Wednesday, December 12, 2007 | Reason : Comedy | print version

World History

by Bors Blog

Reposted from: http://www.mattbors.com/2007/12/world-history.html

Joe Ratzinger, who calls himself "pope bendict XVI", recently issued an encyclical encyclical arguing against atheism and outright blaming it for most of history's atrocities. He should open a history book or perhaps look at the current pedophile infestation he has been covering up with massive payments to victims.

The usual tactic is to note that Joseph Stalin was an atheist and thus insinuate that atheism leads to mass killing because there is no morality to it. And there isn't. Atheism is not a moral philosophy nor a political movement--it's simply a lack of a belief in god(s). One can be a strict science based atheist or a new age quack, a libertarian or a socialist. I've never known anyone who's moral beliefs derived from atheism.

Ratzinger:

Since there is no God to create justice, it seems man himself is now called to establish justice. If in the face of this world's suffering, protest against God is understandable, the claim that humanity can and must do what no God actually does or is able to do is both presumptuous and intrinsically false. It is no accident that this idea has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice; rather, it is grounded in the intrinsic falsity of the claim.

Whether religious or not, most people would agree we need to improve life on earth. This includes establishing governments, creating laws, doing scientific research and creating art, among other things. Since god didn't deliver unto us the constitution, evolutionary biology, medicine, democracy, or equality under the law since the dawn time, we've had to create them ourselves. Ratzinger finds that "presumptuous." Most likely what he detests is that people have found routes to live fulfilling lives that don't include attending his church.

A world which has to create its own justice is a world without hope. No one and nothing can answer for centuries of suffering. No one and nothing can guarantee that the cynicism of power—whatever beguiling ideological mask it adopts—will cease to dominate the world.

That's right. We can't guarantee it as centuries of atrocities have shown. We are on our own and it is up to us to make the world a better place. If we succeed, the power that will "cease to dominate the world" will be morally bankrupt frauds like Joe Ratzinger.

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 60 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #97992 by dialector on December 13, 2007 at 1:03 am

Quote: "The usual tactic is to note that Joseph Stalin was an atheist and thus insinuate that atheism leads to mass killing because there is no morality to it."

Joseph Stalin was very much influenced by Christianity and attended an orthodox theological seminary in Tiflis. His highly liturgical style of ruthless personality cult dictatorship, with its deadly categorical assertions was no accident. It was a product of a period of close association with Christianity, wherein he drew forth some of his most vile corruption.

The very idea that one could blame Stalin's violence on atheism is ridiculous.

Other Comments by dialector

2. Comment #98039 by faouloki on December 13, 2007 at 2:49 am

Agree with dialector.
The fact that Marx's ideas were secular, and Stalin gave the impression that he was Marxist, it is assumed that Stalin was an atheist and that's what made him kill so many people. I think ultimately Stalin wanted to replace god with himself, and as such would have very much been against atheists. As many people have said in the past, if Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens or any other of our high-profile free thinkers was in Stalinist Russia they would not have lived long.
To say Stalin killed because he was an atheist is a logical as saying Stalin killed because he liked the colour red.

Other Comments by faouloki

3. Comment #98142 by JFHalsey on December 13, 2007 at 6:18 am

Gods, I know that cartoon is depicting some of the most heinous atrocities our world has ever seen... so am I a horrible person that I can't stop laughing at it? The image of the crusader with a "Darwin fish," especially, makes me want to giggle.

Other Comments by JFHalsey

4. Comment #98143 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 6:19 am

After the war,English diplomat said to Stalin that he should't be so harsh against religion. Stalin said, 'how many division does the pope have?'

Is it really so difficult to see the link between Stalin's athiesm and his despotism, or is it just that some have allowed themselves to be duped by the 'Hitchins Delusion'. Those mental gymnastics that bring all faults back to the doors of religion.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

5. Comment #98147 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 6:22 am

Also interesting that the Pope has apologised for most of the actions describes above, yet apparently he's blaming them on others. Yet more evidence of the murkiness of this paricular oasis. I't can't really be good for those who drink from it.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

6. Comment #98161 by steve99 on December 13, 2007 at 6:54 am

Is it really so difficult to see the link between Stalin's athiesm and his despotism

Yes.

