NationStates Jolt Archive

It seems, in the past few years, that it has become customary, dare I say trendy, to bemoan and besmirch Islam as an evil, violent, and fascist religion. But it is often forgotten that Christianity also has a smiliarly evil, violent, and fascist history of its own. Now, both religions are off-shoots of Judaism and descend from my own faith with many common beliefs and bonds. I pride myself on being fair-minded and un-judgmental of all religions and I feel that basing your views of all on the actions of a few will only lead to unjustified hatred, but too often the lessons learned in the study of Christianity go unremembered when dealing with Islam. Lessons such as the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. Perhaps it would be better to grant Islam a bit of leeway when judging it. So, without further ado, a little history lesson on the shady past of the Christian faith.

CRUSADES

The Crusades were a series of wars by Western European Christians to recapture the Holy Land from the Muslims. The Crusades were first undertaken in 1096 and ended in the late 13th century. The term Crusade was originally applied solely to European efforts to retake from the Muslims the city of Jerusalem, which was sacred to Christians as the site of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. It was later used to designate any military effort by Europeans against non-Christians. And this is where the real purpose of my thread begins. I've always wondered how some people could make arguments on these boards when the evidence presented in previous posts points to the contrary. I wondered if it was because people did not read entire posts of length such as this. So I'm testing this fact. I bet there will be quite a few people to post on this thread based on the opening paragraph and the beginning of this paragraph. They won't see all this that I'm writing right here at all. And I will enjoy a good laugh. So, if you are reading this, please don't spoil it for me. Instead of posting and having a good laugh at my obnoxious trick, just simply reply with "I agree", and leave any private comments in my telegram box. And, if you are so inclined, make a similar post of your own, with it's own hidden message. Now back to the charade. Stick around through the next paragraph for another easter egg. In a broad sense the Crusades were an expression of militant Christianity and European expansion. They combined religious interests with secular and military enterprises. Christians learned to live in different cultures, which they learned and absorbed; they also imposed something of their own characteristics on these cultures. The Crusades strongly affected the imagination and aspirations of people at the time, and to this day they are among the most famous chapters of medieval history.

THE INQUISITION

The Inquisition was a judicial institution established by the papacy in the Middle Ages, charged with seeking out, trying, and sentencing persons guilty of heresy. In the early church the usual penalty for heresy was excommunication. With the establishment of Christianity as the state religion by the Roman emperors in the 4th century, heretics came to be considered enemies of the state, especially when violence and the disturbance of public order were involved. St. Augustine gave a somewhat reluctant approval to action by the state against heretics, but the church generally disapproved of coercion and physical penalties. And I'm back. I wonder how many people have even made it this far down even after reading the little message in the first paragraph. I imagine I've lost a few readers even though they knew I'd be back here. I think I will allow this thread to hover around like this for a while, depending on the amount of responses I get to the false subject compared to the responses concerning the actual intent. I know that this has probably been done before; I don't think I'm being particularly witty here, but I think this is going to be very amusing for me, to say the least. It is kind of like those tests you used to get in the first day of class in high school that told you to read through the entire instructions before starting, and in the instructions it told you to just answer the final question and hand it in. Then you could enjoy a little chuckle as you saw people struggle through the impossibly hard test, not realizing that a joke was being played upon them. At any rate, I've let this go on long enough, so I think I'm just about done. Just to recap, if you read all this, just respond with "I agree" so I know you got the joke without ruining the joke, and leave me a telegram with your reactions. Thanks. Oh, and check out the links I provide. And now back to your regularly scheduled broadcast. For those of you who spend way to much time on here, no, you're not seeing double, this is a re-posted thread. It was posted a few months ago by Sdaeriji and did really well and I thought it'd be good to bring it back. I got his permission first and added a few touches of my own, but that's really just these few sentences saying this is a re-post and a few words here and there to give it my feel. Enjoy! The grand inquisitor and his tribunal had jurisdiction over local tribunals in colonies such as Mexico and Peru, which were usually more concerned with sorcery than heresy. Holy Roman Emperor Charles V introduced the Inquisition into the Netherlands in 1522, where it failed to wipe out Protestantism. The Spanish established it in Sicily in 1517, but were unable to do so in Naples and Milan. Historians have noted that many Protestant lands had institutions as repressive as the Spanish Inquisition, such as the consistory in Geneva at the time of the French reformer John Calvin. The Inquisition was finally suppressed in Spain in 1834.

So, in conclusion, I think that Christians ought to approach their attitudes towards Islam with a little bit more civility, since Christianity has its own violent and unsavory past.

For some more information on the violent history of Christianity, I refer you to these sites.

http://www.time.com/archive/religion/christianity/h4587340293384673/article/hypocrisy/heylookifoundjimmyhoffabackhere/iamsuchajerk/4342328373593.html
http://www.newyorktimes.com/archive/scienceandreligion/article4328372639834/christianityandislam/ohmygod/bigfoot/iwonderifnessieisbackheretoo/234092347262983.html
http://www.english.aljazeera.net/culture/religion/NR/exeres/8b323237v23/thisiswhereameliaearhartcrashed/ibetalotofpeopleragonmeforincludinganaljazeeralink/7B09E3B6-0AED-496F-B5D8-39C7DCF65E44.htm

I couldn't agree more. Well said.

http://users.rcn.com/rostmd/winace/pics/dnftt.jpg

We all know, Christianity has a bad track record. So do many things - get over it. I'm agnostic, but still, this really is nothing but flamebait.

I think you really should read the whole article before you post such harsh words

http://users.rcn.com/rostmd/winace/pics/dnftt.jpg

We all know, Christianity has a bad track record. So do many things - get over it. I'm agnostic, but still, this really is nothing but flamebait.

I think if you re-read it, you will change your judgement that it is flamebait. It really is an in-depth look at the flaws of Christianity. It's hard to disagree with when you really read the whole thing, start to finish.

