[Closed] Catholic Church and other religions!

I think I'm gonna stick with 'atheist fury', thanks all the same cougar. It makes me feel strangely potent. 😯

Western Buddhism, perhaps?

Diet Buddhism.

nealglover - Member

Rusty spanner, I'm a bit confused now.

A couple of pages back when someone suggested people had a right not to be insulted based on their religion you said that they didn't and you could say whatever you wanted to them and there was nothing they could do about it.

When it was pointed out that this wasnt actually the case, you said you had been arguing against religion being part of that legislation for years (but you seemed not to be aware of it previously?)

You can insult whoever you like, as long as, as pointed out above, there is no intention to harass etc.

There was a thread about this a couple of years ago when the Tyneside Koran-burning case came to trial.

I attempted to debate the intricasies & interpretation of the legislation with TJ, Fred & Ernie, who all disagreed vehemently with my opinion.
There were even insults directed against me 😀
I enjoyed the debate very much.

It'll still be in the archives if you want to look.

Even the modz are laughing at the devout.

I know that was a joke but just for clarity so we can avoid ad modinem attacks; I'm posting here (and generally) in my capacity as a forum user, not a moderator.

Neal, the legislation does not provide a right not to be insulted based on religion.

I'll quote it again ....

Any communication which is threatening, abusive or [b]insulting, [/b]and is intended to [b]harass, alarm, or distress [/b]someone is forbidden

Granted, anyone can claim that their intent was not to distress or harass, as a get out.

But the example I quoted above was pretty clear.

abusing someone isn't nice irrespective of the reasons why. That's not a religion issue, that's being a decent human being issue.

Challenge ideas - yes.
Abuse someone randomly - no.

That's always been my point. Saying 'religious people are ignorant and feeble minded' is not challenging the ideas, that's just being nasty and prejudiced.

Offending and insulting aren't synonyms.

Personally I think we are all missing a trick.

If you can't beat them join them.

Set up the church of mountain biking.

There are already rules (although not on stone tablets as far as I'm aware)
There are already places of worship / pilgrimage.
There is already a great schism (29ers)

Set it up as a religion - claim charitable status - claim all the VAT back on tyres. Everyones a winner

What tyres for sunday prayers?

Halo Choir Boys, of course...

That's always been my point.

Cool; we're in agreement on that, then.

Saying 'religious people are ignorant and feeble minded' is not challenging the ideas, that's just being nasty and prejudiced.

Is it, though? If you accept religious explanations of, say, creation of the world over well established scientific theory, evidence and proof, then you're either ignorant (literally - ie, you don't know any better) or you lack some form of critical thinking which would otherwise empower you to call into question the circular reasoning and inconsistencies that such "explanations" attempt to provide.

It's a rash generalisation perhaps, and it's not particularly nice to call people names; but I don't think it's automatically "nasty" without knowing context and intent, and I don't really see how it could be called prejudiced?

Blah, blah, blah...
...You're not a very good Catholic, then.

How very dogmatic of you.

I'd wager that Barnleymitch's knowledge and understanding of Catholicism is at least as valid as your own.
Perhaps a more "scientific" approach would be to question whether your own pre-conceptions of "good Catholics" hold true?

Slightly more introspective, but also less confrontational and judgemental.

What tyres for sunday prayers?

This time of year... Mudrakes.... as it's all a bit dour and super somber.

Come September and harvest we can crack out the Kenda 8 blocks and have a tear up.

Right I'm gonna be late... catch you after the service

That's always been my point. Saying 'religious people are ignorant and feeble minded' is not challenging the ideas, that's just being nasty and prejudiced.

Halo Choir Boys, of course..

Applauds

Although technically it is true.

So you are opting to be prejudiced and unpleasant here, just to make it absoultely clear?

Aye, you're right joolsburger , I'm as thick as shit me. Better tell the wife to pack her job in as a senior lecturer as well. 🙄

That's always been my point. Saying 'religious people are ignorant and feeble minded' is not challenging the ideas, that's just being nasty and prejudiced.