Other Comments by steve99

7. Comment #98164 by Tyler Durden on December 13, 2007 at 7:04 am

Yet more evidence of the murkiness of this paricular oasis. I't can't really be good for those who drink from it.

And yet here you still are. Says more about you than it does about this particular oasis!!

Other Comments by Tyler Durden

8. Comment #98166 by Philip1978 on December 13, 2007 at 7:10 am

Also interesting that the Pope has apologised for most of the actions describes above

Yes, very good, now if he could also apologise to all the AIDS victims whose death is on his and the Vatican's hands would be a great start. Then he should tell the people in all the countries that have been lied to so far about how wearing condoms is a sin and that actually they can significantly reduce the spread of AIDS, perhaps I might give His Holy Father a bit more respect.

I know I keep bleating on about this but until I figure out why you like that man I will keep reminding you of just how much of an evil man the Pope is.

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

9. Comment #98169 by automath on December 13, 2007 at 7:18 am

That would rest on the assumption that theism couldn't lead to despotism of any sort. This form of argument still rests on the presumptuous and intrinsically false claim that without god then anything is possible and that one can not be moral.

There are no mental gymnastics neccesary, most humans flock to what they know best. If they are brought up to be unquestioning faith-heads (and this is most certainly the type of subservient role that religion encourages in the masses), then it wouldn't take much for people experiencing hardship to pin their hope on anyone that promised them something better. Be it a man invoking gods or a man using hope, plenty and a better tomorrow.

Other Comments by automath

10. Comment #98176 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 7:49 am

Phillip,

I thought the evidence suggests that AIDS is lower in countries with higher percentages of Catholics than those with lower Catholic populations. It seems that if more followed His Holiness' advise, less would suffer. Would be rather inconvenient for his detractors though.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

11. Comment #98179 by steve99 on December 13, 2007 at 8:12 am

It seems that if more followed His Holiness' advise, less would suffer.

Oh I don't think so. I mean think of all the gay people who would have to be celibate. That sure sounds like suffering to me.

Other Comments by steve99

12. Comment #98186 by octopus on December 13, 2007 at 8:18 am

I thought the evidence suggests that AIDS is lower in countries with higher percentages of Catholics than those with lower Catholic populations.

Feel free to comment:
http://gamapserver.who.int/mapLibrary/Files/Maps/HIVPrevalenceGlobal2006.png

Other Comments by octopus

13. Comment #98188 by Philip1978 on December 13, 2007 at 8:21 am

No Fides, its that bloody stupid message that the Catholic Church keeps pounding in to the credulous that contraception is a bad thing, you must of heard that Archbishop saying that the AIDS virus was actually on the condoms - did you hear the Pope condemn him?

All the stories of rape victims being denied abortions, all the women who are dying of cervical cancer because of stupid idiots voting against a drug that could cure it- the list goes on, its all wrong! What don't you understand about the effect the Pope and his cronies have on this world?

The message that contraception is a sin and that abstinence is the key to a moral life is quite frankly monstrous -PEOPLE ARE DYING BECAUSE OF THIS CRAP! Its The Vatican who helped make this crap up - They and the Pope are very responsible, they are the ones with death on their hands - yes other factors are involved and its not just them but for goodness sake they could do something about it!

They could do some good in this world and all they bring is death - how they live with it is beyond me and why you stick up for him is a mystery - what the hell is so wrong about saving lives in face of such dangerous beliefs?

If the Pope stood up tomorrow and announced he was sorry and actually pledged himself to helping with the problems, I would applaud him, I really would- but he does nothing except advocate it and I am sick of it

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

14. Comment #98206 by Tyler Durden on December 13, 2007 at 9:04 am

Fides:

It would seem the numbers don't back up your assumptions:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7109139.stm

http://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm

HIGHEST EU AIDS/HIV RATES:
Estonia - 504.2 per million (54% Christian, 26% Atheist)
Portugal - 205 per million (84% Roman Catholic, 6% Atheist)
UK - 148.8 per million (53% identified themselves as Christian, 23% no religion)
Latvia - 130.3 per million (45% Roman Catholics, 10% atheist)
Luxembourg - 118.9 per million (87% Roman Catholics)