Actually, reading it through, I'd have to say that you weren't just flaming, but actually presented COHERENT (gasp!) points. I'm TG'ing you an apology, I suppose.

Think nothing of it, such misunderstandings happen all the time

Christians (or anyone) shouldn't speak badly of Islam as a whole based on the actions of a minority of Muslims.

Similarly, people shouldn't speak badly of Christianity based on the evil doings of Christians that occured so long ago.


By the way, this thread should be renamed to "the hypocrisy of some Christian individuals". Your current thread title suggests that Christianity is at fault, which, in my opinion is an imbalanced, biased, and unsupportable view. Perhaps it wasn't your intention for it to come off that way.

I had never, you know, thought to think that maybe christianity wasnt so peechy keen and bloodless. This is all such mind blowing news.

Boofheads, I think if you looked at my opening post a little more closely you'll come around to my point of view. I've been told by many people that it really is quite persuasive

Boofheads, I think if you looked at my opening post a little more closely you'll come around to my point of view. I've been told by many people that it really is quite persuasive

Heh, ok, I feel stupid. (:

Er, I mean, I agree. You are a persuasive person.

Christians (or anyone) shouldn't speak badly of Islam as a whole based on the actions of a minority of Muslims.

Similarly, people shouldn't speak badly of Christianity based on the evil doings of Christians that occured so long ago.


By the way, this thread should be renamed to "the hypocrisy of some Christian individuals". Your current thread title suggests that Christianity is at fault, which, in my opinion is an imbalanced, biased, and unsupportable view. Perhaps it wasn't your intention for it to come off that way.


So you defend christians and muslims but it's ok if people speak badly of jews????


In any case, how can you trust someone who believes something so patently absurd as christianity or islam?

Christians (or anyone) shouldn't speak badly of Islam as a whole based on the actions of a minority of Muslims.

Similarly, people shouldn't speak badly of Christianity based on the evil doings of Christians that occured so long ago.


By the way, this thread should be renamed to "the hypocrisy of some Christian individuals". Your current thread title suggests that Christianity is at fault, which, in my opinion is an imbalanced, biased, and unsupportable view. Perhaps it wasn't your intention for it to come off that way.
Christianity as in the organization was at fault for many of thoes things so you could say "christianity" specialy the roman catholic denomination was at fault

So you defend christians and muslims but it's ok if people speak badly of jews????


In any case, how can you trust someone who believes something so patently absurd as christianity or islam?

I can't tell if you're joking or not (based on the "nature" of this thread).

The Christian view is to "love thy neigbor like thyself". There are no stipulations on race or belief system.

Christianity as in the organization was at fault for many of thoes things so you could say "christianity" specialy the roman catholic denomination was at fault

The Roman Catholic Church was, because of human corruption, operating in very non Christian ways. This is regrettable.

I need to tell you a little about how Klonar hurts people wherever they may be, penthouse or poorhouse. And so I shall. In the text that follows, when I quote from Klonar, I will use the word "excrement" in place of another word which is now apparently permitted in general circulation publications, and which I have edited out. He is a psychologically defective person. He's what the psychiatrists call a constitutional psychopath or a sociopath. Can you really blame me for suggesting that he finds enemies everywhere?

What, then, does "preterdiplomatically" mean? It means considerably more than any dictionary is likely to say. I truly can't stress this enough, but if we can understand what has caused the current plague of primitive misfits, I believe that we can then convince ethically bankrupt crooks to stop supporting Klonar and tolerating his accusations. There is good reason to believe that his attendants say, "A book of Klonar's writings would be a good addition to the Bible." Yes, I'm afraid they really do talk like that. It's the only way for them to conceal that most people don't realize that Klonar has already revealed his plans to cause (or at least contribute to) a variety of social ills. I decided to go to a random complain generator to get more people riled about Klonar's thread. I want to see if he can trick more people with his experiment, like he tricked me. I like this random complaint generator, I think it's pretty funny. All I have to do is enter a name and the generator creates a random complaint letter directed toward the person. I wonder if anyone else is reading this. If not, everyone will probably wonder what this letter is all about. He revealed these plans in a manifesto bearing all of the hallmarks of having been written by a bunch of morally questionable maniacs. Not only is his manifesto entirely lacking in logic, relentlessly subjective, and utterly anecdotal, but Klonar's provocateurs consider his slogans a breath of fresh air. I, however, find them more like the fetid odor of totalitarianism. We are a nation of prostitutes. By this I mean that as long as we are fat, warm, and dry we don't care what Klonar does. It is precisely that lack of caring that explains why a colleague recently informed me that a bunch of effrontive wheeler-dealers and others in Klonar's amen corner are about to display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations. I have no reason to doubt that story because Klonar has, at times, called me "postmodernist" or "repressive". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to prosecute, sentence, and label people as capricious sluggards without the benefit of any evidence whatsoever.

Even if our society had no social problems at all, we could still say that Klonar does, occasionally, make a valid point. But when he says that his way of life is correct and everyone else's isn't, that's where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins. There is absolutely nothing these hideous tribalism enthusiasts will not do to destroy their enemies. They will poke into the most secret family affairs and not rest until their truffle-searching instinct digs up some unenlightened incident that is calculated to finish off their unfortunate victim. And that, in my view, is our real problem.

The Roman Catholic Church was, because of human corruption, operating in very non Christian ways. This is regrettable.
Thats what you get when you make an organization that seems designed to controll people
If you get bad leaders things go wrong real quick and in a hury specialy with as branwashed as people get about religion sometimes

Boofheads....uh.....what the heck are you talking about? Am I Klonar? What book of writing? I am completely lost.

Christianity as in the organization was at fault for many of thoes things so you could say "christianity" specialy the roman catholic denomination was at fault


The Universal Church only got the moniker "roman" after the schismatics and heretics launched the protestant revolt and declared themselves 'christians.'

For the longest time, christian was just another word for catholic and vice versa.

