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.
Curious as to why you think his visit isn't news. It is because while the horror of the residential schools in Canada (and the associated, more recent removal of indigenous children from their homes/dissociation from their culture in what is known as the Sixties Scoop even though it last into the Eighties) has been an issue for many years, in 2021 inspectors using Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) found numerous unmarked graves on the properties where these schools stood. It became obvious that what the indigenous have been saying for decades--that their brothers and sisters and cousins disappeared and died at these schools from abuse and neglect is true.
The news is because while at least one other pope made a formal apology from the Vatican on behalf of the Church's involvement in the deliberate destruction of these cultures, Francis received indigenous chiefs at the Vatican and then promised to come and visit the sites of some of the schools in Canada to apologize and try to do something to effect reconciliation. Then he did it, despite obvious poor health and the cancellation of what some would consider more important trips around the globe. The Catholic Church has a tradition of making a concerted effort to destroy cultures around the globe, but particularly in the "new world", and Pope Francis for the first time acknowledged this and said that it was wrong.
He showed up humbly and exposed his vulnerability to sit among thousands of marginalized people who have every reason in the world to hate what he represents instead of hiding under a big hat in a fortress on the other side of the ocean waving his hand and saying, "oh sorry about that".
Pope Francis, yes. Oops
Oh I love the man, and yes he is humble and a wonderful human being with a great personality. Have you seen The Two Popes? Wonderful movie.
Regardless what I think the Pope's visit is news. I just find this a curious intrusion of religion amidst dirty secular politics and with people dying in heat waves, increase in homelessness, children calling 911 while getting shot. Perhaps I just am not religious enough to find his visit relevant or as a blessing of some kind. However I can be moved by a community prayer to the Cosmos event asking for blessings and peace on earth for everyone.
But IS it their problem? How can someone be responsible for what specific others have done just because their name associates them in people's minds? How can your typical Mormon in Salt Lake do something to stop a follower of Jeffs in Short Creek from handing their 12-year-old daughter over to some grown man who wants her to breed his children?
I don't blame Muslims in general for what they did on 9/11. I blame the individuals who planned and carried out the attacks, including those who supported them.
I am sure the first reaction is "that has nothing to do with me/us". Wouldn't it be yours? But perhaps acknowledging the association in people's minds and then condemning the wrongful actions should follow.
Yes. It is their problem...for a couple of reasons.
1. The Mormon Church or the Southern Baptists see themselves as moral and spiritual leaders. You don't lead by keeping your mouth shut.
2. It doesn't take much courage for some holier than thou minister or congregant to belittle some poor unwed mother about her morality. But it does take some courage for a church to say to another church that what they are doing is wrong, and here's why. That's moral leadership.
3. I have known people who believe that Mormons still generally practice polygamy. I have know people who believe that the Westboro Baptist Church is supported by all Baptists. They need to practice moral leadership and set the record clear.
That there are bad communicators is no reason for atheists (and apparently only atheists) to stop posting.
My comment re: educators or how one communicates was in response to your point regarding ‘teaching theists’ by way of this thread. You’re nonsensically forgetting the fact their religious bandwagon is relative to faith i.e. insults, criticism, arrogance, and ‘logical arguments’ will not teach/communicate anything to anyone other than intolerance and an assumption of inequality i.e. ‘atheism is better’. At the end of the day, it negatively affects atheism more than theism as we are severely outnumbered in this country. People fail to see the bigger picture, most notably relative to law and our fight to be an influential part of the mainstream; it won’t happen with anger/arguments against religion and those who believe, no matter how ‘logical’ you may think you are.
That said, I never suggested anyone should/would stop posting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
No, it is about correcting the bad arguments theists post on the internet. And if they have the liberty to post their religious beliefs and claims on the internet, we atheists also have the liberty to refute their arguments.
Have at it; clearly how you choose to represent yourself (and why) is on you. I’m simply expressing my perspective re: the folly and showboating of it all, particularly relative to the thread and when it’s approached as an ‘argument’. I’m certainly not expecting you to agree.
