Tagged: Catholic Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • DistroMan 20:00 on September 24, 2011 Permalink
    Tags: , , Catholic, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    To have or not to have a future, religion is the problem! 

    There has been ongoing rhetoric from all levels of the Roman Catholic priesthood from the Pope on down over the last few years about how they are no worse than secular society.  They have said that there is just as much pedophilia outside the church as there is inside.  Well, for once I’m not going to argue with that point.  I’ll allow it to slide by in the interests of taking the argument one step further.

    What I’d like ask them is whether that argument applies to other areas in which they fall miserably short.  I know there are pedophiles, misogynists, bullies, homophobes, bigots, murderers, thieves, pimps, torturers, slavers etc. out there in society.  We hear about them nearly everyday, but what is most telling is that there are all these types within the Catholic Church itself.  How can this be true you ask?  How is easy.  Read your bible.  It allows for it.  No, it not only allows for it, it demands it.  It is as if they have gathered together the worst parts of humanity and called them ‘brother’.  This is a church of criminals of the worst kind.  Most people only hear about one or two reports and shake their heads as if it is just some kind of anomaly.  It beggars belief that so many outside the church fall for their line of being the moral compass for society when they continue to commit these crimes year after year and use excuses no ordinary person would ever dream of using in a court of law.  Catholics refuse to pull their heads out of their collective arses and see the church for what it is.

    No, I am not saying it is another mafia, or a guild of thieves, or a rape gang.  I’m saying it is all of these and more.  They have murdered, tortured, raped and thieved their way throughout history.  The megalomania is rife within this institution.  Power and wealth is what it is all about.  They want to own everything and have power over us all. Every single one of us.  When you give even the most cursory of glances over their blood soaked history you can see the evidence for yourself.

    As soon as Christianity became legal in the Roman Empire by imperial edict (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christians and pagan priests were killed. Between 315 and 6th century thousands of pagan believers were slain. Christian priests such as Mark of Arethusa or Cyril of Heliopolis were famous as “temple destroyers.”  Pagan services became punishable by death in 356.  Christian Emperor Theodosius (408-450) even had children executed, because they had been playing with remains of pagan statues.  For more read Crimes committed since the advent of the religion of peace!  It goes on and on.

    They have only been kept in check by secular society evolving out of the middle ages and taking some kind of control.  The problem is that the label ‘religion’ still carries with it some kind of inviolable immunity.  We still allow them to use the most feeble of excuses to commit some of the most horrendous of crimes.  Oh sure, we convict and jail some of them, but only after the church has recruited, trained and supported them for decades.  We cannot continue in this vein hoping that it will all go away and they will become what they purport to be.  They never were.  They aren’t and they never will be.  Why?  Because that is not what they want to be.  It never was.

    Just take a quick look at what christianity has done for Africa lately.  They are killing homosexuals.  They are accusing children of being witches and burning them to death.  Adults are being hacked to death because they don’t belong to a local church.  You think it only happened in the Middle Ages?  It’s happening now.  This very minute.

    Read a bible and see what Christianity was like two thousand years ago.  Read the link I gave you above for a short list of what has been happening up until recently.  Think back over what you know about recent history regarding the Church.  Actually think about it.  Then, just for the hell of it, ask yourself how many times during that long reign of terror, people said to themselves ‘Oh, but it is only an anomaly, it will go away!’  Has it?  No. It hasn’t and it never will if people keep thinking in this manner.

    It is about time the world at large woke up and smelled the putrefying undead corpse that is the Roman Catholic Church.  Getting at the priests one at a time will only ever allow them to continue the way they are now by ignoring us and our needs.  To stop this we need to behead the beast. And while I poke my stick at the Catholic Church, this applies to religion as a whole.  It’s time has past.  Long ago.

    Now the time has come for humanity to grow up, put away childish things and take charge of its future.  Or there might not be one.

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 2, 2011 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Catholic, , , , , , , , , , ,   

    1-Kings 13: When is a prophet not a prophet? 

    1-Kings Part 13 of 22
    The Man of God From Judah

    1 By the word of the LORD a man of God came from Judah to Bethel, as Jeroboam was standing by the altar to make an offering.

    2 By the word of the LORD he cried out against the altar: “Altar, altar! This is what the LORD says: ‘A son named Josiah will be born to the house of David. On you he will sacrifice the priests of the high places who make offerings here, and human bones will be burned on you.’”

    3 That same day the man of God gave a sign: “This is the sign the LORD has declared: The altar will be split apart and the ashes on it will be poured out.”

    4 When King Jeroboam heard what the man of God cried out against the altar at Bethel, he stretched out his hand from the altar and said, “Seize him!” But the hand he stretched out toward the man shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.

    <insert spooky noise here>  :)

    5 Also, the altar was split apart and its ashes poured out according to the sign given by the man of God by the word of the LORD.

    6 Then the king said to the man of God, “Intercede with the LORD your God and pray for me that my hand may be restored.” So the man of God interceded with the LORD, and the king’s hand was restored and became as it was before.

    7 The king said to the man of God, “Come home with me for a meal, and I will give you a gift.”

    8 But the man of God answered the king, “Even if you were to give me half your possessions, I would not go with you, nor would I eat bread or drink water here.

