At it again.

[Satya]

What? you don't want to talk about the countries were Christians are beat, killed and incarserated simply for being Christians?

You are talking about Communist countries, which have state religion, which means that they will kill anyone who practices any religion that isn't the state religion.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

You are describing religion against religion, not secular against religion. Protestant against Catholic or Muslim against Catholic, is not the same as Secular against Catholic.

The French revolution wasn't strictly a religious movement, but claimed to be secular.
The point was, nevertheless, that secular powers (albeit in religious countries) were doing the killing. The fact that very few governments, even now, are entirely secular (and even those that claim to be hold fairly dogmatic philosophical beliefs) does not mean that they are not secular powers.



postscript edit: Communist countries are constitutionally atheistic.

 

[Satya]

The French revolution wasn't strictly a religious movement, but claimed to be secular.
The point was, nevertheless, that secular powers (albeit in religious countries) were doing the killing. The fact that very few governments, even now, are entirely secular (and even those that claim to be hold fairly dogmatic philosophical beliefs) does not mean that they are not secular powers.

What it seems to me that you are trying to argue is that the Catholic Church has been targeted by Secular Governments for mass murder. Incredible oversimplification. A government is usually only as secular as the people who run it. Either way, what are you trying to prove? That governments have the power to kill in large numbers? The Catholic Church is a government and it has done that historically. Hell, you could argue that the Nazis were atheists and they killed 6 million Jews. No matter what the religiosity of a government, it is capable of killing in large numbers. And governments are usually motivated by the religion that dominates the populace no matter how secular it claims to be. I don't know of any comparable example that the Catholic Church has in relation to the Holocaust, but that doesn't stop the church from making that comparison whenever it feels persecuted by the nonreligious.

postscript edit: Communist countries are constitutionally atheistic.

Common misconception. It depends entirely upon the country. Some are much more tolerant of religion than others and some establish dictatorships where their leader is seen as a virtual god. Others even manipulate religious leaders to maintain control.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Whether or not a communist country tollerates religion, they are constitutionally atheistic. The deification of leaders is figurative not litteral.

What it seems to me that you are trying to argue is that the Catholic Church has been targeted by Secular Governments for mass murder. Incredible oversimplification. A government is usually only as secular as the people who run it. Either way, what are you trying to prove? That governments have the power to kill in large numbers? The Catholic Church is a government and it has done that historically. Hell, you could argue that the Nazis were atheists and they killed 6 million Jews. No matter what the religiosity of a government, it is capable of killing in large numbers. And governments are usually motivated by the religion that dominates the populace no matter how secular it claims to be. I don't know of any comparable example that the Catholic Church has in relation to the Holocaust, but that doesn't stop the church from making that comparison whenever it feels persecuted by the nonreligious.

My point was in answer to this post:

I haven't been following along word for word and if I'm jumping in with an inaccurate understanding then I apologize, but from my understanding there is a significant difference between the leader of a dominant religious organization making such remarks and an independent public figure doing so within the secular community. Granted there are many leaders who make a variety of remarks, but IMHO the effect is quite different. The Church yields TREMENDOUS social and political power globally so the impact of the Church's remarks is monumental to any group it oppresses (think to the scale of violation or denial of human rights, death sentences, etc.).

That being said, what is the secular community's perpetration? Is it against the Church/Catholics? Your point, if this is it, is well-taken but I think the issues are incomparable in scope.

 

[Shai Gar]

and while Satya wants to pussy around on the issues brought up, I am going to attack them point by point and prove those catholics deserved their deaths.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Everyone deserves to die.

The question is whether someone has the right to kill.

 

[Daeledin]

By now we all recognize that no matter what social organization you belong to there are those people that you'll never agree with; either through personal actions or provocative statements. The issue is what you personally think/do about it. The behavior continues until action is done upon it. You can let it be or not. Think back to some clubs/activities you joined or enjoyed as a kid, no way in heck did you actually like everyone. Yet still you'll identify as belonging with the group. You can choose to ignore it or address it. The manner of addressing it is entirely up to you and can get you lampooned in returned. It's a viscous circle of never ending loathing.

You have to realize that every time an issue like gay rights, abortion, etc come up the devoutly religious will get shaken. Not that they question their faith but rather they feel the hurt of being associated with those that say the most outlandish or radical (and abandoned) statements of the group.

So in response to the current state of the thread. Robespierre was insane, Stalin was definitely an immoral bastard with his gulags. No matter what group of ideology they subscribed to it is inconsequential. An action was done, a consequence was reaped.

Beyond the fact that every group, especially ones that are head to head, will experience divides there is the problem of majority vs minority. Of course the majority has the say and minorities have the sway. Doesn't discard the fact you'll find immorality with both of them.

I know this is all captain obvious stuff. I'm not exactly sober at this point and my Fe is kicking in. I just want you guys to see that this line of arguing amongst yourselves will inevitably lead to this. You'll learn a couple of interesting tidbits of knowledge but remember this forum isn't a platform capable of global change.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Daeledin, you have a point.

My point has been that if one or two, or even a dozen bishops make outlandish statements this should not be used to villify over a billion Catholics.

Bishops are part of a hierarcy instituted to preserve and teach Christ's doctrine and morals, and to sanctify the faithful. Whatever "extracurricular" opinions they might spout are not Catholic doctrine and I, being a Catholic, feel hurt every time Satya (for the most part) fishes some silly comment from some Catholic off the net and uses it to rubbish my religion.

 

[Satya]

Daeledin, you have a point.

My point has been that if one or two, or even a dozen bishops make outlandish statements this should not be used to villify over a billion Catholics.

Bishops are part of a hierarcy instituted to preserve and teach Christ's doctrine and morals, and to sanctify the faithful. Whatever "extracurricular" opinions they might spout are not Catholic doctrine and I, being a Catholic, feel hurt every time Satya (for the most part) fishes some silly comment from some Catholic off the net and uses it to rubbish my religion.

If Bishops had no power then I would have no cause to post about them.

 

[Satya]

and while Satya wants to pussy around on the issues brought up, I am going to attack them point by point and prove those catholics deserved their deaths.

Either I'm too arrogant or too much of a pussy. I just can't win with you.

 

[Shai Gar]

In this instance you could be annihilating their arguments. Every instance FA mentioned, the catholics deserved to die. That should have been obvious to you, a student of history.

Sorry I called you a pussy.