Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you didn't read them, you might come to that conclusion. Here is one quote from one of them
From the NPR link:
"But the Inquisitors were aware that confessions given under torture could be problematic, says Murphy.
'If a person confessed to something under torture, the Inquisitors were not prepared to accept that confession as evidence...'"
I don't consider entertainment networks such as history.com to be reliable sources of information. I would point you to historian Henry Kamen's works on the Inquisition, as he has gone to great effort to correct some of the myths that have grown up around the Inquisition.
Going back and reading all those articles again you do realize that the subjects of all rhe articles were addicts of either drugs or porn? Thete is a vast difference between occassional use and addiction. Alcohol addiction causes grave problems and yet Jesus supposedly turned water into wine.
The difference is that pornography is intrinsically evil and serves no legitimate purpose, while alcohol is good in and of itself so long as it is not abused. The production or use of pornography even in "moderate" amounts is still evil.
"But the Inquisitors were aware that confessions given under torture could be problematic, says Murphy.
'If a person confessed to something under torture, the Inquisitors were not prepared to accept that confession as evidence...'"
I don't consider entertainment networks such as history.com to be reliable sources of information. I would point you to historian Henry Kamen's works on the Inquisition, as he has gone to great effort to correct some of the myths that have grown up around the Inquisition.
If you are going to reference the NPR link, you might want to quote the entire, relevant section:
"When Inquisitors needed a confession, they could elevate their interrogations to include torture.
"The basic line here was, 'Has this person confessed or not?' " says Cullen. "The answer is, 'If they confess, it's true. So torture comes into the picture when you need a confession."
But the Inquisitors were aware that confessions given under torture could be problematic, says Murphy.
"If a person confessed to something under torture, the Inquisitors were not prepared to accept that confession as evidence," he says. "They said, 'Now you have to give it some time. Let a day go by. Bring the person someplace else. Then ask them again. And if they still confess, then we'll accept that confession.' But it's not as if the person who made the confession has forgotten the fact that they were just tortured and couldn't be tortured again. [The Inquisitors] were mindful of the flaws of torture, but they went ahead and did it anyway.""
But if it makes you happier to dismiss sources that disagree with your position, then go ahead and do that.
Here is a nice quote
"But all the popes and the majority of theologians up until the eighteenth century (including even the great moralist and Doctor of the Church St. Alphonsus Liguori) continued to endorse confession-extracting torture."
The difference is that pornography is intrinsically evil and serves no legitimate purpose, while alcohol is good in and of itself so long as it is not abused. The production or use of pornography even in "moderate" amounts is still evil.
In your opinion or should I say in the words of your church. Even more dangerous is the inability to define what is pornographic, erotic , art, or exotic. As a photographer who is married to a visual artist I am well aware of the difficulties of keeping religious people from greatly expand what is pornographic into artistic or anything that has a nude. Censorship is "evil". Ive seen first hand at what is non pornographic being labelled as pornographic by somevlical religious folks.
There are studies that show legitimate uses for pornography. The only legitimate complaint I have for the little porn I have seen is it is mistly boring. I find it rich that you label porn as evil but support a Catholic Minarchy, the inquisition, the killing of Jews in Spain or so called heritics in Francr
If you are going to reference the NPR link, you might want to quote the entire, relevant section:
"When Inquisitors needed a confession, they could elevate their interrogations to include torture.
"The basic line here was, 'Has this person confessed or not?' " says Cullen. "The answer is, 'If they confess, it's true. So torture comes into the picture when you need a confession."
But the Inquisitors were aware that confessions given under torture could be problematic, says Murphy.
"If a person confessed to something under torture, the Inquisitors were not prepared to accept that confession as evidence," he says. "They said, 'Now you have to give it some time. Let a day go by. Bring the person someplace else. Then ask them again. And if they still confess, then we'll accept that confession.' But it's not as if the person who made the confession has forgotten the fact that they were just tortured and couldn't be tortured again. [The Inquisitors] were mindful of the flaws of torture, but they went ahead and did it anyway.""
But if it makes you happier to dismiss sources that disagree with your position, then go ahead and do that.
Here is a nice quote
"But all the popes and the majority of theologians up until the eighteenth century (including even the great moralist and Doctor of the Church St. Alphonsus Liguori) continued to endorse confession-extracting torture."
All I did was make the simple and accurate claim that confessions obtained under torture during the Spanish Inquisition were not considered valid. This is historical fact and is not in dispute by any serious historian.
