be free from religion, I support it. That does not make me a Stalinist.
If you want freedom of religion for you, I support that too. I do not support the right of you to impose your religious "ideals" on people who don't want anything to do with them.
No it means freedom from religion for the whole of humanity. That is the goal.
-
No it means freedom from religion for the whole of humanity. That is the goal.
Whose goal? Name names.
Name the stalinist posters on this forum.
-
Try substituting the word religion with some other groups people belong to and I think you'll find that sounds Stalinist and offensive to people in those groups.
What groups? Instead of hiding behind suggestion and implication and outright obscurantism why can't you specify what it is you think you're on about?
The Americans have a term. The phrase automatically makes religion ''sound like a bad thing''.......and by extension Stalinism not a bad thing since that is precisely what is going on.
Simply repeating the same tosh over and over and over won't make it true, Vlad.
-
No it means freedom from religion for the whole of humanity. That is the goal.
No it isn't. There are only two options here that I can see. One is that you know perfectly well that this isn't the case but keep lying about it for some reason. The other possibility is that you actually believe something demonstrably false, which ... well, you like half-hints and veiled impications so you fill in the rest.
-
Whose goal? Name names.
Name the stalinist posters on this forum.
He won't.
-
C'mon Vlad - spill the beans, grass up the guilty, pin a tail on the Stalinists, etc etc.
We need to know so that we can get our 'Vlad Called Me a Stalinist' T-shirts printed for the coming Saturnalia festivities - and in years to come these could attract cult-status: be a bit like having a Blue Peter badge.
So - out with it man - were all a'tremblin with expectation.
-
It was only a few days ago that Hope was referring darkly to potentially terrorism-causing statements on the forum; now, according to Vlad McCarthy, the place is a hotbed of Stalinists.
Gordon, we're doomed I tell ye - doomed!
-
C'mon Vlad - spill the beans, grass up the guilty, pin a tail on the Stalinists, etc etc.
We need to know so that we can get our 'Vlad Called Me a Stalinist' T-shirts printed for the coming Saturnalia festivities -
Don't you mean Stalinalia?
-
Don't you mean Stalinalia?
Nope, I did spot your bodyswerve though. So, am I on the list?
I'm sitting here thinking about the lettering on my T-shirt: I'm think Cyrillic would look cool!
-
:) He was supposed to have converted some pilchards into herring on his deathbed - he thought the pilchards were the best 'herring' he'd ever tasted. This was the second 'miracle' (his works themselves being the first), that allowed him to be promoted to sainthood.
Pilchards are part of the herring family, closely related. I just googled and found that out. So he was right in a way, they were herring. No miracle.
When I read all this, it makes me feel embarrassed about the outdated canonisation process. I wish there were more people who felt as I do, and were prepared to voice it. Or perhaps no-one cares that much.
-
Chunderer,
Supporting Freedom from religion is Stalinist.
Could you at least try not to be so fucking idiotic.
Here's what Wiki says Stalinism actually involves:
"Stalinism is the means of governing and related policies implemented by Joseph Stalin. Stalinist policies in the Soviet Union included: state terror, rapid industrialization, the theory of socialism in one country, a centralized state, collectivization of agriculture, cult of personality, and subordination of interests of foreign communist parties to those of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union—deemed by Stalinism to be the most forefront vanguard party of communist revolution at the time.
Stalinism promoted the escalation of class conflict, utilizing state violence to forcibly purge society of claimed supporters of the bourgeoisie, regarding them as threats to the pursuit of the communist revolution that resulted in substantial political violence and persecution of such people.These included not only bourgeois people but also working-class people accused of counter-revolutionary sympathies."
Which of these things do you seriously think the BHA to be promoting?
Yet again...
...your religion, any other religion, any other organised belief system should continue to be private members clubs saying whatever they wish whenever they wish without fear of censorship. That's what secularism entails.
All that some of us say though is that none of those clubs should have privileged treatment above any other - to teach its personal faith beliefs as facts to children for example.
That's the "freedom from religion" bit - not to stop the religious from saying anything they like, but rather to give the rest of us the right not to have it imposed on us.
Why is this so difficult for you that you have to keep lying about it?
-
Chunderer,
Could you at least try not to be so fucking idiotic.
