As it relates to the vatican and such I raise this quote from another thread for all to read at their leisure (Courtesy Darth InSidious):
Just to add to the discussion since it seems so relevant. Just throwing it out here, not to anybody in particular.
(BTW, what's going on with spiked-online right now? Why is it down? Anywhere else have this article?)
If dawkins is relevant then please read the below, otherwise you may ignore and skip to the next quoting responses.
Now, Dawkins has lead the charge (crusade?) against the catholic church for some time. So when protests are raised towards a mere visit by the pope it tends to resonate sounding rather similar to Dawkins and his ilk.
IIRC one article in the above quoted of DI's post turns a skeptical eye on dawkins himself. Something on the order of "why *now* is the child abuse of great outrage to him, when it wasn't initially?". That's a very good question. While part of the reason might be explained in that either human beings change their minds, or maybe he didn't have enough information to react as such, there is still something missing. How, without actually being Dawkins, do you explain an initially indifferent reaction to something as outrageous as sexual abuse? What is a satisfactory explanation such a rationale that would do that? Just food for thought.
Originally Posted by Dagobahn Eagle
Que? All Phelp's church does is hold idiotic protests and funeral picketings. I'm not aware of them covering up sex crimes within their family.
Seriously? Probably because P-X was being sarcastic. Could just be me, though.
EDIT: Pastrami, maybe you'd care to clarify? I'm just going of the general gist I got from you. /edit
I'm just as shocked every time someone posts a response of this kind, because I honestly do not understand the problem. The Catholic Church is covering up sexual abuse up to and including rape. Please, take a step back and think about this. Imagine it's someone else than the Vatican. Imagine it's, say, the Boy Scouts in your country. Imagine that not only are Boy Scout leaders sexually abusing young boys, and that those few that dare tell the superiors about this are threatened with expulsion from the Scouts if they tell anyone, even their own parents. Imagine that you learn that boys or girls have been abused at your local school, and that two girls told the principal and their parents what had happened, only to be expelled from the school. Then imagine you learn that the teachers who committed the crimes were not punished, just given a diciplinary talk and moved to a different school.
What exactly is the reason for your anger? That he shouldn't be attacked because he is the Pope? That people who happen to be non-believers shouldn't attack him? What?
*raises eyebrow* Oh-Kay O_O
Err, I don't think pastrami was responding angrily... I think that all he is getting at is that while outrage at what is going on is certainly justifiable, a good bit of this outrage is as a result of hyperbole. The point it seemed PX was getting at was there sometimes is just as much irrationality coming from the "down with the church" crowd as from the ones defending the church sometimes as well.
EDIT: PX, care to explain in case I got anything wrong? Don't let me speak for you./edit
This is not
invalidation of the victims, it's merely attempting to retain a realistic scope on what has actually happened. I think there is always outsider rage at anything perceived like this. I think all PX was trying to do here was say basically the same for the outsiders as you said to those inside the catholic church: "think".
I agree (for personal reasons) the covering up of sexual abuse is horrendous. This makes it rather difficult to defend this religion (as an independent, non-state entity from government) as a whole. Some would argue the same is true for all religion, I disagree; I digress, this is bad. Yet it does little real good to follow the crowd in outrages like these sometimes, I think. Even if you are justified. It's still a valid point: WHY throw the entire religion in the garbage as a whole, as a concept, if it's the people in it that are doing the bad? Why not just go after the people individually?
Do we really need to annex religions into government? Is that what what you're after? What is it?
...huh? Okay, now I'm definitely lost. Who are you replying to here?
No sense of humor???
Oy. Why do I even try
for a jester badge?
I'm trying to be a good sport with you people. I really am.
Originally Posted by Kael'thas Solo
Hellspawn, eh? Of course you're the 4th ruler of Hell... I thought that much was obviou- oh wait... I think maybe it just means different skin colors...
as far as I know India and China have only slightly differing skin colors... so I think it'd be like a white man getting a tan in that regards.
Well, at least somebody
caught my sense of humor.