Thats what you get when you make an organization that seems designed to controll people
If you get bad leaders things go wrong real quick and in a hury specialy with as branwashed as people get about religion sometimes

Yeah, you have a point. Here's how I see it from a Catholic standpoint. Catholics actually believe that the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit (God). However, in the case of some points of the Church's history, the leaders of the Church were corrupted away from the guidance of the Holy Spirit, in large part due to the fact that they did have so much political influence and power (power corrupts).

Now days, luckily, the Church has had that burden of sweeping political power lifted off their shoulders, which allows them to give guidance to its people based off of true morality and goodness, instead of human alterior motives and need for more power. Of course, the weakness of human nature still manifests itself today, as shown with the Priest sex abuse scandal- both with the actual sexually explicit acts and with the failure of those in the know properly react to those acts. This is another problem the Church needs to, and is, working on.

Ultimately, the goal of the Church is to overcome human weakness and the wiles of the Devil, so that the light of God can shine through to the world untarnashed by human sin. This is a difficult task because it is well understood in the Church that we are all weak, all sinners. On a smaller scale, Christian individuals are callled to be windows of God's light to the world.


Usually I try to post in more secular terms, but I tried to demonstrate the idea of the Church as well as I could. Maybe you don't believe the religious aspect of my argument, but perhaps now you better understand the Catholic view of itself. I hope this expalins why Catholics don't simply leave (or shouldn't anyway) or lose faith in the Church at the first sign of trouble.

Boofheads....uh.....what the heck are you talking about? Am I Klonar? What book of writing? I am completely lost.

Did you read my whole post? :p I can be persuasive. ^^

Now days, luckily, the Church has had that burden of sweeping political power lifted off their shoulders, which allows them to give guidance to its people based off of true morality and goodness, instead of human alterior motives and need for more power. Of course, the weakness of human nature still manifests itself today, as shown with the Priest sex abuse scandal- both with the actual sexually explicit acts and with the failure of those in the know properly react to those acts. This is another problem the Church needs to, and is, working on.

.

Yeah right :rolleyes: they are still fighting tooth and nail to even help thoes who have had to have therapy over the years pay for the massive bills we have stacked up
I am trying to be fair but I can NEVER forgive the curch for what they have done ... I am not strong enough to

Doesn't keep them away from trying to interfere with political things...

If it was actually true that the catholic church has stopped with such things, then why are they trying to sell the dead pope as the guy who single handed defeated the eastern block...

Yeah right :rolleyes: they are still fighting tooth and nail to even help thoes who have had to have therapy over the years pay for the massive bills we have stacked up
I am trying to be fair but I can NEVER forgive the curch for what they have done ... I am not strong enough to

That isn't true. Let me copy a letter that my Priest wrote in my local college paper. It's in response to a local student who charged that all the Catholic Church was doing about the scandal was make a pamphlet. This article applies specifically to what has gone on here in Washington State, but it reflects actions taken everywhere.


From Fr. Steve
"The letters policy of The Daily Evergreen states; “Letters and commentaries should focus on issues, not personalities. Personal attacks ... will be considered unsuitable for publication.” Given this criterion, I question how the disrespectful and shameful commentary by Bruno Baltodano was approved for publication in the March 31 edition.
Were “a diminutive, black and white pamphlet” the sole response of the Spokane Diocese’s Bishop William Skylstad to child sexual abuse, I, too, would be amazed. Baltodano’s opinion piece conveniently ignored the facts. Those facts prove a consistent, long-term, compassionate recognition of, and response to a situation of serious concern to the Catholic Church, globally as well as in Eastern Washington.

Nationally, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote and implemented Promise to Protect/Pledge to Heal, a Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People with Essential Norms and a Statement of Episcopal Commitment. This document can be reviewed on the Spokane Diocese’s Web site at www.dioceseofspokane.org in the “Safe Net for Children and Youth” section.

The Charter is not simply lip service. Since the implementation of the charter in March 2003, an independent body of auditors has reviewed each and every diocese to determine compliance with each article included within that charter. The Spokane Diocese’s first audit included commendations for the work the diocese has done. Special congratulations were given for creation and implementation of the diocese’s safe environment program.

The majority of the dioceses have appointed a victim assistance coordinator. Spokane is no exception. The coordinator’s purpose is to reach out to victims, to urge them to come forward and to connect them with counseling, spiritual direction or other resources they need. Additionally, the victim assistance coordinator works with those responsible for creating safe environments.

An independent diocesan review board reviews every policy and action taken related to sexual abuse and harassment and serves as adviser to the bishop. Bishop Skylstad has met privately and personally with victims. He has met publicly with communities where abuse occurred. He has denied under oath knowledge of Father Patrick O’Donnell’s activities. Secrecy is part of the very nature of sexual predators. Thousands of family members can tell similar stories, concluding with the words, “I had no idea this was going on in our own home.”

The diocese has revised and implemented its Code of Conduct and policies in regard to zero-tolerance and reporting requirements.

Employees and volunteers are required to complete safe environment training. Every instance of abuse of a minor has been reported to the police. Public parish forums have featured community experts educating parishioners and neighbors about the prevalence of child abuse and what to do about it. Every aspect of the prevention and training of children, parents, teachers and all church people has been taught, preached and promulgated to create an environment that will – God willing – prevent these abuses from happening now and in our future.

This is a process, a journey. The journey is painful for everyone involved. It will be impossible to heal the church of this terrible blight overnight, but many good, solid actions have been taken. It is our hope that our experience as a church in dealing with this situation will inspire the rest of society to examine the prevalence of child sexual abuse, and work with us

to eradicate it from our families, our schools, our sports programs, our youth activities, and yes, our churches. "


I know Fr. Steve very well and he'll be the first to tell you that the Church wants victims to come foward. Likewise, the Church here in Diocese of Spokane alone has already paid out a lot of money to victims. The Diocese of Spokane has actually declared bankruptcy, partly because so much money has been paid out (not the type of bankruptcy where they have to shut down). All of this is being done on top of the types of things that Fr. Steve described. If you still don't think this is enough, go find your local Priest or Bishop and respectfully suggest what further action needs to be taken.