Here's what Wiki says Stalinism actually involves:
"Stalinism is the means of governing and related policies implemented by Joseph Stalin. Stalinist policies in the Soviet Union included: state terror, rapid industrialization, the theory of socialism in one country, a centralized state, collectivization of agriculture, cult of personality, and subordination of interests of foreign communist parties to those of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union—deemed by Stalinism to be the most forefront vanguard party of communist revolution at the time.
Stalinism promoted the escalation of class conflict, utilizing state violence to forcibly purge society of claimed supporters of the bourgeoisie, regarding them as threats to the pursuit of the communist revolution that resulted in substantial political violence and persecution of such people.These included not only bourgeois people but also working-class people accused of counter-revolutionary sympathies."
Which of these things do you seriously think the BHA to be promoting?
Yet again...
...your religion, any other religion, any other organised belief system should continue to be private members clubs saying whatever they wish whenever they wish without fear of censorship. That's what secularism entails.
All that some of us say though is that none of those clubs should have privileged treatment above any other - to teach its personal faith beliefs as facts to children for example.
That's the "freedom from religion" bit - not to stop the religious from saying anything they like, but rather to give the rest of us the right not to have it imposed on us.
Why is this so difficult for you that you have to keep lying about it?
We know that Stalin also oppressed religion and ordered the removal of Christian symbols from visible places and ordered the bulldozers in. Only yesterday on the BBC was the Hill of Crosses in Soviet Russia discussed.
Anybody therefore who advocates Freedom FROM religion and campaigns for the removal of Christian symbolism is Stalinist.
Just shoving a wiki which fails to mention this doesn't exonerate anyone supporting the removal of Christianity and it's symbols or indeed any religion of Stalinism.
-
Who is calling for the removal of Christian symbols or indeed symbols of any religion from visible places?
-
Anybody therefore who advocates Freedom FROM religion and campaigns for the removal of Christian symbolism is Stalinist.
Just shoving a wiki which fails to mention this doesn't exonerate anyone supporting the removal of Christianity and it's symbols or indeed any religion of Stalinism.
Congratulations. You've managed to brainfart a definition so fucking ludiculous that the Roundheads (of English Civil War fame) can now be described as "Stalinist".
http://www.open.edu/openlearn/history-the-arts/history/world-history/church-desecration
William Dowsing, kept a diary of his exploits:
Swaffham Bulbeck in Cambridgeshire 1643. 4 crucifixes and Christ nailed to them and God the Father over one of them, and we brake down a 100 superstitious pictures, and 2 crosses we took off the steeple, and 2 on the church and chancel…We digged down the steps, 20 cherubins…. At Babraham in Cambridgeshire, January 5, 1644. We brake down 3 crucifixes and 60 superstitious pictures, and brake in pieces the rails.
-
We know that Stalin also oppressed religion and ordered the removal of Christian symbols from visible places and ordered the bulldozers in. Only yesterday on the BBC was the Hill of Crosses in Soviet Russia discussed.
Anybody therefore who advocates Freedom FROM religion and campaigns for the removal of Christian symbolism is Stalinist.
Just shoving a wiki which fails to mention this doesn't exonerate anyone supporting the removal of Christianity and it's symbols or indeed any religion of Stalinism.
The forced banning of religious beliefs should be opposed, but that is not what Freedom from Religion means.
-
Pilchards are part of the herring family, closely related. I just googled and found that out. So he was right in a way, they were herring. No miracle.
When I read all this, it makes me feel embarrassed about the outdated canonisation process. I wish there were more people who felt as I do, and were prepared to voice it. Or perhaps no-one cares that much.
Maybe it might not have been the pilchards he converted could it have been some Pollocks?
ippy
-
Chunderer,
Could you at least try not to be so fucking idiotic.
Here's what Wiki says Stalinism actually involves:
"Stalinism is the means of governing and related policies implemented by Joseph Stalin. Stalinist policies in the Soviet Union included: state terror, rapid industrialization, the theory of socialism in one country, a centralized state, collectivization of agriculture, cult of personality, and subordination of interests of foreign communist parties to those of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union—deemed by Stalinism to be the most forefront vanguard party of communist revolution at the time.
Stalinism promoted the escalation of class conflict, utilizing state violence to forcibly purge society of claimed supporters of the bourgeoisie, regarding them as threats to the pursuit of the communist revolution that resulted in substantial political violence and persecution of such people.These included not only bourgeois people but also working-class people accused of counter-revolutionary sympathies."