    9 For I was commanded by the word of the LORD: ‘You must not eat bread or drink water or return by the way you came.’”

    10 So he took another road and did not return by the way he had come to Bethel.

    No explanations again?  No?  Anyone?

    11 Now there was a certain old prophet living in Bethel, whose sons came and told him all that the man of God had done there that day. They also told their father what he had said to the king.

    Hey, he’s a prophet!  Why does he need his sons to tell him these things?  Freaking stupid book.

    12 Their father asked them, “Which way did he go?” And his sons showed him which road the man of God from Judah had taken.

    Not much of a prophet if he didn’t foresee these things for himself.

    13 So he said to his sons, “Saddle the donkey for me.” And when they had saddled the donkey for him, he mounted it

    Poor donkey!

    14 and rode after the man of God. He found him sitting under an oak tree and asked, “Are you the man of God who came from Judah?”

    “I am,” he replied.

    15 So the prophet said to him, “Come home with me and eat.”

    16 The man of God said, “I cannot turn back and go with you, nor can I eat bread or drink water with you in this place.

    17 I have been told by the word of the LORD: ‘You must not eat bread or drink water there or return by the way you came.’”

    Are you going to tell us why this time?

    18 The old prophet answered, “I too am a prophet, as you are. And an angel said to me by the word of the LORD: ‘Bring him back with you to your house so that he may eat bread and drink water.’” (But he was lying to him.)

    19 So the man of God returned with him and ate and drank in his house.

    He’d believe some old fool over the word of God?

    20 While they were sitting at the table, the word of the LORD came to the old prophet who had brought him back.

    21 He cried out to the man of God who had come from Judah, “This is what the LORD says: ‘You have defied the word of the LORD and have not kept the command the LORD your God gave you.

    22 You came back and ate bread and drank water in the place where he told you not to eat or drink. Therefore your body will not be buried in the tomb of your ancestors.’”

    Mine won’t be and I don’t care.

    23 When the man of God had finished eating and drinking, the prophet who had brought him back saddled his donkey for him.

    24 As he went on his way, a lion met him on the road and killed him, and his body was left lying on the road, with both the donkey and the lion standing beside it.

    God uses lions to do his dirty work now huh?

    25 Some people who passed by saw the body lying there, with the lion standing beside the body, and they went and reported it in the city where the old prophet lived.

    26 When the prophet who had brought him back from his journey heard of it, he said, “It is the man of God who defied the word of the LORD. The LORD has given him over to the lion, which has mauled him and killed him, as the word of the LORD had warned him.”

    27 The prophet said to his sons, “Saddle the donkey for me,” and they did so.

    28 Then he went out and found the body lying on the road, with the donkey and the lion standing beside it. The lion had neither eaten the body nor mauled the donkey.

    29 So the prophet picked up the body of the man of God, laid it on the donkey, and brought it back to his own city to mourn for him and bury him.

    30 Then he laid the body in his own tomb, and they mourned over him and said, “Alas, my brother!”

    You shouldn’t have lied to him.  But that was probably just what God wanted you to do anyway.

    31 After burying him, he said to his sons, “When I die, bury me in the grave where the man of God is buried; lay my bones beside his bones.

    32 For the message he declared by the word of the LORD against the altar in Bethel and against all the shrines on the high places in the towns of Samaria will certainly come true.”

    33 Even after this, Jeroboam did not change his evil ways, but once more appointed priests for the high places from all sorts of people. Anyone who wanted to become a priest he consecrated for the high places.

    Sounds a lot like the Catholic Church these days.

    34 This was the sin of the house of Jeroboam that led to its downfall and to its destruction from the face of the earth.

    Hopefully we can expect the same now.  :)

    << 1-Kings 12       Index      1-Kings 14 >>

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on January 24, 2011 Permalink
    Tags: , Catholic, , , cowards, , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Faith or Abrogation of Responsibility? 

    Cowards in the Mist

    As far back as I can remember I was a loner.  My sister was my closest friend and we took care of each other.  This was more a matter of us circling the wagons against our two older brothers and our mother who was a loose cannon at the best of times and a father who, well, yeah he was there but not if you know what I mean.  So we kept away from everyone else for as long as we could each day and left it at that.  To this day I don’t talk to any of them.  Even my sister fell into that group I now think of as ‘them’.  Why do I tell you this?  Well it’s because it shows why I became a thinker.  I had to be because it was the only way I learned stuff like, right, wrong, good, bad, girls v boys, sex etc.  I was self taught all the basics you’d think a family should be responsible for giving a child.  This wasn’t such a problem for me as I loved to be on my own and think things through anyway.

    This then led me to watch everything and everybody.  My friends at school, both of them.  I wasn’t very popular.  Too short and too useless at sports.  But it did show me how people treated others and I learnt that at times some people did very bad things without any thought for the consequences.  I watched kids come to school bruised and battered.  I watched kids getting beaten up at school, including myself.  I saw kids come to school brokenhearted after their parents had split.  I listened to their stories if I could and I learnt a lot.  I watched a fat kid in my class get picked on by a teacher and couldn’t take it any more.  I stood up and confronted the teacher.  I was abused and told to leave the class. I did and went home.  After telling my mother we headed back to the school where the teacher was called to the front office and asked what had happened.  Instead of also calling the fat kid (I’m sorry, I can’t remember his name and wouldn’t want to use it here anyway) and asking him or others in the class, they took the word of the teacher.  The next thing I know is I’m getting my arse beaten black and blue at home by my mother for ‘telling lies’ and ‘embarrassing her’.