On a more country-wide scale, here is another response to this.
http://www.catholic.com/library/A_Crisis_of_Saints.asp


I know that forgiveness is difficult, especially when the crime is so terrible. I hope one day you can forgive them and I hope that the leaders of the Church keep the Catholic Church here in the US going in a direction that warrants being forgiven.

Doesn't keep them away from trying to interfere with political things...

If it was actually true that the catholic church has stopped with such things, then why are they trying to sell the dead pope as the guy who single handed defeated the eastern block...

They aren't. Perhaps it seems that way because people like to romanticize the recently deceased.

However, he helped, to what degree is disputable. The Pope recognized that the Soviet influence in Eastern Europe was evil, so he spoke out against it.

That isn't true. Let me copy a letter that my Priest wrote in my local college paper. It's in response to a local student who charged that all the Catholic Church was doing about the scandal was make a pamphlet. This article applies specifically to what has gone on here in Washington State, but it reflects actions taken everywhere.


From Fr. Steve
"The letters policy of The Daily Evergreen states; “Letters and commentaries should focus on issues, not personalities. Personal attacks ... will be considered unsuitable for publication.” Given this criterion, I question how the disrespectful and shameful commentary by Bruno Baltodano was approved for publication in the March 31 edition.
Were “a diminutive, black and white pamphlet” the sole response of the Spokane Diocese’s Bishop William Skylstad to child sexual abuse, I, too, would be amazed. Baltodano’s opinion piece conveniently ignored the facts. Those facts prove a consistent, long-term, compassionate recognition of, and response to a situation of serious concern to the Catholic Church, globally as well as in Eastern Washington.

Nationally, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote and implemented Promise to Protect/Pledge to Heal, a Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People with Essential Norms and a Statement of Episcopal Commitment. This document can be reviewed on the Spokane Diocese’s Web site at www.dioceseofspokane.org in the “Safe Net for Children and Youth” section.

The Charter is not simply lip service. Since the implementation of the charter in March 2003, an independent body of auditors has reviewed each and every diocese to determine compliance with each article included within that charter. The Spokane Diocese’s first audit included commendations for the work the diocese has done. Special congratulations were given for creation and implementation of the diocese’s safe environment program.

The majority of the dioceses have appointed a victim assistance coordinator. Spokane is no exception. The coordinator’s purpose is to reach out to victims, to urge them to come forward and to connect them with counseling, spiritual direction or other resources they need. Additionally, the victim assistance coordinator works with those responsible for creating safe environments.

An independent diocesan review board reviews every policy and action taken related to sexual abuse and harassment and serves as adviser to the bishop. Bishop Skylstad has met privately and personally with victims. He has met publicly with communities where abuse occurred. He has denied under oath knowledge of Father Patrick O’Donnell’s activities. Secrecy is part of the very nature of sexual predators. Thousands of family members can tell similar stories, concluding with the words, “I had no idea this was going on in our own home.”

The diocese has revised and implemented its Code of Conduct and policies in regard to zero-tolerance and reporting requirements.

Employees and volunteers are required to complete safe environment training. Every instance of abuse of a minor has been reported to the police. Public parish forums have featured community experts educating parishioners and neighbors about the prevalence of child abuse and what to do about it. Every aspect of the prevention and training of children, parents, teachers and all church people has been taught, preached and promulgated to create an environment that will – God willing – prevent these abuses from happening now and in our future.

This is a process, a journey. The journey is painful for everyone involved. It will be impossible to heal the church of this terrible blight overnight, but many good, solid actions have been taken. It is our hope that our experience as a church in dealing with this situation will inspire the rest of society to examine the prevalence of child sexual abuse, and work with us

to eradicate it from our families, our schools, our sports programs, our youth activities, and yes, our churches. "


I know Fr. Steve very well and he'll be the first to tell you that the Church wants victims to come foward. Likewise, the Church here in Diocese of Spokane alone has already paid out a lot of money to victims. The Diocese of Spokane has actually declared bankruptcy, partly because so much money has been paid out (not the type of bankruptcy where they have to shut down). All of this is being done on top of the types of things that Fr. Steve described. If you still don't think this is enough, go find your local Priest or Bishop and respectfully suggest what further action needs to be taken.


On a more country-wide scale, here is another response to this.
http://www.catholic.com/library/A_Crisis_of_Saints.asp


I know that forgiveness is difficult, especially when the crime is so terrible. I hope one day you can forgive them and I hope that the leaders of the Church keep the Catholic Church here in the US going in a direction that warrants being forgiven.


It is GOD DAMN TRUE (Im sorry but) I am one of thoes kids ... I have fought sence I was in 6th GRADE to get them to help with the medicle costs of what my priest did to me
You know what good that did? in order for them to help I had to issue a blanket gag order that just finaly in the last 2 months got overturned and they are STILL fighting me over it

I had a choice ... talk, or get better ... they wouldent let me do both
infact the clergy that talked to me after the fact put so much fear for my familys survival (financial and legal) that it took me 3 years to even say anything to the therapist

dont give me that shit I deal with this every single day of my life ... and will the rest of my life

Yeah right :rolleyes: they are still fighting tooth and nail to even help thoes who have had to have therapy over the years pay for the massive bills we have stacked up
I am trying to be fair but I can NEVER forgive the curch for what they have done ... I am not strong enough to

What nation are you a citizen of?

What nation are you a citizen of?
United States

First of all, regardless of what previous posts have said, Christian is not interchangable with CATHOLIC. I am a Christian, but I am not a Catholic. I read the whole first post, and the Catholics have done hypocritical stuff as well as other Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike. Before you go condemning, try forgiving first. It usually makes things better.

