When he started out claiming that science was the reason he came to the conclusion that a supernatural being existed I knew this was doomed. I respect peoples faith if they keep it to just that, faith, when they start trying to "explain" how it is the only explanation and that scientific theory backs them up, then I am going to have something to say. Faith is based on not having to have an explanation, a belief that is not based on proof, yet he had to tell us how we were wrong and science proved "his" existence. He has since really gone off the deep end with the conspiracy theories about there not really being any priests convicted and it was all the hippies fault, what with the sexual revolution and all. This was, as I thought from the beginning, a "look at me" thread for him to preach.
Don't blame me for the abortion you turned this thread into. It's your preaching fostered by your church elder talking points that brought it down. Total crock. This thread was started as a trolling look at me thread to spout your right wing propaganda. Own it. The only thing worse than your proselytizing are your analogies. So now you are comparing a doctor accidentally harming a patient to priests INTENTIONALLY raping children. Hey UnTruth--you bet me I couldn't find evidence of ONE priest being convicted of molesting children but I gave you HUNDREDS. And a dog fucker for good measure. Go make up more excuses. _
Growing Concerns Over Clergy Videos By Truth4U2 Admist growning concerns over a pair of recently released videos, the Church has scheduled a press conference for Wednesday morning at 10:00 a.m. The two videos in question, "Priests Gone Wild" and "Monsignors on Spring Break - Panama City Edition!" ironically were being marketed for the purpose of raising funds to help cover legal expenses involving sexual abuse court cases. Anita Budplugg, spokesperson for 'Gowns & Groans Productions' declined comment and referred the press to the upcoming press conference. Church officials were unavailable for comment as well...
The best part about this topic is the OP discrediting media reports written in the past decade of being questionable while trumpeting a book that has been rewritten and edited hundreds of times over the past 2000 years by authors commissioned by kings, emperors, and other men of power who would benefit from the policies it's followers would follow
god damnit i'd be lying if i said im not completely drop jawed this fine monday morning catching up on the last 7 pages of this thread that has transpired over the weekend. holy smokes, i can only equate this to Tex Cobb vs. Larry Holmes. anyone see that fight? guess who's Tex Cobb haa haa!!
How can you not love Tex Cobb, he actually had an acting career after that too, Golden Child and Raising Arizona
He had one fight against Sonny Barch that was DQd when both of them tested positive for coke, Barch said they did coke together before the fight and then he took a dive. Guess after a 4 year layoff Cobb needed some help. I only remember this because it was right after I moved to Fla. and it was 5 miles from my house in Lauderhill. Cobb took pride in being the one that forced Howard Cosell out of boxing, Holmes beat Cobb so bad that Cosell thought it too brutal and walked away from announcing.
and a shellacking he took indeed, i mean holy smokes! pure butchery, nothing less. guy could take a punch.
I'm not denying that there have been abuses in the name of religion. But the Catholic Church's Priestly abuse scandal has been grossly exaggerated, and completely blown out of proportion by the Catholic-bashers out there. There's no denying that. I am trying to discuss the teachings of religion here, the different Faiths, as well as debate those skeptics out there who doubt the existence of God altogether. There have been some quality posts in here, and some good discussion. One person told me that he would like to believe, that it would give meaning to his life, but so far he has trouble believing in God. I have had some quality discussions with Protestant Christians as well. An atheist (or agnostic?) recently stated his case in a respectful way, and I addressed it. I appreciate well-written viewpoints that differ from mine. But there are a few people who just want to pick a fight by hurling insults, posting vulgar, abusive photoshopped images, and ignoring all of the points being raised by the believers in this thread. I hope we can get back to discussing religion as a whole, not just the Priest abuse scandals from 30 or 40 years ago. The Catholic Church has addressed that issue, responded to it, and from all accounts fixed it. It's a thing of the past now, thank goodness. Those who continue to dig it up are just trying to slander the church and sidetrack the discussion in this thread. If anyone wants to start another thread on those scandals, that's fine, but it doesn't belong in this thread. And besides, while the Catholic Church was mostly accused of these things, they were hardly alone; Rabbis and clerics of other religious faiths were also accused. But again, I would like this to be the place for people to discuss the role of religion in their lives, comparative religion, metaphysical issues (the existence of God), etc. Those who are vehemently opposed to one or more religions are asked to be respectful of the believers on here. That's all.