    This kind of watching and learning has gone on all my life.  Watch someone next time you see something happen and think about the situation for yourself.  Step aside from it and be objective.  Is it right?  Did someone do wrong?  Were there preexisting circumstances you know nothing about?  All this questioning will lead you to then examine your own life.  In great detail if my experience is anything to go by.  You can learn a lot.

    So, how can a skinny kid around 8 to 9 years old figure all this stuff out on his own without the intervention of anyone else?  Well the answer dear reader is easy.  Just open your eyes and be honest.  Don’t factor in how it will affect you if you choose A or B.  Just be honest.  I can’t believe how easy it actually is.

    This then begs the question, how the hell can Christians say that only the bible can teach you this stuff?  If I could do it at that age without the help of the bible, without the help of a parent, teacher or preacher, then what is wrong with them?

    This isn’t rocket science.  If you did something wrong, it’s your bloody fault.  Own it.  If you did something right and good then the credit goes to  you.  Whatever it was YOU did, YOU did it.  Not God.  Not the Devil.  YOU.

    I can’t understand for a second how anyone can divest themselves of all responsibility for their actions in this manner.  So many times I’ve heard from faithers, that it was the sinners that caused the problem when something went wrong and it was by God’s good grace that something went right.  Just the other day Pat Robertson, a christian televangelist in the US said that the blizzard there was God punishing those who were driving to do something gay.  Blaming the gays for a blizzard!  But, if an earthquake like the one in Haiti in 2010 kills thousands and one baby is rescued it was a miracle wrought by God.

    There you go, those gay sinners caused a blizzard and God can save a baby but let thousands die.  Hallefreakinglujah brothers and sisters!!!

    How about confession?  You can kill somebody and go to confession, tell the robed one and be forgiven.  I wonder if this is why you find so many born agains in jail these days?

    How about we call these things for what they are?  Blizzards and earthquakes are natural events and are not caused by people loving each other .  If only one baby is saved while thousands die and it’s God you want to give the responsibility to, then it’s his damned fault for not saving them all by stopping the earthquake.  You can’t have it both ways.  Anything else is just a copout.  Blaming others when bad things happen and praising God when good things happen is a copout.  If that is you, then you are one of those lazy minded bastards that don’t even have the spine to stand up and take responsibility for your own actions, but are willing to blame others when something goes wrong.  Maybe less people would die if you got up off your holier than thou knees and pitched in with a bit of actual work.

    Responsibility.  Why doesn’t the bible put a bit of emphasis on responsibility instead of teaching these morons that having faith is enough to get into heaven?  What reason do they have to do right if all they have to do is have faith and confess?

    And while we’re calling things what they are, we may as well go a step further and call the people for what they are.  Nothing but a bunch of spineless cowards, simpering at the heels of the frocked ones and begging to be let into heaven but unable to do something practical to help those in need.  No, I’m not talking about the real helpers, the ones out there feeding the starving, finding beds for the homeless, but the cowards who do nothing but throw a gold coin on a plate and pray and call themselves christians.  There are good christians, but they are good because they ‘want’ to help others, because they know it’s the right thing to do, not because they are christians.  It’s the cowards, the overwhelming majority who think just being a christian is all it takes.  Letting the starving children die, letting the homeless freeze, letting those in need of medical care suffer!  As long as they kneel in prayer, they don’t give a shit.

    A child who steals an apple to feed his sister is a hero in comparison to the Sunday Morning Happy Clappers who congratulate each other for singing this weeks hymns so well.  They have no idea what it means to be good human beings and they never will while they rely on the bible as their moral compass.  Stop spending so much on your Sunday Go To Meeting Clothes and give it to the poor.  Get off your knees and volunteer to actually help someone who needs helping.  You’ll feel much better for it and so will those you help.

    “Be known for ye good deeds, not by ye good words” – Francis Bacon

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on June 4, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Catholic, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    P.O.P.E. Pissing Off People Endlessly 

    The Pope’s linking of Islam to violence during a speech in Germany led to outrage in the Muslim world, nearly forcing cancellation of a trip to Turkey in 2006.

    Another controversy arose from his remarks on a trip to Africa that condoms can “make the continent’s AIDS epidemic worse”.

    He  made comments in Brazil that Latin America’s native people “wanted” to become Christian even before Europe’s conquerors arrived.

    Pope Benedict XVI called abortion and same-sex marriage some of the most “insidious and dangerous” threats facing the world today.

    In suffering, you will discover an interior peace and even spiritual joy.

    In Latin America the Pope said, “There is another disquieting trend, authoritarian forms of government and regimes wedded to certain ideologies that we thought had been superseded.” Here the Pope seemed clearly to be referring to leftist governments such as the Venezuelan regime of Hugo Chavez, who has clashed frequently with Church leaders there.