It is GOD DAMN TRUE (Im sorry but) I am one of thoes kids ... I have fought sence I was in 6th GRADE to get them to help with the medicle costs of what my priest did to me
You know what good that did? in order for them to help I had to issue a blanket gag order that just finaly in the last 2 months got overturned and they are STILL fighting me over it

I had a choice ... talk, or get better ... they wouldent let me do both
infact the clergy that talked to me after the fact put so much fear for my familys survival (financial and legal) that it took me 3 years to even say anything to the therapist

dont give me that shit I deal with this every single day of my life ... and will the rest of my life
sounds like you should join a different church?

It is GOD DAMN TRUE (Im sorry but) I am one of thoes kids ... I have fought sence I was in 6th GRADE to get them to help with the medicle costs of what my priest did to me
You know what good that did? in order for them to help I had to issue a blanket gag order that just finaly in the last 2 months got overturned and they are STILL fighting me over it

I had a choice ... talk, or get better ... they wouldent let me do both
infact the clergy that talked to me after the fact put so much fear for my familys survival (financial and legal) that it took me 3 years to even say anything to the therapist

dont give me that shit I deal with this every single day of my life ... and will the rest of my life

I think you need to contact someone else. If you believe your Diocese is corrupt or hasn't supported you enough, you should contact the authorities, a lawery, another Diocese or anyone you feel comfortable with. It is a matter of law that you get compensated, not just a matter of Christian righteousness. People will take you and what you have gone through very seriously.

I'm not sure when you dealt with the Church, but these reforms are fairly recent. Before the Church didn't fully understand the scope of their problem and, shamefully, some members of the Church simply swept their problems under a rug. Maybe it's still even happening today in parts of the countries. These things need to be reported.

I know that you can never be fully compensated or fully cured after what happened to you, but I do hope you receive justice.

you know...the whole priest sex scandal deal could be solved if they took away celebacy as a requirement. can God not work through people who have had sex before? if He doesn't, we're screwed.

God is said to be at work in all people and in all places.

Here is a bit on celebacy and the priesthood. Admittingly, it might not answer all your questions, but I'll post it anyway.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Celibacy_and_the_Priesthood.asp

you know...the whole priest sex scandal deal could be solved if they took away celebacy as a requirement. can God not work through people who have had sex before? if He doesn't, we're screwed.

as long as an organization covers up illegal activity merely widening its applicant pool will do little good.

Quite frankly, the comparison between Christianity and Islam in this regard is quite unwarranted. The Bible has passages like, "We do not fight against flesh and blood...." while the Qu'ran talks about beheading infidels. The Crusades were definately against the teachings of the Bible, while an argument could be made that holy war is endorsed by Islam.

i agree. jeez. that was hard to say. but i whole heartedly agree.

i understand where the celibacy comes from, and i can see the justification. we are all susceptible to temptation, and i guess it was just those specific preists' downfall

I think you need to contact someone else. If you believe your Diocese is corrupt or hasn't supported you enough, you should contact the authorities, a lawery, another Diocese or anyone you feel comfortable with. It is a matter of law that you get compensated, not just a matter of Christian righteousness. People will take you and what you have gone through very seriously.

I'm not sure when you dealt with the Church, but these reforms are fairly recent. Before the Church didn't fully understand the scope of their problem and, shamefully, some members of the Church simply swept their problems under a rug. Maybe it's still even happening today in parts of the countries. These things need to be reported.

I know that you can never be fully compensated or fully cured after what happened to you, but I do hope you receive justice.

I have goten the treatement the problem is my family is not rich ... it essentialy saped my parents retirement funds to give me the help I needed

All we were ever looking for was some help to get that
And all we ever got was drawn out legal battles dealing with one church or another

Things have gotten easier now that the story broke but it is slow and does not make up for a lifetime (well almost half my life right now) fighting this
Just wanting to see my parents comfortable in their retirement ... I have been fighting this sence the 6th grade ... I am tired of it and tired of the church
They did nothing to help us untill they had to ... their secrecy was worth more then our safty and health

I have goten the treatement the problem is my family is not rich ... it essentialy saped my parents retirement funds to give me the help I needed

All we were ever looking for was some help to get that
And all we ever got was drawn out legal battles dealing with one church or another

Things have gotten easier now that the story broke but it is slow and does not make up for a lifetime (well almost half my life right now) fighting this
Just wanting to see my parents comfortable in their retirement ... I have been fighting this sence the 6th grade ... I am tired of it and tired of the church
They did nothing to help us untill they had to ... their secrecy was worth more then our safty and health


I'm sorry to hear that. You were definitely treated very poorly.

Maybe now that the issue is out in the open the Church will compensate you for all those years of legal battles, too. I don't know, but it might be worth looking into. I'm no lawery, but it seems that you (and your parents) have the right to more money.

I'm sorry to hear that. Maybe now that the issue is out in the open the Church will compensate you for all those years of legal battles, too. I don't know, but it might be worth looking into. I'm no lawery, but it seems that you have the right to more money.
I just want to be done with the whole thing but they wont let it go

But anyways that is my personal issue with the organization but I dont believe in organization of faith in general

I can understand personal believe but indoctronated beliefs dont sit well with me

Quite frankly, the comparison between Christianity and Islam in this regard is quite unwarranted. The Bible has passages like, "We do not fight against flesh and blood...." while the Qu'ran talks about beheading infidels. The Crusades were definately against the teachings of the Bible, while an argument could be made that holy war is endorsed by Islam.
you have a point


if we live under the new covenant (which Christians do), God does say turn the other cheek, love your neighbor as yourself, and that vengance belongs to God. however, some people do argue about God telling his followers to attack certain lands in the Old Testament. if it were up to me, i'd go with the first, but there were very different views from ours during the middle ages.

Man. I could not have said it any better myself, Klonor. The visceral eloquence with which you destroyed any possible opposition is... well damn, it's good.

Up with Klonor the Thread Creator and his brilliant teachings!

I just want to be done with the whole thing but they wont let it go

But anyways that is my personal issue with the organization but I dont believe in organization of faith in general

I can understand personal believe but indoctronated beliefs dont sit well with me

After what you've gone through, I can understand why.


