Roman Catholics.

[Drake Dun]

Originally Posted by Unimatrix 00

Do you mock every tradition this way? Do you mock the eating of a turkey at Thanksgiving? Do you mock July the 4th fireworks?

We probably would if people thought the turkey started as turkey, but became Tom Cruise in the oven. Or if the reason people shot off fireworks on the 4th was to ward off spacecraft from the Xooblean empire.

I would type some long rant about the Catholic church, but I'm not in the mood. Anyway, if you can look at the facts for yourself and conclude that it's "all encompassing, and all good", you're already beyond the reach of any words, and most antipsychotic drugs.

That said, for whatever strange reason Catholics often do seem more relaxed than their Protestant counterparts. I couldn't tell you why. One of those curious idiosyncracies in social dynamics, I guess.

[Vivi]

As the Dalai Lama promotes peace and living in harmony with nature in the world around us, the pope sits on his gold, jewel encrusted throne dictating new policies and ways of making money to the world, giving none to the starving and the homeless. Oh. And if you dont play along with their scam you face a punishment of an eternity in hell. God bless the Catholic Church!

[CptSternn]

I'm a proud Catholic.

[Beneath the Shadows]

My mother was Roman Catholic. (I say "was" because I haven't had any contact with her in the past 14 years.) If I had been raised by her, I suppose I would have been raised RC as well. Though the short time I did know her she wasn't overly religious, so I may be wrong.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

That said, for whatever strange reason Catholics often do seem more relaxed than their Protestant counterparts. I couldn't tell you why. One of those curious idiosyncracies in social dynamics, I guess.

There's something in the wafers...

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

Jilly: Have you ever spoken to women in these more conservative religious denominations and ask if they feel they are discriminated against?

Tam, it's not a question of whether the female followers of a bigoted religion feel discriminated against, although I'm sure that many Catholic women hold out hope that the church will reform its positions and policies. The true problem is that organized religions, especially those as large and influential as Catholicism, exercise an uncomfortable degree of control over secular society.

Why do you suppose the majority of people are opposed to the notion of homosexual marriage? Because their religion condemns it. For an even more pertinent example, consider a man raised in a Catholic household, who later becomes the head of a large company's human resources department. Whether this individual realizes it or not, he's been brought up according to a doctrine that stipulates women to be simply incapable of performing most jobs-- including that job of paramount importance, religious leadership-- as well as men are. More likely than not, that upbringing will color his perceptions.

[jack_the_knife]

I dismiss all religions as pathetic fan-clubs.

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by jack_the_knife

I dismiss all religions as pathetic fan-clubs.

It's a bit more than that, but okay.

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

Tam, it's not a question of whether the female followers of a bigoted religion feel discriminated against, although I'm sure that many Catholic women hold out hope that the church will reform its positions and policies. The true problem is that organized religions, especially those as large and influential as Catholicism, exercise an uncomfortable degree of control over secular society.

I can see that. As I said before, it's not good for one person or one group of people to grow so powerful.

Why do you suppose the majority of people are opposed to the notion of homosexual marriage? Because their religion condemns it.

While that's part of it, I don't believe that's the entire reason. I think that it's more like this is simply the "pet sin" of churches right now; it's the one they want to get terribly upset about, even though their own religion says that such sin isn't any worse than committing adultery or lying.

For an even more pertinent example, consider a man raised in a Catholic household, who later becomes the head of a large company's human resources department. Whether this individual realizes it or not, he's been brought up according to a doctrine that stipulates women to be simply incapable of performing most jobs-- including that job of paramount importance, religious leadership-- as well as men are. More likely than not, that upbringing will color his perceptions.

I've never met a Catholic who thought of women as incapable of performing normal, working world tasks.

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

While that's part of it, I don't believe that's the entire reason. I think that it's more like this is simply the "pet sin" of churches right now; it's the one they want to get terribly upset about, even though their own religion says that such sin isn't any worse than committing adultery or lying.

A sin is a sin-- Churches don't condone adultery either, but a prominent pro-adultery initiative doesn't really exist at present.

I've never met a Catholic who thought of women as incapable of performing normal, working world tasks.

Can you not resist the compulsion to distort my words into a titanically obvious straw man? I never said modern Catholics commonly think of women as incapable of working world tasks. I said modern Catholics often think of women as less capable of such tasks than men, even if this isn't an attitude they declare publicly or even acknowledge in themselves.

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

A sin is a sin-- Churches don't condone adultery either, but a prominent pro-adultery initiative doesn't really exist at present.

Perhaps not, but a pastor who has committed adultery won't stir up quite as much opposition as one who confesses to being a homosexual.