LOWEST EU AIDS/HIV RATES:
Bulgaria - 11.9 per million (1% Roman Catholic)
Czech Republic - 9.1 per million (26.8% Roman Catholic, 59% agnostic/atheist)
Romania - 8.3 per million (5% Roman Catholic)
Hungary - 8 per million (52% Roman Catholic, 15% atheist)
Slovakia - 5 per million (69% Roman Catholic, 11% atheist)

In non-EU areas of Europe the number of cases is also continuing to rise, with particularly high rates in Ukraine - 288 per million (88% Christian) and Russia - 275 per million (63% Russian Orthodox, 6% Atheist)

Makes sense to me. Wear a condom, it can save your life. Of course, the pope says different...

Other Comments by Tyler Durden

15. Comment #98208 by Hypoluxa on December 13, 2007 at 9:09 am

Has anybody here, or in the forums posted a once and for all a response (w/ refs etc) to this never ending pro-religious argument "that athieists have done the worst atrocities in the world, in the name of atheism", and why that argument is faulty. I mean, damn, they keep using this argument all the friggin time!!! Why can't they realize that most people do not/would not commit crimes in regards to non-belief in x,y or z.

Other Comments by Hypoluxa

16. Comment #98219 by Vaal on December 13, 2007 at 9:39 am

Phillip,

Not to mention the holy grail of overpopulation ignored, even endorsed, by the Catholic church. That may have been OK in the Bronze age, when the Bible was written, and the Earth seemed an infinite resource, but it is reckless madness today. The world population for most of recorded history never exceeded 1/2 a billion, yet even in my lifetime it has more than doubled, and is expected to reach 9 billion by 2050.

Every day there are stories of the world's resources being further stretched, ocean's being emptied, the worlds species in the biggest extinction event since the Jurassic extinction, perhaps irreversible changes to the Earth's climate. People fighting over land and water. How many people will it take before the Church has the wit to understand that the Planet is a finite and precious resource. 100 billion, 200 billion? Can you imagine the horror of living on a world with that number, no wild animals, except in zoo's or museums. Also, what kind of life are they endorsing when they encourage the poor to have more children, who die of starvation and illness. What a wretched life. Admittedly, that is also a social and political problem, but religion is the prime instigator of overpopulation with it's short sightedness and intransigence.

Other Comments by Vaal

17. Comment #98221 by Tyler Durden on December 13, 2007 at 9:44 am

Vaal,

You're missing the point... when it all gets too much for our poor, poor planet, god will come riding out of the clouds on a golden chariot and winged steeds and save us all, every last one of us ;-)

Other Comments by Tyler Durden

18. Comment #98229 by steveroot on December 13, 2007 at 10:07 am

17. Comment #98221 by Tyler Durden on December 13, 2007 at 9:44 am
Vaal,

You're missing the point... when it all gets too much for our poor, poor planet, god will come riding out of the clouds on a golden chariot and winged steeds and save us all, every last one of us ;-)

Well, at least all of us True Christians (R)! ;-)
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/
Steve

Other Comments by steveroot

19. Comment #98238 by Vaal on December 13, 2007 at 10:36 am

Unless you are a Jehovah's witness, of course, in which case only 100,000 are saved. Wonder how they figure out who are the saved ones? Gladiatorial contests, eating championships, spot the ball?

Other Comments by Vaal

20. Comment #98275 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 12:06 pm

I guess this'll be the same pope that told us the native South Americans had been waiting for Christianity?

Other Comments by Goldy

21. Comment #98306 by gr8hands on December 13, 2007 at 1:07 pm

Vaal, it's 144,000 who will go to heaven with Jehovah (they misunderstood the part in Revelations about 12,000 male virgins from each of the 12 Jewish tribes). The rest of humanity that followed Jehovah's commands with the right faith will have the 'hope' of the resurrection into a newly re-created Earth.

No rapture, but after Armageddon comes the re-creation. No one knows if they will actually be resurrected -- they only have 'hope'. If not, then at least there is no hell.

Other Comments by gr8hands

22. Comment #98351 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 1:58 pm

Philip, you've steered away from the point again.