I know that it sounds cheesy, but I hope that you find peace.

After what you've gone through, I can understand why.


I know that it sounds cheesy, but I hope that you find peace.
Ahhh I mostly have
Lol sorry for going off back there ... its only been a little while sence I could legaly say anything and ... I dont know quite how to handle it
Normaly I am not emotional ;)
Expect me to call ya on logical falicies in the future :D

Ahhh I mostly have
Lol sorry for going off back there ... its only been a little while sence I could legaly say anything and ... I dont know quite how to handle it
Normaly I am not emotional ;)
Expect me to call ya on logical falicies in the future :D

Me, make logical fallacies? Never!! :p

It seems, in the past few years, that it has become customary, dare I say trendy, to bemoan and besmirch Islam as an evil, violent, and fascist religion. But it is often forgotten that Christianity also has a smiliarly evil, violent, and fascist history of its own. Now, both religions are off-shoots of Judaism and descend from my own faith with many common beliefs and bonds. I pride myself on being fair-minded and un-judgmental of all religions and I feel that basing your views of all on the actions of a few will only lead to unjustified hatred, but too often the lessons learned in the study of Christianity go unremembered when dealing with Islam. Lessons such as the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. Perhaps it would be better to grant Islam a bit of leeway when judging it. So, without further ado, a little history lesson on the shady past of the Christian faith.


where... here on the boards? I see more Anti-Christian threads than Anti Islamic, and that's not including this one... on the news? hmmm... most of the news stations I see call them Islamic Fanatics and I for one don't hold their actions against their entire Religion.

So, in conclusion, I think that Christians ought to approach their attitudes towards Islam with a little bit more civility, since Christianity has its own violent and unsavory past.


I think Atheists and Agnostics ought to approach their attitudes toward Christianity with a little more civility, since Atheism and Agnosticism has its own violent and unsavory past as well.

The history of the human race itself is a bloody and hypocritical one. Unfortunate, but true. I'm not justifying it at all. Just an observation. Hell, I'm not entirely head-over-heals with the church establishment anyway, but every institution has horrible skeletons in their closets.

Me, make logical fallacies? Never!! :p
:-D dosent even have to be you ... just wait till you see what happens when you try to propose an omnipresent diety :D

Quite honestly, this whole thread is a fallacy. Ad Homenim to be exact. You are saying that the actions of some people who hold certain beliefs automatically discredit those beliefs. So if I think that murder is wrong, but I rob a bank, does that mean that my claim about murder is incorrect?

You are also judging the whole system by the actions of a few. It's just that most of the Christians that we should admire don't make the news.

Quite honestly, this whole thread is a fallacy. Ad Homenim to be exact. You are saying that the actions of some people who hold certain beliefs automatically discredit those beliefs. So if I think that murder is wrong, but I rob a bank, does that mean that my claim about murder is incorrect?

You are also judging the whole system by the actions of a few. It's just that most of the Christians that we should admire don't make the news.

Well, in that regard it's kind of like that quote from Spiderman.

"Eventually, they will come to hate you. For what do people love more than a hero? They like to see a hero fall, fail, die trying."

Christians have been the champions of the poor for ages past. But news companies can't make money by pointing out the GOOD things that someone in a religion might do, especially in a post-modern society that hates Christianity. News companies make money by "getting the scoop" on someone who has DONE SOMETHING WRONG. And if they can make it look like that person is a member of Christianity, so much the better, because the public eats that up.

It's all about the money.

Which is why neutral media like MSNBC and conservative media like FOX exist. They also know there is money in another subset of the population who don't appreciate constantly having their views assasinated for no reason other than their religious beliefs. And I think we should respect media like that. They might not always be the most balanced, but they don't twist the facts as much either.

Well, in that regard it's kind of like that quote from Spiderman.

"Eventually, they will come to hate you. For what do people love more than a hero? They like to see a hero fall, fail, die trying."

Christians have been the champions of the poor for ages past. But news companies can't make money by pointing out the GOOD things that someone in a religion might do, especially in a post-modern society that hates Christianity. News companies make money by "getting the scoop" on someone who has DONE SOMETHING WRONG. And if they can make it look like that person is a member of Christianity, so much the better, because the public eats that up.

It's all about the money.

Which is why neutral media like MSNBC and conservative media like FOX exist. They also know there is money in another subset of the population who don't appreciate constantly having their views assasinated for no reason other than their religious beliefs. And I think we should respect media like that. They might not always be the most balanced, but they don't twist the facts as much either.

Good point about the media. We've been talking about that in a couple of my classes recently. If your journalism is profit-driven, what sort of news are we going to get....?

Funny you should mention Spider-Man. Those movies are one of my favorite examples of philosophy in pop culture. The way that both of them are set up, Spider-Man represents a thinly veiled Christian philosophy, while the villians represent the philosophy of Nietzsche.

Quite honestly, this whole thread is a fallacy. Ad Homenim to be exact. You are saying that the actions of some people who hold certain beliefs automatically discredit those beliefs. So if I think that murder is wrong, but I rob a bank, does that mean that my claim about murder is incorrect?

You are also judging the whole system by the actions of a few. It's just that most of the Christians that we should admire don't make the news.
He was remarking on the catholic church as a whole … those two examples are examples of church wide sponsorship
And those Christians who let the church get away with it and didn’t try to stop it are just as guilty. Either the church had a majority on its side or the large number of people who did not agree with those actions did not speak up.
So he is not really critiquing based a “small group” rather covering the history of what must have had majority sponsorship (or at least apathy)

sounds like you should join a different church?

He did.... in a way.

It seems, in the past few years, that it has become customary, dare I say trendy, to bemoan and besmirch Islam as an evil, violent, and fascist religion. But it is often forgotten that Christianity also has a smiliarly evil, violent, and fascist history of its own.....

It comes with the day and age really. Islamic fanatics seems to be the biggest threat to every other person who believes otherwise currently.