    An Irish government-organized compensation board has paid out more than $983 million to 13,000 people abused in Ireland’s church-run residential institutions for children. Why do the Irish people have to pay when the Vatican has more money than they do and they were the ones doing wrong?

    Archbishop Timothy Dolan, hand picked by Pope to join the Child Sex Abuse Probe in Ireland let a priest sue his accuser in St Louis and fought against reforming Wisconsin child sex abuse law.  Is this the right person to be on the panel?

    Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor is also a Papal choice for the Irish Probe.  It was Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor’s decision in 1985, when he was bishop of Arundel and Brighton, to move Fr Michael Hill to a chaplaincy at Gatwick airport.  Eighteen months previously the cardinal had removed Hill from ministry because of child abuse allegations but then allowed him back to work at the airport where Hill abused a child. Hill was jailed in 2002.   Is this the right person to be on the panel?

    British Taxpayers are to be asked to pay over $24.2 million to help fund the Pope’s visit in September all because ex Prime Minister Gordon Brown wanted the visit to help shore up Labour’s vote among the faithful in Scotland.

    It seems that there is a never-ending onslaught of Papal intervention in the affairs of Sovereign Governments these days.  When the Vatican seems less and less capable of even taking care of it’s own house you would think that they would be better off STFU.  But no, they seem quite willing to carry on laundering money, abusing children, raping nuns, avoiding the law, pimping, causing the deaths of hundreds of thousand by denying their followers the use of condoms, allow mothers to die during childbirth by denying abortion, allowing women to get pregnant too many times and risking their lives by denying the use of condoms and birth control.  All this and more while they put themselves up as the moral arbiters of our actions.

    The furor over child abuse has been growing steadily for around two decades and yet they still sit on their hands and wait for ‘nothing’ to happen.  Popey Joe continues to talk about ‘decisive action’ but none has been taken.  He has only just gotten around to naming a panel of ‘men of the cloth’ to go to Ireland and he couldn’t even get that right.  At least a third of them have questions to answer about their own activities.  How can anyone take them seriously when they themselves haven’t even cleared their own names.  Joe travels around the world spewing forth about the abuse and how it is ‘wrong’ and ‘evil’, but only blames the secular community, homosexuals or lack of faith by Catholics themselves.  One of his Cardinals even went so far as to accuse the children of ‘wanting it’.

    The US government is now involved in helping him avoid trial.  Their Supreme Court is so top heavy with Catholic Judges that they won’t give a verdict themselves on whether the Pope is immune from lawsuit, but have asked the Obama Administration to tell them what they should do.  What use are Judges if they won’t judge?  Of course, if they decide not to follow the Administration’s recommendations, then the Pope could still face trial if he is ever stupid enough to step foot on US soil.  I ‘pray’ that they do and he does.

    JOE AND BUBBA SITTING IN A CELL

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 26, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , Catholic, , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Ethics Trial debate is becoming a farce. 

    Abbreviations:

    * SRE – Special Religious Education – Single faith instruction, usually by a ‘chaplain’ of that faith.

    ** GRE – General Religious Education – Comparative religious instruction on many faiths.

    Last night on television here in Australia a show called Insight had a somewhat varied group discussing their opinion on the Ethics Classes that the Education Department hope to introduce on a fulltime basis.  As you have probably seen from previous articles I have written on the subject, the religious community have gotten in on the act and are trying every tactic they can think of to stop these classes going ahead.  We have heard arguments that:

    • it isn’t necessary because they already have religious classes
    • it has no moral basis
    • ethics lacks substance
    • the term ‘ethics’ is problematic
    • it’s not fair and just to the religious children
    • it’s hostile to religion
    • it just shouldn’t happen because they have an agreement with the government
    • you can’t teach ethics outside a religious framework
    • the children’s minds can’t critically analyse ethics
    • philosophy discussion ‘problematic’ at that age (10 to 12)
    • the work of the Greek and Roman philosophers is irrelevant to ethics
    • afraid more children will opt out of SRE*
    • wasn’t implemented in a way they approve of

    They gave some of the children a chance to give their opinion and describe the classes they are involved in.  I was amazed at the explanations of the ethics given by the children and how it was being taught, but the religious in the group could not come up with one reason that countered the children’s wish to continue.

    It was explained by the person who originally put the syllabus together that scenarios are tailored for the age groups they are given to so that the children can not only comprehend the problem put to them, but analyse it and come up with different ways of dealing with them and then discussing those ideas amongst themselves with the objective of finding better solutions to ethical problems in their lives.

    The Anglican Minister confused me with his objections.  I can only think that he has no idea how atheism is defined.  He said,

    “If there was an atheistic teaching system we would be happy with that at the same time. Teaching all faiths is better than ethics with no faith component”

    and something about

    “Atheistic religion it’s a religion of some sort.”

    I don’t know what he is thinking because I’m not sure he knows himself.  None of his objections made sense and he was less than helpful in the discussion.  Whilever we include clueless people in these discussions, an outcome is impossible.