Tyler, that's ridiculous. The link you provided said that half of HIV infections in Estonia were down to needles and the rest were the addicts infecting their partners. It's just a hunch, but I'm not sure that too many of those people might curtail their drug fuelled passion to put on a condom as a result of reading the latest encyclical from the Pope urging them to do so.

And another thing, those statistics are absurd.

And another thing, we were talking about Africa, not Europe. Compare the campaign for fidelity approach in Uganda and its effects, to the condom approach in South Africa and Zimbabwe, and its effects. Reason can tell you the most effective approach to dealing with HIV. The Holy Father knows it, and so would you if you conducted an honest appraisal of the evidence.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

23. Comment #98353 by ronnieharper on December 13, 2007 at 2:02 pm

I copied and read this encyclical, and I'm fairly certain that even Ratzinger, deep in his cockels, does not think that most of its finer points have any merit. It is an absolutely absurd document. There is simply no way that a truly rational human being, especially one so well educated, could accept the edicts in this document at face value. In my opinion, this document is clear evidence of a pointed attempt by religionsts to purposefully confound the average, everyday person on matters of philosophical import.

Other Comments by ronnieharper

24. Comment #98358 by steve99 on December 13, 2007 at 2:05 pm

The Holy Father knows it, and so would you if you conducted an honest appraisal of the evidence.

Honest is to respond to points honestly put to you. Phillip can deal eloquently with the points he raised. I want to know if you believe that gay people like me should live lives of celibacy.

Other Comments by steve99

25. Comment #98363 by the great teapot on December 13, 2007 at 2:14 pm

We have lived under the guidance of our current god for centuries and look at what atrocities we have suffered under him. He is an intrinsically incompetent god. I suggest we get a new one.
Did Brian Barnwick pick him?

Other Comments by the great teapot

26. Comment #98370 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 2:28 pm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1247745,00.html
fides, the Pope is telling people to become more faithful to their partners. Do you REALLY think that can happen? Really, truly?

Other Comments by Goldy

27. Comment #98372 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 2:29 pm

Tomorrow's BBC Panorama programme carries an interview with a Catholic woman in Uganda who has chosen to sleep unprotected with her infected husband: "We won't go to heaven if we use condoms," she explains. Asked if the woman made the right choice, the Archbishop of Kampala, Cardinal Emmanuel Wamala, replies: "If it is wrong to use the condom, then she has made the right choice." Even if it costs her her life? "Yes," replies the cardinal. "That is a harsh teaching," the reporter responds.

From the article

Other Comments by Goldy

28. Comment #98374 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 2:31 pm

24. Comment #98358 by steve99 on December 13, 2007 at 2:05 pm

I take it you mean chaste, and if so, I'm not bothered what you do.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

29. Comment #98378 by steve99 on December 13, 2007 at 2:34 pm

I take it you mean chaste, and if so, I'm not bothered what you do.

I am glad to hear it. That means you are ignoring the proclamations of the Holy Father. Good for you.

So, if you are prepared to ignore his wishes over this, what is so special about condoms?

Other Comments by steve99

30. Comment #98381 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 2:37 pm

I take it you mean chaste, and if so, I'm not bothered what you do

Does this mean you don't care if Steve has a sex life or you don't care what he does as long as he is chaste?

Other Comments by Goldy

31. Comment #98383 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 2:38 pm

Really, how did he tell me to react to you?

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

32. Comment #98402 by Corylus on December 13, 2007 at 2:51 pm

Huh??

[Grabs dictionary to look up the difference between 'celibate' and 'chaste']

Ok. Celibate means 'no chance' but 'chaste' mean either 'no chance' or 'only within marriage'.

Hmm.

Fides, Do you think Steve should be able to get married?

N.B. I am not talking about the mealy mouthed sophistry that is 'civil partnership' here. I mean genuinely married.

If not I don't understand the distinction you seem to want to make between 'celibate' and 'chaste'.

[Steve - so sorry to talk about you in the abstract here, but I am interested in the answer to this one]

Other Comments by Corylus

33. Comment #98405 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 2:53 pm

It's time for this faith head to rest his junkie bones. I look forward to seeing the results of your googling for Papal wisdom tomorrow. Whack in fides et ratio and Pope John Paul II while you're at it. It's worth a read.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

34. Comment #98407 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 2:56 pm

Depends what dictionary you read I suppose. I understood that celibacy means not getting married.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

35. Comment #98410 by Corylus on December 13, 2007 at 3:01 pm

Oxford English, Fides, can't beat it :-)

BTW - you haven't answered my question. Is gay marriage legitimate??