Although technically it is true.

Meh...

Aside from the genuinely ignorant - eg never been taught otherwise I've actually always been impressed by the capacity of bright religious people to hold onto some of the sillier tenants of their faith.

I mean the intellectual rigour involved in the beliefs held by "young earth creationists" would tire me out pretty quickly.

Personally I'd just give in and go along with everyone else and you know all that "evidence" and other stuff

No to make it absolutely clear I am using those words in exactly the way they are intended to be used.

Ignorant - Lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular: "ignorant of astronomy".

In this case the belief in something without a shred of evidence and despite the evidence to the contrary

Feeble minded - Is perhaps a little harsh and I withdraw that however the cognitive dissonance required to believe in god and post that using a computer on the internet is mind boggling.

Prejudiced and unpleasant, I'm not the one in a club based on hatred and fear.

I'd wager that Barnleymitch's knowledge and understanding of Catholicism is at least as valid as your own.

I know what a quack sounds like, that doesn't make me a duck.

I don't doubt that BM knows at least as much about Catholicism as I do, and probably a lot more. But he's choosing to ignore it.

Perhaps a more "scientific" approach would be to question whether your own pre-conceptions of "good Catholics" hold true?

I don't have any preconceptions of anyone, but I do have a basic understanding of the core tenets of the Catholic church, and their pro-life isn't something that's ambiguous. If you're going to align yourself with a group and then choose to ignore what they stand for, you're not a very good member of that group.

If I ate fish, I'd be a pretty poor vegetarian. If I continued to call myself a vegetarian whilst chowing down on a cod fillet, would that not suggest that perhaps a different label is appropriate? Hey, maybe I should look into what those pescetarians are up to?

Slightly more introspective, but also less confrontational and judgemental.

My intention wasn't to be either of those things, sorry if it came across otherwise.

Granted, anyone can claim that their intent was not to distress or harass, as a get out.

Intent is a legal idea, which is contained in many laws. Intent makes the difference between murder and manslaughter or other lesser charges, for example.

What I want to know is:

If catholics truely believe in transubstantiation can a vegetarian take communion?

I've actually always been impressed by the capacity of bright religious people to hold onto some of the sillier tenants of their faith.

Sure.

This is where I was going with "rash generalisation." One of the most intelligent, educated people I know is a Christian (and a polymath). I had a lengthy discussion with him about it as I couldn't consolidate the two. Basically, he said he compartmentalises the faith side of things and treats it wholly separately from everything else. His 'conversion' tale is not wholly dissimilar to Ro5ey's.

I have to disagree with joolsburger on this.

Saying all religious people are ignorant is just ignorant in itself, as amply demonstrated by barnsleymitch's always honest, intelligent and patient contributions to these threads.

I was brought up as a Catholic myself, by a fiercely religious mother and an atheist father and am fully aware that there are lots of very complex reasons why people believe what they do.

In my opinion, and it's just that, it's fine to insult an opinion or belief, but attacking the individual holding that opinion is a matter which should be approached differently.

Oh, and nealglover, here's a link to the thread I mentioned above, discussing the relevant legislation.
Only a couple of years ago, but it's interesting to see the contrast in the tone of debate between then and now.

[url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/is-this-actually-racial-hatred ]Link. [/url]

I do have a basic understanding of the core tenets of the Catholic church, and their pro-life isn't something that's ambiguous. If you're going to align yourself with a group and then choose to ignore what they stand for, you're not a very good member of that group.

I know several women who considered leaving the CofE over the women bishops vote. My wife was pondering moving to the Quaker congregation.

Membership of a church gives its views authority. The Church of England uses the answers given in religious views on the census as support for its ideas, for example. Obviously, they choose to ignore the fact that lots of people ticking the CofE box do so because they were Christened so that's what their label is, rather than because they actually agree/believe in what the church says.