    The children who were removed from the SRE* classes told the audience that they were allowed to:

    • watch movies
    • read books in library or in the back of SRE* Classes
    • played on computer

    This is the part that really upsets the Non Religious parents.  Why, when the ‘religious’ children are being taught something their parents and the ‘chaplains’ are happy with, are our children being made to go without?  Blaming us for not wanting our children in those classes is no more than a smokescreen to reflect the responsibility back on us.  The trouble most of us have with that is that they wan to have their cake and eat it too.  I’ll explain what I mean by that.

    We take our children out of the SRE* classes, and they say it’s our fault. Fine, we take responsibility for our own children the same way they do for theirs.  Our children sit doing nothing and they say that’s our fault as well.  Sorry, but that’s not true.  It was part of the agreement they had with the government.  Why they would ever have made an agreement that the non SRE* children were not to be allowed to undertake educational activities is something they need to answer for as it is neither an ethical or moral stance.  So we took appropriate action to give our children a positive educational influence during that time and then they want responsibility back and the authority to stop us teaching ethics to our children.  We took them out of those classes and they didn’t care.  Our children sat idle and they didn’t care.  Why so much concern now?

    They showed a clip of one Minister teaching 10 to 12yr olds with toy bears.  THAT does not seem age appropriate to me.  If you can’t do better than that, it will only reinforce the decision to keep our children out of SRE.  While I certainly do not believe that all ‘chaplains’ would be that bad, I can only assume that they would have tried to show their best to the world.  If that is so, it was a pretty pathetic ‘best’.  They did themselves a great disservice and only managed to show how poor SRE* can be as an educational tool.

    It was also a sad reflection on the Victorian State Government to hear that they wouldn’t allow Humanist/Secular Ethics classes in Victoria because the group proposing it weren’t religious.  It really does show that the Christian Lobby in this country have quite a stranglehold on our Education Departments.  This is inappropriate in this day and age.  It needs to be looked at seriously and a resolution sought that will allow for our children to get better educations free of the restraints being imposed by a ‘special interest group’.  It is their ‘interest’ and not that of the wider community.

    Let’s get to some facts.

    1. They have the classes for their children that they want.
    2. We don’t have an existing alternative.
    3. Their children learn scripture according to their groups beliefs.
    4. Our children are banned from learning anything during that time.
    5. Some parents put their children into the SRE* classes because there is no alternative class.
    6. If there was an alternative, they would change their children over to that class as has already been shown during the trial.
    7. There has been up to 47% drop in SRE* attendance in some classes.

    This whole debate is entirely unnecessary.

    • They have their classes for their children, so why complain?
    • They haven’t cared about our children going without before, so why are they so interested in what we ‘do’ teach our children now?
    • Our children learning ethics is a good thing, so why complain?
    • They have GRE**, SRE*, Church, Sunday School and home. What more do they need?

    It really boils down to this:  The children of religious parents have the right to have their children taught the belief system they choose.  We, as either non-believers or parents whose children’s school does not have a chaplain for their ‘belief system’ would prefer to have our children taught ethics.  Why when they get exactly what they want do they think they have the right to deny us the exact same thing?

    Again, the explanation is simple.  They have to ‘automatically respect’ the other religions so they don’t make a noise about children of other faiths being taught in SRE*.  But we aren’t religious and are not given that respect.  We are nothing to them and in their opinion we don’t have equivalent rights to teach our children ethics.  It would not be in any of their interests for our children to be shown to be becoming more moral and ethical without their so-called religious beliefs.  It would once and for all show to the world that their gods and prophets are not needed for us to be good people.  They will continue to fight this even if we do get these classes approved.  It is not in their interests for us to be good.  How then do they claim that without God, there is no morals, no goodness, no compassion etc?  What use will there be for religion if that happens?

    THE DEMISE OF RELIGION IS AT HAND

     
    • Kat 11:58 on May 27, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      I am a strong supporter of teaching ethics in primary and philosophy to high school age students. One of the things that most strongly affected my thinking as a child was that while Mum wanted us to go to Catholic school where our thinking was often stifled – my father taught us many philosophies, encouraged critical thinking and had many ethical discussions on many topics.
      I taught my children ethics when they were primary school age and Philosophy when high school age. Even though my daughter has not pursued it academically – it has helped her make good life choices and decisions. My son is still interested and continually questions and discusses ethics and philosophy daily.

  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 23, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , Catholic, , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Questions for Cardinal George Pell and Robert Haddad. 

    In the following article entitled ‘Secular ‘ethics’ drive belittles religious faith‘ Cardinal Pell seems to have missed the point yet again.

    He uses the word secular.  Do you not understand the term?

    It is not religious.  It is not anti-religion.  It is just ‘without’ religion.  It has nothing to do with religion in any way.

    There is no hostility in secularism.  As there is no hostility, hostility cannot be reflected in anything. You state that there is a majority of christians in Australia, which I doubt, but I’ll let you have that for the sake of the discussion.  What has that to do with anything? Are you of the opinion that a religious majority have the right to enforce their religion on the secular minority? All anyone is asking for here is the right to teach our children ethics outside of a religious framework because we are not religious.

    You say

    So you have a few people who suggest that religious considerations are inappropriate in public life.