"The gospel is, John Paul II said, a Gospel of Life. And it is a gospel of family life, too. And it is these integral dimensions of the gospel that powerful cultural forces and currents today demand that we deny or suppress." "If," Jesus said, "anyone wants to be my disciple, let him take up his cross and follow me." We Christians in the West, having become comfortable, had forgotten, or ignored, that timeless gospel truth. There will be no ignoring it now. Powerful forces and currents in our society press us to be ashamed of the gospel—ashamed of our faith's teachings on the sanctity of human life in all stages and conditions, ashamed of our faith's teachings on marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife. These forces insist that the Church's teachings are out of date, retrograde, insensitive, uncompassionate, illiberal, bigoted—even hateful. These currents bring pressure on all of us—and on young Christians in particular—to yield to this insistence. They threaten us with consequences if we refuse to call what is good evil, and what is evil good. They command us to conform our thinking to their orthodoxy, or else keep silent. We believe the truth—in its fullness—about the dignity of the human person and the nature of marriage and sexual morality as proclaimed by the Church for two thousand years. Read more:http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=28-03-003-e#ixzz3dAPbkngr "She spoke of the decline of respect for religion’s place in American society. “Religious freedom, which was once considered the first of freedoms, is on track to becoming a second-class right…a right that is regularly subordinated to a vast range of other rights, claims and interests.” Tracing the history of religious freedom, Ms. Glendon spoke of the persecution of Christians in ancient Rome. “Today, once again, we are living in an age of persecution: horrifyingly violent religious persecution in some parts of the world, more insidious in the liberal democracies of the West,” she said. In contrast, she spoke of “a great moment in the history of religious freedom”—when the framers of the U.S. Constitution prohibited restrictions on the free exercise of religion. “What our framers set in motion was something entirely new in the world. It was a system that lifted up religious freedom as a fundamental right, and it left room for diverse ways of bringing that right to life.” The framers, Ms. Glendon continued, knew that religion could foster the virtues and strength of character required for successful self-government. She added that George Washington, in his farewell address, “warned against…imagining that a healthy civic culture could be sustained without religion.” Ms. Glendon spoke also about changes in the understanding of the First Amendment. Until about the mid-1940s, it was commonly held that the amendment’s purpose is to protect religion, she said. Though that intention was not perfectly realized, “the ideal …of America as a pluralist, tolerant country was widely shared,” she said. As a result, there was cooperation between church and state, such as school-bus service for children in religious schools and after-school religion classes held in public schools. The courts did not hold such accommodations to be unconstitutional, she said. But, she noted, in 1947 a Supreme Court majority began to cast doubt on this public-religious cooperation by using a metaphor of Thomas Jefferson’s: “a wall of separation between church and state.” The shift in attitude attracted little attention until 1962, when the Supreme Court banned prayer in public schools. It was then that many Americans became aware of “a version of secularism that seemed to be on a trajectory of driving almost every trace of religiosity from America’s public institutions,” Ms. Glendon said. Speaking about the influence that religion formerly exerted in American life, Ms. Glendon said that the impetus for the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s came largely from religious sources. “How many people today know that Martin Luther King, during his Birmingham campaign, required his followers to sign a pledge to meditate daily on the teachings and life of Jesus?” she asked. Most important in the defense of religious freedom, she said, will be the efforts not of lawyers and politicians, but of religious believers and religious leaders. “It will be up to them to resist the forces that aim to install an intolerant secularism as the established religion,” she said. http://cny.org/stories/Edward-Cardinal-Egan-Lecture-Examines-Religious-Freedom-in-Peril,12747?content_source=&category_id=&search_filter=Edward Cardinal Egan Lecture&search_headline=&event_mode=&event_ts_from=&list_type=&order_by=&order_sort=&content_class=&sub_type=stories&town_id=
How can you expect to have a respectful discussion about religion if you excuse, disregard and completely ignore things that clergy from your church have done and continue to do? Even in this thread, after you have previously been proven wrong multiple times, you still state "the Catholic Church's Priestly abuse scandal has been grossly exaggerated, and completely blown out of proportion by the Catholic-bashers", "not just the Priest abuse scandals from 30 or 40 years ago" and "The Catholic Church has addressed that issue, responded to it, and from all accounts fixed it. It's a thing of the past now". How do you expect to discuss your high and mighty church if you excuse the massive wrong doings they were and still are involved in?
Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Om A Ra Pa Ca Na Dhih Repeat this mantra over and over and it will enhance your wisdom
FACT: Almost all accusations against Catholic priests date from many decades ago FACT: You would never know it from the media's lurid and obsessive coverage, but the vast bulk of reported cases of abuse stem only from a historical anomaly, as most allegations occurred during only a small sliver of time during the Sexual Revolution from the 1960s to the early 1980s. And despite media suggestions of dark conspiracies and cover-ups, the Church – like every other institution at the time – simply followed the then-prevailing view of experts in the field that offenders could be successfully rehabilitated FACT: The Catholic Church is likely the safest environment for children today. http://www.themediareport.com/fast-facts/ This was ignored by the Catholic-bashers before, and likely will be again. The abuse scandal is a thing of the past, why are we even discussing it??? IF we're going to discuss ancient history, why don't we talk about "the problem of slavery" in America? It's ridiculous. But I guess when the haters have nothing new to harp on, they have to keep going back to old stuff that no longer applies to perpetuate their propaganda.
Fact: Themediareport.co m is a blog run by church lapdog David F. Pierre Jr and is a useless source Fact: Catholic clergy still get regularly arrested for sex crimes against young children Fact: Sex crimes against young children, committed by clergy, have been happening for 100's of years and were in no way caused by the sexual revolution
Governor Cuomo understands the importance of the Catholic Church in NY. President Obama also understands the importance and influence of the Church in this country. But we must be a nation that condones child abusers, according to what the small minority of Catholic-bashers will have you believe. The truth is that the scandal is a thing of the past, and the Catholic Church has done an admirable job in solving the problem. Most people realize this, it's crazy that I'm still dignifying the baseless propaganda of a few people on here. smh.
Someone needs to get a memo out to whoever was editing the New York Times front page today apparently.