Simply put it, Fanatics of all sorts are the worst.

I think a lot of people here really do need to re-read my opening to get a better understanding of my original point for this thread, it seems to have drifted a bit into more of an argument than I had intended.

I think a lot of people here really do need to re-read my opening to get a better understanding of my original point for this thread, it seems to have drifted a bit into more of an argument than I had intended.

In light of your first post:

Yes, Christianity had its violent past. But that seems to have stopped some time ago (with the exception of places like Northern Ireland, which may be considered a religious as well as a political war).

WL, I think you're still not quite getting what I'm trying for. I'm sure if you'll just look over the opening again you'll come around to my side.

WL, I think you're still not quite getting what I'm trying for. I'm sure if you'll just look over the opening again you'll come around to my side.

I agree and I don't agree.

This thread makes me giggle. I agree, yet i dont agree. Anywho, the past is the past and the present is the present. Had i been around during the crusades or inquisitions, i probably would have been mad at the christians.

none the less, good point.

and boofheads, you make a good point as well.

you both have too much free time.

Oh I agree completely! It was an interesting read and has profoundly influenced my thinking. No more church for me.

He did.... in a way.
:fluffle: yup no more religion telling me that I am going to hell because of what a religious leader did with m :fluffle:

Besides I have too much logic to blindly follow anything

:fluffle: yup no more religion telling me that I am going to hell because of what a religious leader did with m :fluffle:

Besides I have too much logic to blindly follow anything

Hello, stranger. :)

:fluffle:

Hypocrisy is one of the less appealing aspects of 'organised' religion, I feel... let people decide how THEY want to experience sprituality, IF they want to.

I'm with you. I'm waiting for a less 'flawed' concept to arrive.

Hello, stranger. :)

:fluffle:

Hypocrisy is one of the less appealing aspects of 'organised' religion, I feel... let people decide how THEY want to experience sprituality, IF they want to.

I'm with you. I'm waiting for a less 'flawed' concept to arrive.
Yup I have no issues with general deism … we really cant prove god’s existence one way or another but the general illogic of specifics specially in an organized religion are within the realm of contention

Yup I have no issues with general deism … we really cant prove god’s existence one way or another but the general illogic of specifics specially in an organized religion are within the realm of contention

Exactly.

Nothing else to add!

I'm glad to see so many people have such short memory.

As am I

I'm glad to see so many people have such short memory.

Sorry, what did you say?

I am an evil Christian. In the past we have plagued the world with such things as abolition, child labor laws, hospitals, orphanages and the American civil rights movement. I wish to apologize for the grevious offenses against humanity.

Christianity...what kind? There more denomitations than one could ever count. All disagreeing with each other on one or more points due to the flawed and varied interpretations of individuals. The denomination I am a member of lost many to the Inquisition, should my denomination be found guilty as a collaborator with the Catholic Church when it was a victim? Broadbrushing victims and aggressors together doesn't make sense. Individuals hiding behind the Institution of Religion, be it the Pope or Osama Bin Ladin, who wield power and manipulate for greed, lust, revenge etc. are the ones to point the finger at.

I've read the Q'aran and the Bible, I believe the Bible. I live a happy life with my wife, two kids and a small business. I've never had negative contact with the law, pay my taxes, help in the community...what danger do I pose to you nonbelievers? Are Christians okay as long as they keep their mouth shut? Honestly I find it hard to be polite to God Haters but He says I'm supposed to.

Matchopolis, I feel that if you'd just re-read my opening post you would come around to my point of view. I have nothing against you, you'll see that I truly do have a non-partisan and well-supported post.

Matchopolis, I feel that if you'd just re-read my opening post you would come around to my point of view. I have nothing against you, you'll see that I truly do have a non-partisan and well-supported post.
Yeah too many people are breezing it over or taking the title at face value

Yeah too many people are breezing it over or taking the title at face value

'I agree', but I am responding to the thread as it flows.

'I agree', but I am responding to the thread as it flows.
Me to ... otherwise there is not much to talk about :p

Okay, I reread it. I agree with your view on the Crusades and Inquisition. My point, My Christianity has not perpetrated such conquests and crimes.

It is wrong to condemn all of Islam as a religion of hate. Statisticians us in the months after the atrocity, told 3 of 4 mosques condoned the events of 9-11. 99% of the others have failed to condemn the actions of the terrorists.

Before countless homicide bombers detonate themselves in the midst of innocents they screamed "Allah Ackbar". 911 hijackers screamed "Allah Ackbar" over the radio as their planes slammed into office workers. When insurgents sprayed AK47 rounds into worshippers at Abu Hanifa mosque in Baghdad they screamed "Allah Ackbar". When Abu Masab Al Zarqawi pushed Nick Berg to the ground and sawed off his head with a butcher knife he was screaming "Allah Ackbar". Constantly we here, "we are doing this in the name of Islam,".

Is an atheist who once believed in God a hypocrite if he says he's a nonbeliever? No, his past actions and beliefs are not being acted out in the present.

Yeah too many people are breezing it over or taking the title at face value

I came to this thread expecting another glorified religion-bashing atheist viewpoint, and was pleasantly surprised to find that I agreed with what Klonor said, and have often made similar pointts in the past. I wish other people would take time to read the entire post before commenting.

I agreed with him the first time he posted it, but I'm afraid his arguments lose their sway the second time you read them.

How so?

How so?
It's only interesting the first time, same thing with any thread. Reanimating a thread a few months later is never as meaningful as the first time.

I've been here less than two months, so I'm going to go ahead and take your word on that.
I thought you were saying that on second reading the arguments lose their merit because they have some sort of basic flaw . . .

I've been here less than two months, so I'm going to go ahead and take your word on that.
I thought you were saying that on second reading the arguments lose their merit because they have some sort of basic flaw . . .
Oh no, I'm saying this is the second time this has been posted, verbatim, in less than a year. I agreed with it the first time, but the second time...meh.