That is how the inquisitors slept at night I'm sure. They might be terrorizing people, torturing them, killing them, inciting violence and suspicion and distrust toward them. They might occasionally be wrongly accusing Catholics of being covert heretics or heretic sympathizers. But it's all in the service of a higher purpose. As EscAlaMike points out, killing innocent children when they are still innocent is doing them a favor so they don't grow up to commit the heinous sins of their supposedly depraved culture. On another site, someone made a similar claim with a straight face about the casualties at the school in Uvalde: maybe all those children would have grown up to be unbelievers anyway, god knows best, so he sent the gunman to mow them all down before that could happen. After all, that's a far more satisfying answer than that we need to limit access to weapons of mass murder in any way! And we don't mind introducing all sorts of other logical inconsistencies, like why god doesn't feel the need to wipe out dozens of children in other countries -- just this one.
What strikes me regarding "thinking" like this is that it's as if every bad idea that mankind ever had seems to lie latent within an astounding number of people, just waiting for a society dumb enough to give it expression again. If there were a Catholic monarch, there would be no shortage of applicants for the job of Inquisitor. It is not like 100% of people would not be interested because we'd already been down that road and the horrific outcomes are well-known. No, we do not learn from history. There walk among us people who would be fine with being central to implementing a Final Solution to the Jewish Problem or some imagined sustainable pure religious environment that leads to heaven on earth or at least the ushering in of the kingdom of god, or the summary execution of all citizens with degrees or who wear glasses (looking at you, Cambodia). I mean there's no end to the horrors we'll repeat in the firm conviction that this time, somehow, will be different.
It is very disappointing some of the posts in this "thought experiment". The bottom line, EscAlaMike's Catholic monarchy would take away the peace of today's law-abiding citizens as well as any future generation and replace it with the possibility of an environment where there is no guarantee of safety (through laws) if you are not Catholic or Catholic enough.
ETA: I watch a lot of TV shows with kings and emperors. The "good" ones are usually concerned about the little guy, the people. That doesn't sound true in this Catholic monarchy where the concern is about pleasing a god.
All I did was make the simple and accurate claim that confessions obtained under torture during the Spanish Inquisition were not considered valid. This is historical fact and is not in dispute by any serious historian.
this is another example of your dismissing what history clearly shows.
your posts have done this many times.
it is disingenuous.
it is another reason why people do not trust or embrace or accept what you are putting forth.
you defend, justify, and even admire, that which a more mature humanity at this point recognizes as reprehensible.
humanity is saying "never again" while your posts seek to glorify and whitewash and bring back the inhumane.
All I did was make the simple and accurate claim that confessions obtained under torture during the Spanish Inquisition were not considered valid. This is historical fact and is not in dispute by any serious historian.
You are defending the Inquisition, and claim to be religious. Astounding!
All I did was make the simple and accurate claim that confessions obtained under torture during the Spanish Inquisition were not considered valid. This is historical fact and is not in dispute by any serious historian.
well then, there seem to be a whole lot of non-serious historians out there I guess.
It seems that the most "liberal" understanding I can find is that confessions under torture were used as corroboration, or that the accused had to "freely" confess again after the torture stopped (though with the possibility of ore torture in the future).
If that seems understandable to you as "not considered valid" then so be it. You find what you need, I guess.
"The basic line here was, 'Has this person confessed or not?' " says Cullen. "The answer is, 'If they confess, it's true. So torture comes into the picture when you need a confession."
But the Inquisitors were aware that confessions given under torture could be problematic, says Murphy.
"If a person confessed to something under torture, the Inquisitors were not prepared to accept that confession as evidence," he says. "They said, 'Now you have to give it some time. Let a day go by. Bring the person someplace else. Then ask them again. And if they still confess, then we'll accept that confession.' But it's not as if the person who made the confession has forgotten the fact that they were just tortured and couldn't be tortured again. [The Inquisitors] were mindful of the flaws of torture, but they went ahead and did it anyway."
"Technically during the Inquisition, there were guidelines in place that said ... you were supposed to torture a person only once," says Murphy. "But if you wanted to torture a person a second time or a third time, there was a way in which you could simply define the second, third or fourth time as simply a continuance of the first time."
"The pope had control over the Medieval Inquisition and over the Inquisition that came later, but the pope had no control over the Spanish Inquisition. As a result, you had the government — the monarchs — presented with this extraordinary tool that they could use for a variety of purposes. ... The Spanish government did not have the welfare of victims in mind. What it did have was the uses it could put prisoners to. And one of the things the monarchy needed was galley slaves [to row ships]. It's probably the worst punishment that can ever be meted out. Your life expectancy was not more than a couple years."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