The RC church goes one further, and just uses the number of baptisms. If you had some water splashed on you as a baby you're in, regardless of your stance now.

nealglover - Member

A simple test, we throw them all into Grafton Water, those that float we burn as witches.

(I fully expect the "Edinburgh Defence" to be deployed )

Please tell me you're not serious? 😆

I don't want to get too deeply involved in this Cougar, I've already wasted too much of my day on here, and mrs Mitch will probably withdraw all hands up jumper rights from me when she realises I've spent yet another day off sitting on my arse. Without knowing how I've thought / acted and interacted with other members of the church regarding my doubts and beliefs, you seem to be getting a bit judgemental, although I perhaps started that by describing myself as a 'not very good Catholic'. i was merely trying to point out that not all Christians, Muslims, Catholics whatever, are following the tenets of their faith blindly.

I believe that the religious are ignorant of the fact that there is no god. I can't dress it up or sugar coat it. I think it's a completely mad idea and I'd be less honest and lack integrity if I pretended I thought something else for the sake of politeness.

At the end of it all my beliefs have no impact on anyone, live and let live etc. Theirs really do and in many ways very negatively.

At the end of it all my beliefs have no impact on anyone, live and let live etc.

...and thereby hangs the tail! The truth is that if none of the nonces thieves, murderers or adulterers operating under the auspices of religion chose to ponitificate about their faith, I very much doubt whether anyone much would comment on religion here or elsewhere. The problem is that they cannot just be content with finding the Lord, they have to bore the rest of us with their issues.

So for the record, my personal beliefs are my business and no one elses. If I choose to share them, and those I share them with wish to comment then thats fair enough by me, because I've opened that door. Trouble is the religionists can't quite get that point.

The truth is that if none of the nonces thieves, murderers or adulterers operating under the auspices of religion chose to ponitificate about their faith...

You conveniently forget people who mutilate children genitals, oppress women, or discriminate against gays.

At the end of it all my beliefs have no impact on anyone, live and let live etc. Theirs really do and in many ways very negatively.

... because atheists/non-religious people have never done anything to negatively impact anyone

🙄

Ha that old chestnut. I can't actually recall when bad things were done expressly in the name of atheism/secularism. Yes I know Stalin was an atheist but he also had a mustache, so what, Hitler was a catholic and only had one nut.

I don't see the atheists in Uganda calling for the murder of gays etc etc etc.

Whatever way you dress it up if you truly believe in a life after this one you're likely to act very oddly indeed.

Without knowing how I've thought / acted and interacted with other members of the church regarding my doubts and beliefs, you seem to be getting a bit judgemental,

As I said just there ^^ that wasn't my intention, and I apologise unreservedly if that's how it came across.

not all Christians, Muslims, Catholics whatever, are following the tenets of their faith blindly.

Sure. And the same argument applies; why would they, then?

This is probably a generalisation but, if you(*) subscribe to an organised religion, you (presumably) believe that its preachings are godly in origin. You obviously believe in a god, and yet you'd wilfully reject god's will and teachings because you believe you know better. How do you then consolidate a love / fear of god with such disobedience? Moreover, why / how would you then continue to say you're following that religion when you clearly aren't?

I understand that many religions values are products of an earlier time and not really compatible with modern society. I just don't get why you'd still identify with a particular religion whose views are in conflict rather than your own, rather than finding a different faith which was more appropriate.

(* - "you" as in "someone", not you personally)

S'ok Cougar, I was going to post and apologise for using the term 'judgemental' anyway. (Edit) long rambling post deleted.

Yes I know Stalin was an atheist but he also had a mustache, so what, Hitler was a catholic and only had one nut.

It could be argued that Stalin could do what he did because of the conditioning of the religious system in place before him. People were accustomed to following the orders of an all powerful leader.

I pretended I thought something else for the sake of politeness.

That's not what I'm asking you to do, ffs!

Do say: "I don't share your beliefs"
Don't say: "Hahaha you stupid bastard"

I really can't understand why people are struggling with this.