    Whether or not we consider it inappropriate or not has nothing to do with the ethics debate currently underway. That is not what is being said at all.  What is being said, and I am getting rather tired of having to repeat myself here, ‘All anyone is asking for is the right to teach our children ethics outside of a religious framework because we are not religious.‘  Please try to understand George, this has nothing to do with you or your SRE classes.  This is about parents who wish to have their children taught ethics.  What has that to do with you? Is it just that a few parents have taken their children out of the SRE classes? They probably would not have put them there in the first place if secular ethics classes were available.  Which just means that you and yours have had a free ride with those children up till now.  You shouldn’t be complaining about that.

    From your friend Robert Haddad:

    It’s not for our sakes, but so our baptised children can hear and know about Christ, wherever they may be.

    Now that’s telling isn’t it.  It’s for his baptised children. He wants to do the best for ‘their’ children.  Good luck to you mate.  Well, we also want to do the best for our children.  Why are you trying to stop us?  Do you have some special mandate that means only you are allowed to do good for your children and that says we can’t?

    and

    “In the end, the volunteer providers of secular ethics will be no more interesting or inspiring than our catechists, nor will they have the staying power of our catechists, many of whom have devoted decades to joyfully bringing Christ to our children, despite the many difficulties they encounter.”

    Not only are you religious, you now profess to be a fortune teller? You can see the future? Oh, what a wise and holy man thou art!  Your comments about others being ignorant and prejudiced just go to show your own failings as a christian and solidify our problems with having people such as yourself teaching anything, especially ethics, to our children.  Take your hostility to your church and teach it to your children, not ours.  He goes on…

    Sorry, I would much prefer to continue my cooperation with Orthodox, Protestant, Jewish, Islamic and Buddhist SRE providers to have this Ethics course diverted to another dedicated time slot or removed altogether.

    All this shows is that you are trying to remove it altogether.  You know full well that if it went to another time slot that the children would have to forgo some other part of their education and that will not be allowed.  All you want is to stop non religious people being taught ethics in a secular manner. 

    If Christianity were being practised in this country in the way that is being made out by the vocal proponents of Christianity in this debate, there wouldn’t be such a problem.  But the words being used and the tone of the arguments coming from those in positions of leadership within the christian community are one of the biggest signs that religion is past it’s use by date.  When they push a fear campaign to get their way it just goes to show that they have a weak position and they know it.

    Why is it that you’re all fine to allow other religions to teach their special brand of ethics, even if it is one you don’t prescribe to, but we aren’t allowed?  Why do you fear us so much? We are just ordinary people trying to get along in the world and do the best for our families just like anyone else.  If it is just because we don’t believe in your god, then it makes even less sense.  How many other religions don’t believe in your god but you’re fine with them teaching their followers children in that same time slot?  Buddhists don’t even believe in a god but you’re fine with them, so what is your problem with us?

    IT’S TIME YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 20, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , Catholic, , , , , , , , , ,   

    Cardinal Pell versus Ethics Classes – Yet Again 

    Once again Cardinal Pell finds it necessary to speak out about the Ethics Classes under trial here in NSW.

    “Our state schools are free, compulsory and secular; there’s no reason whatsoever as part of the normal curriculum that secular ethics mightn’t be taught,” the cardinal said.

    Let’s break this down and go through it one bit at a time shall we.

    “Our state schools” – yes, State Schools George.  Not your Catholic Schools.  You get a fair bit of leeway in how you run your Private Catholic Schools and can teach religion in whatever way you wish, but when it comes to State Schools, you shouldn’t. Not even close to having a say.  Just where do you get off thinking you are in a position to demand that our children either sit in your indoctrination classes or sit idle?  If not idle, then why not ethics?  Straighten your frock George, your agenda is showing.

    “Free” – yes, they are to a great degree, but that isn’t what is under discussion here.

    “Compulsory” – No, that is not true. You may enrol your child in a private school or do homeschooling if you so choose.

    “Secular” – No, that is not quite true.  If it were you wouldn’t have your god squad invading them once a week.

    “there’s no reason whatsoever as part of the normal curriculum that secular ethics mightn’t be taught” - Wow, I’m surprised you even said this.  I really am.  That is the whole argument there in one phrase.  If our children aren’t attending your religious classes, then you have nothing to do with them and no say over what we as parents want to have them taught and therefore whatever they are taught IS part of their normal curriculum.

    I know that SRE has been going on since approx 1880.  At what time parents were allowed to exempt their children from SRE I do not know, but I do know that nobody has said a word about that as long as those children that were exempt weren’t doing anything ‘worthwhile’ or that may encourage others to remove their children as well.  As I see it, that is the big problem here for you.  You are worried that parents will remove their children and you’ll lose a captive audience.  If those parents only have their children in your classes for the ethics but would prefer a non religious environment if that was on offer then that is their choice and you should not be depriving them of that.  Neither you, nor the Catholic Church have the right to deny anyone a choice in how they learn or live their lives.

    What is the the Jesuit maxim? “Give me a child for his first seven years and I’ll give you the man”?  There it is in a nutshell.  That is what you are losing.  Raw recruits to feed your religious mill.  You know full well that if you can’t get them early enough, you’ll never get them.  If we can teach them ethics outside of your superstitious institution, then they would have no reason to bow before you and the inevitable demise of religion would be hastened.