I never said modern Catholics commonly think of women as incapable of working world tasks. I said modern Catholics often think of women as less capable of such tasks than men, even if this isn't an attitude they declare publicly or even acknowledge in themselves.

Perhaps so.

[jack_the_knife]

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

It's a bit more than that, but okay.

In what sense is it a bit more than that? These fan-clubs are dedicated to imaginary friends. These fan-clubs generally even have conflicts about who's imaginary friend of choice is cooler. Or am I entirely missing something?

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by jack_the_knife

In what sense is it a bit more than that? These fan-clubs are dedicated to imaginary friends. These fan-clubs generally even have conflicts about who's imaginary friend of choice is cooler. Or am I entirely missing something?

If you've never searched for Spiritual Truth, there's simply no way I can sufficiently describe to you how different it is from just being a fan club.

Once you realize the Spiritual Realm is real, and realize that there is, indeed, a God Who cares and wants to help, it changes everything. That's the best way I can put it.

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

But if you're stupid, pathetic imaginary friend fan clubs are cool.

Fixed that for you.

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

Fixed that for you.

Why not just let folks believe as they wish? Why the hostility?

[jack_the_knife]

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

Why not just let folks believe as they wish? Why the hostility?

Because letting people believe what they want merely breeds stupidity of the worst degree.

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

Why not just let folks believe as they wish? Why the hostility?

For the most part, I do let people believe as they wish. I've pretty much given up trying to make religious people aware that they're deluding themselves without reason. In return, I ask that you "just let" me hold the belief I wish the hold, this being the belief that you're a dumbass, and fulfill my consequent desire to make fun of you.

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by jack_the_knife

Because letting people believe what they want merely breeds stupidity of the worst degree.

So you would rather someone try and force you to believe something you know isn't true?

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

For the most part, I do let people believe as they wish. I've pretty much given up trying to make religious people aware that they're deluding themselves without reason. In return, I ask that you "just let" me hold the belief I wish the hold, this being the belief that you're a dumbass, and fulfill my consequent desire to make fun of you.

Believe whatever you wish, GM, whether it's about me or anything else. [Isn't freedom a wonderful thing?]

[viscus]

Originally Posted by jack_the_knife

In what sense is it a bit more than that? These fan-clubs are dedicated to imaginary friends. These fan-clubs generally even have conflicts about who's imaginary friend of choice is cooler. Or am I entirely missing something?

There's no reason to it, it's all strictly emotional. You either feel spiritual or you don't.

I don't, and mostly I don't care if other people do so long as they leave me alone about it.

[jack_the_knife]

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

So you would rather someone try and force you to believe something you know isn't true?

What I meant was that I would rather to be forced to believe something that's true ( and proven ) as opposed to some concocted story that some blokes dreamed up some two-thousand years ago.

[Pyre]

This thread was completely and utterly derailed from its decent intentions. If you guys want to argue religion, then take it to the religion thread. Although I am nonreligious I am still very offended when people find it necessary to attack others' beliefs. The only "religion" worth attacking is Scientology, because it's the cult from the depths of Hell itself--probably the only "religion" I am not opposed to being attacked.

[jack_the_knife]

Originally Posted by Pyre

This thread was completely and utterly derailed from its decent intentions. If you guys want to argue religion, then take it to the religion thread. Although I am nonreligious I am still very offended when people find it necessary to attack others' beliefs. The only "religion" worth attacking is Scientology, because it's the cult from the depths of Hell itself--probably the only "religion" I am not opposed to being attacked.

Quite frankly I don't see how you can justify attacking Scientology but are offended when other "religions" are attacked.

[Pyre]

Originally Posted by jack_the_knife

What I meant was that I would rather to be forced to believe something that's true ( and proven ) as opposed to some concocted story that some blokes dreamed up some two-thousand years ago.

That's fine. You believe as you want and let others believe as they want. If everyone believed in the same thing, then life would become pretty bland--who would you be arguing with, then?

And some "bloke" didn't just dream up Christianity two thousand years ago. Christianity, as well as all modern religions, are all born of the same proto-religion. The argument is that there is a "God gene" that makes humans innately believe in higher beings, which is why the idea of spirit gods and creationism has been around since the age of man. (Of course, the idea of a "God gene" seems entirely preposterous, but the fact that humans have always held spiritual beliefs is all the same.)

[Pyre]

Originally Posted by jack_the_knife

Quite frankly I don't see how you can justify attacking Scientology but are offended when other "religions" are attacked.

If you didn't catch my use of grammar, I did not say other "religions." There are religions and then there's the "religion" of Scientology. Religion. "Religion." Not the same. Scientology is a cult, and it's a very harmful one at that.