Matchopolis, I feel that if you'd just re-read my opening post you would come around to my point of view. I have nothing against you, you'll see that I truly do have a non-partisan and well-supported post.Unfortunatly, you only focus on one religion... Christianity. Sure there were the Inquisitions and the Crusades, then again, what of the Jihads that were Declared. (granted I know that most of them were forced to be called.)

Every Religion has their Zelots and every Religion has their moments of shame and every Religion will justify their actions.

now, counting the number of God Bashing (and i use God in the general sense) threads on this board, don't you think that your Title of
"Christian Hypocrisy" might also have a factor in people either mis-reading your post or glossing it over since the your focus is only on the Christian Faith?

Unfortunatly, you only focus on one religion... Christianity. Sure there were the Inquisitions and the Crusades, then again, what of the Jihads that were Declared. (granted I know that most of them were forced to be called.)

Every Religion has their Zelots and every Religion has their moments of shame and every Religion will justify their actions.

now, counting the number of God Bashing (and i use God in the general sense) threads on this board, don't you think that your Title of
"Christian Hypocrisy" might also have a factor in people either mis-reading your post or glossing it over since the your focus is only on the Christian Faith?

Perhaps people should not be so quick to dismiss someone's words based on the title of the thread, then?

Perhaps people should not be so quick to dismiss someone's words based on the title of the thread, then?and also the topic creator should also choose his titles a little more carefully.

and also the topic creator should also choose his titles a little more carefully.

You didn't actually read the entire thing, did you?

Perhaps people should not be so quick to dismiss someone's words based on the title of the thread, then?

Also, if the title is something moderate, like "Perhaps Christians need to learn moderation when condemning Islam based on their religion's own history" nobody reads it because they all see it as something they can live with. This way, people feel their feelings being hurt, leap to the defensive, and if, like me, they take the time to read it, learn that their anger was needless.

JuNii, I think you really do need to go back and re-read the opening post. Everything will be so much clearer once you have.

I agree

JuNii, I think you really do need to go back and re-read the opening post. Everything will be so much clearer once you have.

You keep saying that, but I don't think that anybody is getting it. I made two other posts to talk about what I thought was the point of the thread. Was I right in either case, or were they both wrong?

So far, everybody I know who has read the opening post in its entirety has agreed with what I've said, the only people who have any problems with it are people who haven't bothered to. So, I merely wish to make sure people have read my statement before they start an argument.

In light of your first post:

Yes, Christianity had its violent past. But that seems to have stopped some time ago (with the exception of places like Northern Ireland, which may be considered a religious as well as a political war).

Religion has nothing to do with the continuing contemporary troubles of Northern Ireland. It is merely an identification of your group. Like football hooliganism, it is tribal in its very essence. The hatreds of those of the more extreme "Protestant" or "Catholic" faith against the other are merely based on the fact that the other side is Protestant or Catholic. They could be wearing green or blue, very much like some of the American gangs, (e.g. the bloods or the crips), in how they identify the other through what they wear. In Northern Ireland where you live, (the Falls Road or the Waterside) or your surname, (McGuiness or Paisley), is much more of a clear identification than if you adhere to the teachings of a Roman Pope or not.

Northern Ireland's troubles were and continue to be ones of a primarily political creation. 300 years ago religion played a part, not anymore.

Tiocfaidh ar la, this thread isn't about the political situation in Northern Ireland. That post was a few pages ago, leave it there.

So far, everybody I know who has read the opening post in its entirety has agreed with what I've said, the only people who have any problems with it are people who haven't bothered to. So, I merely wish to make sure people have read my statement before they start an argument.

I did read the whole thing through, and I still disagreed with you. The argument could be made from the Qu'ran that holy war is legitimate, while the Bible specifically prohibits such things. Also, attacking the actions of some people who called themselves Christians does not change the truth or falsity of the claims of Christianity.

Based on your latest post I can surmise that you did not, in fact, read the entire opening post. Please go back and do what you claim to have already done.

I did read the whole thing through, and I still disagreed with you. The argument could be made from the Qu'ran that holy war is legitimate, while the Bible specifically prohibits such things. Also, attacking the actions of some people who called themselves Christians does not change the truth or falsity of the claims of Christianity.

You entirely missed the point of the first post if you think it has anything to do with the Koran or the Bible in any way. The mere fact that you are still arguing shows you don't really understand the point behind Klonor's (and originally my) statement.

You keep saying that, but I don't think that anybody is getting it. I made two other posts to talk about what I thought was the point of the thread. Was I right in either case, or were they both wrong?Not say right or wrong, just saying that with all of the God bashing threads out there... are you really surprised at the responses when you choose a such a title?

not complaining about the info, (I completly agree with Klondor on that, after all, they where as you say) just the title tends to colorize one's perception when reading it. that's all.

Btw Klondor... While I didn't say it, the post was extremely well written. Congrats. :)

Oh, and the mentality for some is to read the breif sysnopsis of the thread, then go to the last page... so most of your arguments are missed.

not complaining about the info, (I completly agree with you on that, after all, they where as you say) just the title tends to colorize one's perception when reading it. that's all.


That's what Ubiqtorate was saying. If Klonor picked a nice, happy, non-inflammatory title, people wouldn't read it. The title is specifically designed to incite emotional outbursts.

Sorry to Klonor if I treat this as my thread. =P

Yeah, I agree as well. Very interesting thread.

Oh, no hard feelings, I've always felt its good to share ones intellectual property

That's what Ubiqtorate was saying. If Klonor picked a nice, happy, non-inflammatory title, people wouldn't read it. The title is specifically designed to incite emotional outbursts.

Sorry to Klonor if I treat this as my thread. =PI think they still will.

and with a mind open enough to understand his point. I'll admit, I had to reread the first post without looking at the title, then and only then, I understood his viewpoints.

The Inquisition was just a Spannish thing wasn't it?

And the Crusades was sanctioned by the Pope, but then that is no suprise..