    I also know that this worries you.  As it should I suppose.  You have given your whole life to the Church and what it stands for, but is that a reason to deny others with differing opinions a chance to learn and to prosper as human beings?  Really George, if christianity, the church, religion or whatever term you wish to use, has a firm enough foundation as you obviously believe, don’t you think it could withstand this?  Facing hardships is one of the things we all know is part of life on this planet and that when we overcome them, we turn out to be better people for that experience.  If christianity/the church/religion can’t survive children learning ethics outside of a religious framework, then it doesn’t have the foundation you think it has and it should be allowed to fall by the way, just as the Ethics Classes shall if they are not worthy of continuing.  Are you worried religion isn’t up to the challenge?

    Once again, I’ll say this.  You have your churches to teach Sunday School for those who wish to attend.  You have your Catholic Schools to teach religion in the manner you choose.  You have SRE classes in State Schools where you can teach religion in the manner you wish to the children of parents who wish to have them attend those classes.  Those are your domains.  Outside of that, it is our domain.  A place where  secular parents can choose to have their children be educated in a secular manner.  Why is it that you are trying to deny us that right?

    DEMOCRACY NOT THEOCRACY

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 14, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , Catholic, ,   

    Why does a book have to come between us? 

    A: You look like a decent person.

    B: So do you sir.

    A: Having a nice day?

    B: I most certainly am. You?

    A: Oh yes. Magnificent.

    B: It’s marvellous what God has given us isn’t it?

    A: Huh? What? God?

    B: Yes, isn’t his work marvellous.

    A: I don’t believe in a god.  I’m not religious.

    B: Oh. I’m sorry.

    A: Sorry? Why would you be sorry?  It doesn’t bother me that you believe in a god.

    B: But you’re missing out on so much.

    A: Like what? I’m sitting here enjoying the same marvelous day we were both just talking about.

    B: But you don’t see Gods glory in that.

    A: I see the same sun, sky, clouds and earth that you do.  I marvel at it’s beauty just like you do.  What need have I of your God?

    B: Everything is so much better with Jesus in your life.

    A: Better? How do you know I’m not enjoying this more than you and you’re the one missing out because you give credit to someone or thing that you can’t prove?

    B: It says in the Bible that God made everything here before you.

    A: Now you’re bringing up yet another ‘thing’ that you have yet to prove.

    B: But it’s true, the Bible says so.

    A: Didn’t men write the bible?

    B: Yes

    A: Aren’t men sinners?

    B: Oh yes.

    A: Then may they not have been telling lies?  You said yourself that we’re sinners.

    B: No, because it’s the word of God.

    A: Did your god talk to these men or just Jesus and Moses?

    B: He talks to everyone.

    A: Do you hear God?

    B: No, it doesn’t work like that.

    A: But you just said he talks to everyone.

    B: Not everyone hears him with a voice like you’re making out.

    A: Then the ones that don’t hear voices hear what?  Seagulls?  Or do they see burning bushes?  How do you interpret a burning bush?

    B: Now you’re being silly.

    A: Then how do you hear him?

    B: Well I haven’t heard him yet.  I just know he’s there listening.

    A: How do you know?

    B: The Bible tells me.

    A: But you haven’t proven the bible is true yet.  All we know so far is that some men two thousand years ago wrote stories about God and that you have no proof that they were even spoken to by your god.

    B: It’s all in the Bible.

    A: They could have written that god looks like a big pink bunny and you’d believe that without proof?

    B: No, of course not.

    A: Then why believe any of it?

    B: Well, there are over 1 billion Roman Catholics in the world, we can’t all be wrong.

    A: Over one fifth of the people in the world don’t believe in personal gods, they can’t all be wrong either.  Add to that the Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists and the many other religions who believe in gods other than yours, and you are in the minority.  Odds aren’t in your favour anymore.

    B: Sure is a lovely day today.

    A: :)

    I READ FAIRY STORIES WHEN I WAS YOUNG

    DOESN’T MEAN I BELIEVE IN TROLLS

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 13, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Catholic, , , , , , , , ,   

    More Opposition to Ethics Classes in Schools 

    Once again we have an uninformed and close minded priest coming out in opposition to the proposed Ethics Classes.

    ROSEMEADOW priest Father Christopher Sarkis believes there’s a ‘hidden agenda’ behind proposed ethics classes in public schools.

    There is nothing hidden here.  The whole planning for this trial has been public knowledge since the beginning.

    But Fr Sarkis, of Our Lady Help of Christians Catholic parish, said most churches were against such classes.

    The last report I read said that the Catholic Church wasn’t against this at all.  It has only been the Anglicans and the Australian Christian Lobby led by Jim Wallace.

    It’s not anything specifically Catholic or Christian but it’s something that flies in the face of all religions.

    I fail to see how teaching children ethics flies in the face of anything.  How can there be anything wrong with teaching children to be better citizens?

    The objection we have is not to the ethics classes but the way they came about and are being put into practice.

    They came about through consultation and research.  They are being put into practice in exactly the way it was described to everyone prior to the start of the program.  St James Ethics Centre has been open about this through the whole process.  The only people complaining seem to be those who didn’t bother to find out the facts for themselves in the beginning or just have a fear of people finding out that ethics are not necessarily tied to religion.