My understanding is that "Stalinism" means a belief in socialism in one country, as opposed to the "Trotskyite" idea of international revolution. :)
-
We know that Stalin also oppressed religion and ordered the removal of Christian symbols from visible places and ordered the bulldozers in. Only yesterday on the BBC was the Hill of Crosses in Soviet Russia discussed.
Anybody therefore who advocates Freedom FROM religion and campaigns for the removal of Christian symbolism is Stalinist.
Just shoving a wiki which fails to mention this doesn't exonerate anyone supporting the removal of Christianity and it's symbols or indeed any religion of Stalinism.
How about this Vlad the small gathering houses at Crematoriums, usually owned by the local councils and not church property, are working toward having all religious symbols put away into suitable storage places and only brought out where appropriate, like for instance at a Humanist' funeral all the religious symbols would be put away to respect the feelings of the mostly non-religious relatives.
This is on it's way Vlad I just thought you would like to know about the enlightened view, such as religious symbols brought out of storage when these rapidly diminishing parts of society are conducting one of their funerals.
I call that fair play for all because the rules are the same for all, Humanist or not, no one would be banned.
ippy
-
Maybe it might not have been the pilchards he converted could it have been some Pollocks?
ippy
Being as he was posh and educated, he would have referred to them as "Pollachius".
-
How about this Vlad the small gathering houses at Crematoriums, usually owned by the local councils and not church property, are working toward having all religious symbols put away into suitable storage places and only brought out where appropriate, like for instance at a Humanist' funeral all the religious symbols would be put away to respect the feelings of the mostly non-religious relatives.
This is on it's way Vlad I just thought you would like to know about the enlightened view, such as religious symbols brought out of storage when these rapidly diminishing parts of society are conducting one of their funerals.
I call that fair play for all because the rules are the same for all, Humanist or not, no one would be banned.
ippy
I think that's fair enough. And I would imagine that no funeral directorship would be swayed in the service they provide by non sequiter propaganda like ''rapidly diminishing parts of society''. But that's decency for you.
-
I think that's fair enough. And I would imagine that no funeral directorship would be swayed in the service they provide by non sequiter propaganda like ''rapidly diminishing parts of society''. But that's decency for you.
Well Vlad I'm glad you could at least see that point; I was trying to describe secularism to you, banns don't come into the secularist equation, you really have misread the aims of secularism.
ippy
Couldn't help inserting the reminder, just couldn't resist it.
ippy
-
Vlunderingstupidity,
We know that Stalin also oppressed religion and ordered the removal of Christian symbols from visible places and ordered the bulldozers in. Only yesterday on the BBC was the Hill of Crosses in Soviet Russia discussed.
Yep.
Anybody therefore who advocates Freedom FROM religion and campaigns for the removal of Christian symbolism is Stalinist.
Nope. Desperate, desperate stupidity and a non sequitur to boot.
First, no-one is “campaigning for the removal of religious symbols”. The closest anyone comes so far as I’m aware is to argue for appropriate use and non-use according to the audience.
Second, “campaigning” for something is light years away from the brutal oppression and genocide of Stalinism. Anyone can campaign for anything – that does not make them Stalinists for doing it though.
Third, freedom from religion has nothing to do with separating those who are religious from their beliefs. All it involves is the rest of us not having to have any particular set of religious belief imposed on us.
Just shoving a wiki which fails to mention this doesn't exonerate anyone supporting the removal of Christianity and it's symbols or indeed any religion of Stalinism.
Wiki doesn’t mention it because it’s entirely an invention of your fevered imagination and dull incomprehension. Again, even if anyone did "support" the removal of religious symbols, there would still be not one jot of a smidgin of an iota of a hint of Stalinism about that.
-
I think that's fair enough. And I would imagine that no funeral directorship would be swayed in the service they provide by non sequiter propaganda like ''rapidly diminishing parts of society''. But that's decency for you.
Fair enough?
Fair enough?
You mean that crematoria temporarily removing crosses for non-religious funerals isn't sentimental anti-theistic philosophically naturalistic materialist Stalinism?
I need a lie down :o
-
Being as he was posh and educated, he would have referred to them as "Pollachius".
Of course, I have heard of that but at the time I thought Pollocks.
ippy