Other Comments by Corylus

36. Comment #98413 by steve99 on December 13, 2007 at 3:03 pm

[Steve - so sorry to talk about you in the abstract here, but I am interested in the answer to this one]

Go ahead! This is intruiging!

A supposed full-on Catholic said, whatever the context (Celibacy/Castity being synonymous with abstinence) that it does not bother him.

I believe we have achieved a breakthrough. He endorses, or at least tolerates, gay sex, in direct contradiction of the Holy Father.

What is next? Condoms approved? Married Priests? Actually giving away the wealth of the Vatican to help the poor? One can only wonder.

Other Comments by steve99

37. Comment #98416 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 3:11 pm

So what has the Holy Father told me to think about you Steve? You seem to think there's a problem with me not having a problem with your sexuality. Reminds me of a certain Little Britain character.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

38. Comment #98417 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 3:13 pm

Really, how did he tell me to react to you?

I believe old Papa said you can treat him as a person ("forbids any disrespect or failure of compassion for gays"), but a someone who is in sin or mentally ill or the like ("Catechism repeats the position that the homosexual orientation is "intrinsically disordered."). Something like that :-)
Edit - oops, sorry, should have added this http://www.advocate.com/news_detail.asp?id=15726

Other Comments by Goldy

39. Comment #98419 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 3:14 pm

Oh, and there already are married priests (not just ex anglicans either).

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

40. Comment #98421 by octopus on December 13, 2007 at 3:15 pm

Actually giving away the wealth of the Vatican to help the poor?

Now, that would be real miracle!

Other Comments by octopus

41. Comment #98423 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 3:18 pm

Oh, and there already are married priests (not just ex anglicans either).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article637486.ece Seems priests were last allowed to be and get married before 1139...
There may be married priests, but are they legit?

Other Comments by Goldy

42. Comment #98426 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 3:19 pm

Thanks Goldy, interesting how when the Pope says, 'forbids any disrespect', you say, 'you can treat him as a person' as if it's an option. The oasis grows ever murkier.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

43. Comment #98428 by steve99 on December 13, 2007 at 3:20 pm

So what has the Holy Father told me to think about you Steve? You seem to think there's a problem with me not having a problem with your sexuality. Reminds me of a certain Little Britain character.

I am astonished! You are supposed to be so knowledgeable.

Let me remind you of current teaching. The Catholic church considers homosexual sex is immoral. Homosexuals cannot be allowed into the priesthood. Same sex relationships of any form should not be socially acceptable, and same-sex marriage is out of the question.

This is why I really appreciate your rebellion against such bigotry.

Other Comments by steve99

44. Comment #98429 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 3:21 pm

Greek rite Catholic priests (in full communion with Rome) amongst others are allowed to be maried. Fully legit.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

45. Comment #98431 by fides_et_ratio on December 13, 2007 at 3:24 pm

Steve, I really have to go. I was hanging arund in the hope that you might find a quote from the Pope telling me how I should view you. Ask Goldy what search engine he uses, he managed to find one. I like it myself, and will endeavour to follow it closely.

Other Comments by fides_et_ratio

46. Comment #98432 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 3:26 pm

how when the Pope says, 'forbids any disrespect', you say, 'you can treat him as a person' as if it's an option

Que?? Sorry, but when you say the oasis grows murkier, methinks it's because you're stirring the mud! Are these 2 comments not the same? You don't think treating someone as a person demands that you treat them with respect and stuff?

Greek rite Catholic priests (in full communion with Rome) amongst others are allowed to be maried

Aaaah, OK. Orthodox who look to the pope as the Patriarch.
And you say this oasis is getting muddier...

Other Comments by Goldy

47. Comment #98434 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 3:27 pm

Ask Goldy what search engine he uses, he managed to find one.

Google, what else? Have to skim read a bunch of stuff to find something that maybe is what one looks for....there's so much crap out there in the ether!