    We believe there is a hidden agenda to do away with anything ‘religious’.

    Believe?  It seems to that you have about as much evidence for this as you do all your other beliefs.  Put your paranoia away and look for the good in what can be accomplished here.

    Even those who don’t have a Christian belief have some religious belief.

    Excuse me?  I’ll thank you NOT to be telling people lies about my beliefs.  You neither have the right nor the moral authority to pigeon hole my or anybody else’s beliefs in this manner.  You insult all non theists and make a fool of yourself into the bargain.

    These beliefs underpin our society and to try and stop this is a denial of that.

    Again you make unfounded claims.  Not one of the Aboriginal people were christians and when the British arrived they didn’t even build a church.  It got to the point that the ministers had to raise money themselves to build a church because the governing officers saw no reason to waste money on such things while there were much more important needs to be attended to.  Read your history books Mr Sarkis.

    The trial was introduced because the number of parents not choosing scripture meant too many children were being left without anything to do,” said Verity Firth, Minister for Education.

    But Fr Sarkis said children not having ‘anything useful to do’ was an internal problem at schools.

    Yes Mr Sarkis it is now, but it came about due to a deal made by the Church with the State that no child was to be taught anything else while Scripture Classes were underway.  You and your lot caused this.  Now it is being fixed up and the children will not be disadvantaged only because you don’t want to lose children from your classes.  This country is a mostly free country.  We get to make choices.  If, as parents we decide that is in our children’s best interests not to have them attend Scripture Classes, then they should be able to do something worthwhile.  Considering it is just about always the Church that is carrying on about how the youth of today is getting out of hand and running amok in the streets, it would seem that it would be in there interest to back any proposal to help children become better people.

    They put the classes on at exactly the same time as scripture lessons.

    It is the children who are not attending scripture classes that we are talking about here.  Of course it is going to be at the same time.  Would you have them miss out on another necessary part of their education so that they can sit around with nothing to do while you teach the other children scripture?  As that is the time when they aren’t doing anything I would think it obvious that would be the time to hold the ethics classes.  Or should they miss out on Maths or Geography Mr Sarkis?  Do you think it’s better for them to sit around for one hour doing nothing and then miss Maths so they can do Ethics?  Would that please you?  I’m very curious about what your agenda is here.

    I find it interesting they didn’t ask for feedback before it was introduced.

    As I said previously, this has been known about for years and there has been feedback.  Even the Church knew about it and has been trying to stop it all this time.  Stop crying foul now just because you don’t like it.

    Quite honestly I think this comes down to one thing and one thing only.  You, your church and the rest of religion, do NOT want the rest of the world figuring out that we can be ‘GOOD WITHOUT GOD’.  If ethics and morals can be taught to children and they can grow up to be good, productive, caring, generous and community minded citizens, then it makes your cabal look meaningless.  Stop trying to own ‘ethics and morals’. They do not belong to you.  They belong to humanity.  You may be able to teach them and you can even teach them with a religious flavour, but that is not where they come from and I won’t have my children and grandchildren force fed a meal of pre-chewed pap just so the church can keep the power it has become accustomed to over the centuries.  You and it are an anachronism in this world.  Accept it.

    To finish, answer one question for me without saying ‘they can attend our scripture classes’.  What would you have our children do during your scripture classes Mr Sarkis?  Please inform the public what your alternative is.

    HOW CAN TEACHING ETHICS TO CHILDREN BE WRONG?

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 12, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , Catholic, Dawkins, , Hitchens, , , PZ Myers, Rap,   

    Catholic Rap 

    Hello there, my name’s Joe,
    I lay down the line you have to toe.
    I have my army, all dressed in purple,
    Who all believe the lies laid down in Constantinople.

    I’ve got this crew that like little boys,
    They love to cuddle them like fluffy toys.
    But some went too far and got found out,
    So where there’s fact, I have to sow some doubt.

    I can’t let them get into trouble,
    So now my workload has had to double.
    I wrote a letter to the Irish people,
    And I had to say sorry to the Sheeple.

    I’ve been to Malta and I’ve shed a tear,
    Made them all think that hell I fear.
    But what worries me is that the people are leavin,
    I’ll just have to cry more and show them I’m grievin.

    Now I’m off to Portugal to look all prophetic,
    I’ll think up some words to sound all apologetic.
    I might have to sob and groan a little,
    A couple of tears faked with some spittle.

    So all you heathens better believe in me,
    And stop worrying about the boys sitting on my knee.
    Bring all your kids to the church,
    We’ll keep’em in line with a bit of birch.

    All you women, get in the kitchens,
    And stop that listenin to Christopher Hitchens.
    No more Dawkins or PZ,
    From now on it’s just God and me.

    So you should listen and do as I say,
    or you’ll get stoned come Judgement Day.
    Now do as I say and not as I do,
    Cause that’s what it says in my Book of Woo.

     
    • eda1 13:40 on May 12, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Love this Rap. it's funny. you are very good with words… 1st time I read about "Joe the bastard" and I laugh! Brilliant!

c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel