cressida Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 Why should we close the Catholic church because of these miscreants - are they in the majority? We don't close the schools because of perverts, we don't close the banks if they get it wrong btw I am not a Catholic but it's the evil people who need weeding out and sometimes even the people at the top don't know what is going on - if they do then they should be weeded out too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 Why should we close the Catholic church because of these miscreants - are they in the majority? We don't close the schools because of perverts, we don't close the banks if they get it wrong btw I am not a Catholic but it's the evil people who need weeding out and sometimes even the people at the top don't know what is going on - if they do then they should be weeded out too The trouble is the people at the top DO know what's going on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chorba Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 .................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 The trouble is the people at the top DO know what's going on Then all it should take is the removal of those at the top. You dont have to close down the whole bleddy church along with it. If the Chief Executive Officer of British Petroleum was caught taking a shower with the choirboys would they close down BP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 I try my best, but when you keep interrupting the debate telling us we shouldn’t be debating religion it gets a little difficult. Where did I tell you not to debate religion? You on the other hand tell me not to post anything about religion unless it's derogatory or else start my own thread about the postive aspects of it. You can argue about the existence or non-existence of god until kingdom come but the argument will never be won by either side as there just isn't any evidence to support either argument. That's the point I was making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Yes but they are things more relevant to the Muslim faith as is the recent grooming of young white girls by gangs of Pakistani men..This isn't about that though, its about a problem specific to the Catholic Church ie priests abusing thousands of children for many years and then this being covered up by the church... Close the Catholic church and you'll have to close every major bank, financial institution and governments who've turned a blind eye to their murky past...a past which now isn't so murky. I'm all for expanding any discussion on what's right and what's wrong about religion as a whole. That's a bit rich coming from a country that outlawed Darwinism from its education curriculum. Darwinism (science) was only given a leg-up because Russia launched Sputnik. The 'wrong doing' of the catholic church is endemic. The organisation hoarded wealth, sided with Dictators, oversaw the moving on of abusers (often to abuse again) and the wholesale repatriation of children who were told that their mothers had died. Add to this the control over contraception and the lack of access to abortion , AIDS in Africa where the priests lie to people about the benefit of condoms and I think it's safe to say that anyone who thinks the catholic way is best for their children should have those children taken into care. Quite, but none of this could have happened without individual State/institutional approval..the Catholic church has very long tentacles. This is ridiculous. Classic media sensationalism. There have been cases of priests sexually abusing minors. Right, well then that justifies the ending of a religion that has been going for over 2000 years does it? What about Islam? Plenty of cases of suicide bombers, etc. Why not end that too? Ridiculous. It's the priests at fault, not the religion. You seem to contradict yourself...in one sentence religion is not at fault but in another you're suggesting Islam be banned. Make your mind up. And once again I dont see that anything is gained by laughing or ridiculing them. It's all a matter of having some respect Who's ridiculing and showing disrespect? Regardless of the religion..but which you seem to be trumping Catholicism like a high school cheerleader, all religions are fundamentally dangerous. If you wish to take a wider view through ridiculing and disrespect, would you like me to point you to the thousands of incidents acted out in the name of religion which shows no respect for their fellow men. Religion asks nothing from you other than to get on your knees..personally I think that's worth a ridicule or two. If I wish to call you a dork for believing in the tooth fairy it isn't exactly going to kill you is it..after all your faith will see you through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Then all it should take is the removal of those at the top. You dont have to close down the whole bleddy church along with it. If the Chief Executive Officer of British Petroleum was caught taking a shower with the choirboys would they close down BP? Yes if it was systematic throughout BP right down to the guy sweeping the shop floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Where did I tell you not to debate religion? You on the other hand tell me not to post anything about religion unless it's derogatory or else start my own thread about the postive aspects of it. You can argue about the existence or non-existence of god until kingdom come but the argument will never be won by either side as there just isn't any evidence to support either argument. That's the point I was making. You are a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena therefore there is little you can contribute to a debate about God. I accept your position which can never change, there can be no proof either way of something that as no group definition, on the other hand if someone gave a comprehensive definition of God without constantly changing said definition then it may be possible to disprove it exists outside of the human mind. For instance a omnipotent entity having unlimited power; able to do anything, can be proven not to exist. I accept that God exists just like love and hate exist in the mind of the individual. Love, hate, fear and God are all beyond an excepted group definition because they are all constructs of an emotional mind. Each person will define them differently and act on those feeling differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 No I am not. I am an Agnostic. I demand proof that there is a god as I demand proof that there isnt a god. That is not reasonable, negatives cannot be proven. Do you demand proof that there isn't a giant invisible incorporeal elephant sitting in front of you right now? Would you say you are agnostic on the issue? Or would you simply say 'no, there is no elephant'. You said "I refuse to subscribe to any theory that cannot provide absolute proof to it's validity." That means that you must not believe in god, because there is no proof or evidence for it at all. If you don't believe in god then you are an atheist. I know that atheist is a dirty word where you live and it might make you uncomfortable, but it is the only logical conclusion of your stated position. I'm not smart enough to have any positive theory on how the earth or the universe was created.That's great, just like me, that's why I'm an atheist. It is not a positive theory, merely a denial of other people's positive theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Then all it should take is the removal of those at the top. You dont have to close down the whole bleddy church along with it. If the Chief Executive Officer of British Petroleum was caught taking a shower with the choirboys would they close down BP? I didn't say it we should close down the whole church because of them. I've said that I don't think there's a need for churches or ANY religious organisations to tell people how to worship their gods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.