Other Comments by Goldy

48. Comment #98441 by Corylus on December 13, 2007 at 3:40 pm

Ok Fides we all need our sleep :-)

I would like to know how you feel about gay marriage at some point though.

Other Comments by Corylus

49. Comment #98456 by Goldy on December 13, 2007 at 4:04 pm

A letter from Arab News

Fighting AIDS

This is regarding Lulwa Shalhoub's article, "Fight AIDS, Not People With AIDS" (Dec. 7).

This issue breaks into two parts. One is like the case of Abu Abdullah who contracted the virus through contaminated equipment used when he was being treated. For such people this is horrible and it would be hard not to feel sympathy.

But what about those who catch AIDS through immoral acts including having homosexual relationships? Should there be sympathy for such people? Didn't they bring it onto themselves?

Safoora, UK, published 13 December 2007

Not Catholicism, whatever denomination, but it does illustrate how people interpret things. Whatever Ratzi might say, someone will always hear it differently.
As it is, I am surprised at this attitude...

Other Comments by Goldy

50. Comment #98632 by Philip1978 on December 14, 2007 at 12:55 am

Missed the point? Exactly what point did I miss Fides?

I basically outlined why I thought the Vatican have been and will continue to be a bunch of accessories to murder. I was asking you why the hell you stick up for them? All this over sex or "souls" - you saw what Goldy posted- there are people like that all over the world, why can't you see what I am getting at?

This is psychological genocide - credulous people letting themselves die or spread disease all because of a doctrine of an evil book whose words have been twisted and turned into what you see today. What have I got to do to show you the impact the Catholic Church has over people - you might have rejected some of the bigotry and I am proud of you for that but there are others in this world needlessly suffering and you need to realise this, I think its so important

So here are my questions, this is all to do with what I have been wanting to discuss with you

1. I have heard countless stories but I will use one to make my point - 13 Year old girl, living in Ireland, walking home one early evening when she gets grabbed into an alley, beaten and then raped to within an inch of her life. She is found and taken to hospital where she slowly recovers and the doctors perform the usual tests. They find out she has been made pregnant by her attacker - what was the Catholic Church's view on this? She should have the baby, no doubt about it

She had to go to England to have it aborted in the end which cause no end of hassle.

Why did the Church act like this - this poor girl has to grow up with the psychological torture of being raped, something that never leaves rape victims and there were a bunch of men telling her that she is to have her attacker's baby

How cruel is that?

2. HPV virus, am sure you have heard of it - it has links to sex and can cause cervical cancer - its pretty nasty. A new drug was brought out with NO side effects and it was 100% effective - called Gardasil- What was the Catholic Church's response - Absolutely not happy with this drug because it encourages women to have sex more and promiscuity is out of the question - Again, there is this obsession with sex being bad and that human life is completely superfluous.

How cruel is that?

See, here is what I getting at Fides - The Catholic Church should not be having this influence over people - religion shouldn't have this effect over people, its not just yours that's at fault. I am sure you have seen recently on here the awful stories about Jehovah's witnesses refusing blood transfusions and then dying - it all equates to the same thing.

People are dying for no GOOD reasons - piety and subservience to some god is not going to help this world cure disease - knowledge, education and prevention will cure it.

I want you to acknowledge the barbarity and needless killing that stems from what the Vatican has caused over the centuries and what it is still doing now. I have referred to Billy Sands phrase mental torture many a time and I want to again - people are psychologically damaged by religion, its not enough that people have disease or have to see loved ones die, its the fact that religion is adding to it.

Please think about this - the reason I am picking on the Vatican here is because its the religion you follow. I could plough into any religion and expose the needless damage it does and will keep on doing if people don't wake up to this.

What is the point of it all? Why do people have to infect each other with a disease all because the Catholic Church says contraceptives are evil? It makes the Vatican look so callous and cold blooded - the value of human life over religious nonsense. If it was anything else other than religious reasons these madmen would have been arrested and brought to justice a long time ago - why does religion deserve this special treatment? They are getting people murdered or psychologically tortured for nothing more that belief and faith.

Does that make any sense to you Fides or am I just wasting my time? I dont for one second think you are callous, cold blooded or stupid. But what does really confuse me is why you support it?

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978