In my opinion, and it's just that, it's fine to insult an opinion or belief,

I don't think it is. It's fine to disagree, and discuss, but all I'm asking for is a little ****ing politeness! Discuss, don't insult. There is never a need to insult people.

I've actually always been impressed by the capacity of bright religious people to hold onto some of the sillier tenants of their faith.

One might say that a characteristic of intelligence is the ability to reconcile apparently mutually exclusive points of view.

At the end of it all my beliefs have no impact on anyone, live and let live etc. Theirs really do and in many ways very negatively.

An absolutely gigantic straw man. Lots of people have beliefs that affect others negatively. It is in no way exclusive to religion. Also, lots of religious people do not have beliefs that affect others negatively.

Poor poor reasoning.

This is probably a generalisation but, if you(*) subscribe to an organised religion, you (presumably) believe that its preachings are godly in origin. You obviously believe in a god, and yet you'd wilfully reject god's will and teachings because you believe you know better. How do you then consolidate a love / fear of god with such disobedience? Moreover, why / how would you then continue to say you're following that religion when you clearly aren't?

Probably one of the most discussed topics in all of history. Lots of reading to be done...

[b] In my opinion, and it's just that, it's fine to insult an opinion or belief[/b],

I don't think it is. It's fine to disagree, and discuss, but all I'm asking for is a little * politeness! Discuss, don't insult. There is never a need to insult people.

But I said it's fine to insult the opinion or belief (my quote in bold).
Do you agree?

By the way, do you consider 'ffs!' and 'a little * politeness!' to be polite? 😀

BTW, I do think in certain circumstances it's fine to verbally insult or attack an individual.
If that individual is attempting to pass off hatred and predjudice as religious or political belief and refusing to engage in polite and rational debate, for example.
Sometimes, rarely, it's the only alternative.

That's not what I'm asking you to do, ffs!
Do say: "I don't share your beliefs"
Don't say: "Hahaha you stupid bastard"
I really can't understand why people are struggling with this.

You can ask all you want but I don't have to comply. You don't get to control what I say, anymore than I get to control what you or anyone else says.

following the tenets of their faith blindly.

no need to, jesus (or his associated preachers in america) can fix the blind. seen it on TV.

You can ask all you want but I don't have to comply. You don't get to control what I say, anymore than I get to control what you or anyone else says.

And you can tell me that you don't care all you want.. see, that's how conversation works. I'm not expecting you to do what I say - I've been alive too long to expect it 🙂

But I said it's fine to insult the opinion or belief (my quote in bold).
Do you agree?

No - do not INSULT it - disagree with it nicely.

The bottom line - don't be a ****

I do think in certain circumstances it's fine to verbally insult or attack an individual.
If that individual is attempting to pass off hatred and predjudice as religious or political belief and refusing to engage in polite and rational debate, for example.
Sometimes, rarely, it's the only alternative.

It will never, ever work, will just result in two abusive people instead of one. Save your breath.

No - do not INSULT it - disagree with it nicely.

And what if that belief is then violently forced upon you?
Is it ok to fight back?
As long as you don't insult anyone?

It will never, ever work, will just result in two abusive people instead of one. Save your breath.

Some beliefs are so vile that those who espouse them are deserving of ridicule and insult.
They have, by voicing their hatred, by their abandonment of reason and rationality, forfieted their 'right' to politeness.

Do say: "I don't share your beliefs"
Don't say: "Hahaha you stupid bastard"

I really can't understand why people are struggling with this.

See I get what you are saying and I agree.

However I might consider being told I am going to hell by a religious person quite insulting too (I don't I'd need to actual believe hell exists for this to bother me)

But certainly if I was gay then being described as an abomination or similar would probably be quite upsetting

A woman in a difficult situation seeking an abortion might hold a similar view.

So the religious can't really have it both ways. Free to have a go at anyone who makes choices or leads a life contrary to their beliefs but somehow immune from insults thrown in their direction?

However I might consider being told I am going to hell by a religious person quite insulting too

Fair enough. But I've never read that posted on here by a Christian, but I've seen a hell of a lot of abuse thrown about by atheists.

Free to have a go at anyone who makes choices or leads a life contrary to their beliefs

No no no! I'm not saying religious people can insult whoever they like. My comments apply to EVERYONE.

Religious people shouldn't insult, pity, criticise or denigrate atheists, and vice versa.

It's just about being nice to each other. That's all. It's really not too hard is it?

Fair enough. But I've never read that posted on here by a Christian, but I've seen a hell of a lot of abuse thrown about by atheists.

As someone already pointed out, you get it shouted at you in the street reasonably often when you walk round a city centre. I don't recall ever seeing any atheists doing similar.

It's just about being nice to each other. That's all. It's really not too hard is it?

Someone got nailed to a tree for saying that once you know. Allegedly 🙂

Anyway, you're just trying to impose your beliefs on others now aren't you? 😀

I'm off to clean the car.

It's just about being nice to each other. That's all. It's really not too hard is it?

Not at all

Rule No:1 "Don't be a dick"

I'm just saying (as are you happily enough) it applies to both sides

As someone already pointed out, you get it shouted at you in the street reasonably often when you walk round a city centre

I also see people exhorting me to buy stuff, singing, playing musical instruments, dancing, pretending to be statues and rambling incoherently. I dunno if they are atheists or not.

If THAT is the excuse you use for having a go at any christian who happens to be reading STW, then that's pretty weak.

It's just about being nice to each other. That's all

its the christian thing to do

If THAT is the excuse you use for having a go at any christian who happens to be reading STW, then that's pretty weak.

That's a pretty blatant straw man - weak.

We can safely say that most of the insults thrown on STW would never be voiced aloud in company anyway.

If THAT is the excuse you use for having a go at any christian who happens to be reading STW

I refer you to my previous post..

Berm Bandit - Member

At the end of it all my beliefs have no impact on anyone, live and let live etc.

...and thereby hangs the tail! The truth is that if none of the nonces thieves, murderers or adulterers operating under the auspices of religion chose to ponitificate about their faith, I very much doubt whether anyone much would comment on religion here or elsewhere. The problem is that they cannot just be content with finding the Lord, they have to bore the rest of us with their issues.

So for the record, my personal beliefs are my business and no one elses. If I choose to share them, and those I share them with wish to comment then thats fair enough by me, because I've opened that door. Trouble is the religionists can't quite get that point.

I think you will find the majority of noise on this subject is one directional. I know of few if any non religious folk who spend much time on the religious. The religious however, seem to make it a priority the other way around. Therefore it should hardly be surprising when confronted with damning evidence of hypocracy that a few point a finger and say things along the lines of "but you're not wearing any clothes". Hoisted on your own petard seems to cover it.

ONCE AGAIN it's fine to take issue with them, it is not fine to be nasty.

"As someone already pointed out, you get it shouted at you in the street reasonably often when you walk round a city centre."

GOLF SALE, GOLF SALE

Bloody Golfist

Mols....

I'm doffing my cap to you fella... I know you're not doing it, to stick up for us (you know we don't need that or indeed possibly in a wider, much wider context deserve it) but are trying just to make STW (and maybe away from here) a better place .... for that you should be congratulated.

Good work

If I was told to my face by a religious [s]idiot[/s] person that I was going to go to "hell" for being an atheist, I agree it would be a fine and noble and civilised thing to say something along the lines of: "I respectfully disagree with you my dear chap, although of course you are fully entitled to your opinion."

But I might be more inclined to say something like "* off you stupid * and shove your *wit opinion up your *."

Which I think is entirely reasonable. 👿

@BB; But the noise on STW is very much the other way. Other than a few JWs that knock on the door every so often (maybe twice a year), I really don't find myself being mentally assaulted by religious folk trying to persuade me to believe what they believe.

You do realise that there are as many if not more nonces, thieves, murderers (and other emotive terms of your choice) operating under no influence of religion at all don't you? I'm sure you do, of course.

Woppit of course it is... to that particular person.

But not to the rest of us.... thanks vmuch

Ro5ey - Member

Woppit of course it is... to [s]to that particular person[/s] anyone who says that to you.

While we are at it, latest news from the battlefront:

http://www.secularism.org.uk/media-round-up.html

You do realise that [s]there are as many if not more[/s]most nonces, thieves, murderers (and other emotive terms of your choice) who are operating under no influence of religion [s]at all don't you?[/s]don't either pontificate at me or belong to an organsiation that does.

TFTFY

Can't really understand why the concept is so hard to grasp to be fair. Its the pontificating whilst also being an arse that is the irritant, not merely being an arse of itself. Worse still, its those who are remaining silent while its going on. To be honest I find it unbelievably difficult to stomach the hypocracy of the vast majority of religionists, in this context. Think about it: Politician, Football Manager, CEO, you name it if you were in charge whilst there was wholesale abuse of privilige going on during your watch and you'd be gone....... Compare that to the Pope/Cardinals/Arch Bishops/Mullahs etc etc etc

{EDIT:} do none of you lot who are religionists actually read your own PR? Jesus turning over money lenders tables, treating the lowly and sick with respect for example, or is it a case of suffer the little children unto me, having a different meaning to the one I understood??

 

OK .... so, you see that no one on HERE as ever said anything of the sort to you... yet you feel free to spout YOUR (IMO) horrid options left right and centre

I'm not expecting you to do what I say - I've been alive too long to expect it

That's exactly what you are doing when you say

Do say: "I don't share your beliefs"
Don't say: "Hahaha you stupid bastard"

Good work

Thanks, I do it for reasons of balance, I would be doing it to stick up for the religious if I thought they hadn't heard it all before and couldn't deal with it, which you seem to be able to do.

Good work

But I might be more inclined to say something like "* off you stupid * and shove your *wit opinion up your *."

Which I think is entirely reasonable

I don't. Not least because it's just noise and will never make any kind of useful point. If you think being 'noble and civilised' is that difficult, then you need to pull your finger out IMO.

If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

Can't really understand why the concept is so hard to grasp to be fair. Its the pontificating whilst also being an arse that is the irritant

1) People on here aren't doing that - if some religious idiot preaches to you against your will, take it out with him or her, don't spread it about on STW. Incidentally I can't remember reading any threads that started 'This religious guy came to my door and started slagging me off when I didn't let him in'.

2) As above, just because someone irritates you doesn't absolve you of the responsibility to be civil.

That's exactly what you are doing

It's advice, not an instruction.

do none of you lot who are religionists actually read your own PR?

Lol.. yes of course they do.. do you think EVERY religious person is a kiddie fiddling hypocrite? Seriously weak arguing.

yet you feel free to spout YOUR (IMO) horrid options left right and centre

Left right and centre, eh?

"horrid options", eh? 😆

Dead thread, yet?

Seriously weak arguing

I think thats the basis of my case, and I agree that yours is seriously weak.

Simply put for you. If you actively support an organisation so seriously and obviously riven with corruption as the Catholic Church, then you condone what they do and you are part of it.

Regarding pontification: My life has been totally shaped and dictated by religion and it is very much against my will. School, Government, State, you name it. I could stomach it were it not for the blatant hypocracy. If you can't see that then frankly you are simply confirming the self delusionary and self propagating aspect of religion.

Lol.. yes of course they do.. do you think EVERY religious person is a kiddie fiddling hypocrite? Seriously weak arguing.

Oh the ironing.

Another huge straw man there.

If you actively support an organisation so seriously and obviously riven with corruption as the Catholic Church, then you condone what they do and you are part of it.

That's a very good point.

If you can't see that

I can. You seem to be under the impression that I am supporting religion. I'm not, I'm saying that it's not good to insult people of whom you know very little, on the basis that some OTHER people loosely affiliated (and the church is a pretty loose affiliation as we've demonstrated) did something you don't like.