That said, there are those who are so wrapped in their group/forum-think they don’t understand the obvious: our individuality. I laughingly expect it from theists i.e. we are ‘the lowest of the low’; however, it’s bizarre when other atheists expect me (or anyone) to do as they say/act in a forum; else, in their mind, I’m not really an atheist. That’s the epitome of intolerance/immaturity i.e. ‘think as I do’; else, be harassed, mocked and ridiculed.
Obviously, many of us are lawyers, CLOs, CEOs, doctors, professors and so on i.e. professionals who understand the importance of reputation/presentation, effective communication and acceptance of others (sans anger) relative to functioning (or any level of success) in the world. My perspective is not confined to a forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
And then there are the dishonest theists.
Sure, but I don’t care if they are dishonest or posting under ten different accounts; they can (foolishly) knock themselves out. Point being, it doesn’t mean anything relative to our atheism, does it? In fact, all the more reason to stop spinning on the hamster wheel.
Last edited by CorporateCowboy; 08-04-2022 at 03:47 PM..
Reason: added a sentence
Yes. It is their problem...for a couple of reasons.
1. The Mormon Church or the Southern Baptists see themselves as moral and spiritual leaders. You don't lead bykeeping your mouth shut.
2. It doesn't take much courage for some holier than thou minister or congregant to belittle some poor unwed mother about her morality. But it does take some courage for a church to say to another church that what they are doing is wrong, and here's why. That's moral leadership.
3. I have known people who believe that Mormons still generally practice polygamy. I have know people who believe that the Westboro Baptist Church is supported by all Baptists. They need to practice moral leadership and set the record clear.
The quote you used was "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Isn't the only actionable item in the quote is to DO something? An act, like refusing to get off the seat at a Whites Only restaurant even when shoved and pushed. That is an action of civil disobedience for a cause at the risk of getting beaten with a club.
Is loud criticism an action? Doesn't disassociating with the organization speak louder than words?
I don't think some of these people understand what gaslighting actually means.
Hello! You are welcome to address "these people" with your definition of gaslighting. In some circles gaslighting means saying one thing while doing the counter opposite. The official definition includes attempting to cause someone to doubt their reality usually to the benefit of the gas lighter.
Pope Francis, yes. Oops
Oh I love the man, and yes he is humble and a wonderful human being with a great personality. Have you seen The Two Popes? Wonderful movie.
Regardless what I think the Pope's visit is news. I just find this a curious intrusion of religion amidst dirty secular politics and with people dying in heat waves, increase in homelessness, children calling 911 while getting shot. Perhaps I just am not religious enough to find his visit relevant or as a blessing of some kind. However I can be moved by a community prayer to the Cosmos event asking for blessings and peace on earth for everyone.
That's because those things are generally not happening on the same scale as the United States in the country the Pope visited. The revelation of the extent of the residential schools tragedy, on the other hand, is very much a current topic here and has been for some time. People who once had no voice are speaking out and making their country face its mistakes. Yes, the American news is covered here, too, but Canadians don't feel the same effects of, say, a school shooting in Texas, as Americans do.
The quote you used was "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Isn't the only actionable item in the quote is to DO something? An act, like refusing to get off the seat at a Whites Only restaurant even when shoved and pushed. That is an action of civil disobedience for a cause at the risk of getting beaten with a club.
Is loud criticism an action? Doesn't disassociating with the organization speak louder than words?
No.
I wonder how many boys would have been saved from molestation if more catholics had spoken up.
Hello! You are welcome to address "these people" with your definition of gaslighting. In some circles gaslighting means saying one thing while doing the counter opposite. The official definition includes attempting to cause someone to doubt their reality usually to the benefit of the gas lighter.
Hello! You are welcome to address "these people" with your definition of gaslighting. In some circles gaslighting means saying one thing while doing the counter opposite. The official definition includes attempting to cause someone to doubt their reality usually to the benefit of the gas lighter.
that is how i understand gaslighting to mean. from the movie.
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.