Another huge straw man there.

Well it's not meant to be, that's the straw man that seemed to be underpinning your argument. I'm trying to point that out rather than allege that you actually believe that. It's obviously bobbins which is why I drew attention to it.

It's advice, not an instruction.

Isn't that the Edinburgh defense?

No. Of course not. Why the hell would I be handing out instructions on here? I'm not your lifestyle coach.

Well it's not meant to be, that's the straw man that seemed to be underpinning your argument. I'm trying to point that out rather than allege that you actually believe that. It's obviously bobbins which is why I drew attention to it.

Er.... no - you criticised an exaggerated version of what you think someone meant by what they said, rather than what they actually said - a classic straw man.

And also, my argument?

So, these religion threads are now going to be a thread where we 'discuss' what is or isn't an insult, rather than the point at hand? That pretty much kills the forum then.

If you don't want to participate in the central point of the thread because of the tone of the debate, feel free not to not read it or to report specific posts.

If you want to discuss etiquette, or repeatedly derail the discussion into other areas, why not start your own thread?

(Not that I'm aiming this at anyone in particular but this could apply equally to diet and exercise threads...)

No. Of course not. Why the hell would I be handing out instructions on here? I'm not your lifestyle coach.

Well in that case might I suggest that you work on your communication skills, as that's not how you come across. Your comments on such matters come across in both tone and content as instructions as how everyone should talk.

Ok grum - apologies for losing track of who said what.

do none of you lot who are religionists actually read your own PR? Jesus turning over money lenders tables, treating the lowly and sick with respect for example, or is it a case of suffer the little children unto me, having a different meaning to the one I understood??

Let's look at this again. The assertion is that Christians in general (because it says 'do none of you...?') don't follow Jesus's teachings, because.. what? Because there is bad practice in the church? Well, of course there is. But should they all be tarred with the same brush? Of course not.

Obviously I'm not sticking up for kiddie fiddlers, obviously I'm not condoning the bad stuff, I've said many times I'm not sticking up for organised religion. However Berm Bandit seems to be saying that everyone in the church is at it, as justification for being rude to any Christians who might be reading STW. That seems like weak reasoning to me, because you've got no evidence that the majority of Christians condone such behaviour.

Correct me if that's not what you meant.

Simply put for you. If you actively support an organisation so seriously and obviously riven with corruption as the Catholic Church, then you condone what they do and you are part of it.

What is your evidence for that?

(What is your evidence for that?) oh now you want evidence 😆

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/religion

They/anyone can believe any crazy old crap they want but when they try and imnpose it on me
Does this happen often?

Can we have an answer please mr junkyard?

Correct me if that's not what you meant.

Gladly.

Firstly, I don't beleive I've ever been rude directly to anyone one on this thread, and indirectly no more so than me being consigned to eternal damnation, so a neutral transaction IMHO.
Secondly, I've made my point very clear several times, if you are a member of an organsiation and don't at least speak up agaisnt its clear and frequent excesses you then condone it, so to that extent, Yes you are tarred with the same brush.

Let's look at this again.

Finally, I am not now and never have denied anyones right to hold their own beliefs, opinions and views. What I have said however, is if you put them in the public domain thats your call, but you can hardly complain when by doing so the very obvious flaws in what you beleive are pointed out to you. As religion is unfortunately thrust down everyones necks in this country, I'm sorry if you don't like it, but in my book thats open season.

Going home now, may your God go with you, meanwhile I'll remain spiritually destitute.

Mr woppit - has anyone ever said that, or anything like that to you? Be honest, because the way you come across is that 'religious idiots' appear to be targeting you in particular, on what appears to be a regular basis.

TFTFY

To be honest, you made a bit of a hash of it.

But your one of your subsequent statements explains your attitude to the whole shebang, so fairy nuff.

As religion is unfortunately thrust down everyones necks in this country

It's not though, is it? I find my neck free to support my head, and contain the passages necessary for transport of food and gases. It feels quite free from religion.