The Pope Thread [UK visit 2010 - merged]

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Well he just wound me up

So, if someone from the catholic church purporting to be Gods representative here on earth winds you up you think it's entirely appropriate to maligin christianity in its entirety?

That's a very strange concept of balanced and subjective atheism.

Effectively you are suggesting that you were "wound up" by the comments of the supposed spokesperson of something you refuse to countenance as even possibly existing.

Does that not strike you as a little "strange" - to say the least?

[Traduk]

Do we have a party or group with political aspirations that hold extremist views with intolerance to just about everybody and anything that cannot be considered to have Great Britain running through their bodies like a stick of rock.

The parallels with the rise of Nazism were using a bit of foresight whereby in the difficult financial times ahead there could be social unrest whereby views that are rejected during normal times may become attractive.

I suspect that he envisages very difficult socio\economic times ahead and hopes that "nasty nick et al" do not attract an increased level of support.

That party (if they can be called one) has clashed with the church of England recently over using Christian symbolism to put over their message.

Atheist extremists was probably too broad a brush with which to paint a picture but perhaps he thought that with a few seconds worth of thought people would add the elements together and realise that we only have one group that is a candidate for comparison with Nazi or Fascist extremism.

[Niles Crane]

More mixed messages from the Pope and his posse. The UK is like the third world? The UK is at threat from "aggressive forms of secularism"? Third world and theocracy are practically synonymous.

[speedfreak]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

So, if someone from the catholic church purporting to be Gods representative here on earth winds you up you think it's entirely appropriate to maligin christianity in its entirety?

That's a very strange concept of balanced and subjective atheism.

Effectively you are suggesting that you were "wound up" by the comments of a spokesperson of someone / something you refuse to countenance as even possibly existing.

Does that not strike you as a little "strange" - to say the least?

Arent you reading a bit too much in to it? Sirius explained his reasoning behind what he said, he didnt like being referred to as a Nazi just for being an Atheist so he made the paedophilia comment in the same way the Nazi comment was made

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by speedfreak

Arent you reading a bit too much in to it? Sirius explained his reasoning behind what he said, he didnt like being referred to as a Nazi just for being an Atheist so he made the paedophilia comment in the same way the Nazi comment was made

Thank you

My point is if you are willing to pick on a group and call them names, Expect that group to call you names back.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Traduk

I suspect that he envisages very difficult socio\economic times ahead and hopes that "nasty nick et al" do not attract an increased level of support.

I suspect he actually means what he says. Evils such as Nazism could not happen in the moral framework of religion (particularly Catholicism), and as such we're all on a slippery slope by not accepting his authority over our moral judgment. Nice bloke...

[Peter_]

I find it strange that he can class me an atheist as a potential nazi when he actually wore the uniform of the Hitler Youth, a case of the pot calling the kettle black when he is the one supporting the cause.

I abhor everything the nazi party stood for but he wore the uniform and no amount of back pedalling can ever remove that stain.

Little point in posting articles to prove otherwise as history can and will be massaged to cover up peoples bad press from the past.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Masque

I find it strange that he can class me an atheist as a potential nazi when he actually wore the uniform of the Hitler Youth, a case of the pot calling the kettle black when he is the one supporting the cause.

I abhor everything the nazi party stood for but he wore the uniform and no amount of back pedalling can ever remove that stain.

Little point in posting articles to prove otherwise as history can and will be massaged to cover up peoples bad press from the past.

In fairness, he wore that uniform because, like all German youths at the time, he was required to.

Anyway, it's a funny thing that Atheists are tarred with the Nazi brush while there's a huge row in Europe over Reding's comparison of France's Roma deportation with WW2. But hey. Reding isn't the Pope...

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by speedfreak

Arent you reading a bit too much in to it?

I don't think so - can you "read too much" into God or atheism? Atheists do not believe in God(s) therefore it follows - by logical extension -that they would pay no heed, whatsoever, much less take offence at anything to anyone purporting to be a spokesperson or represenrtative of any such deity here on earth might say.

Originally Posted by speedfreak

Sirius explained his reasoning behind what he said,

No, actually, he didn't. He used an out of context assertion as an excuse to level an attack on christianity as a whole.

Originally Posted by speedfreak

he didnt like being referred to as a Nazi just for being an Atheist

But he wasn't compared to a nazi for being an athiest. The pope made the analogy in relation to "atheist extremism". Given the offence taken by Sirius in relation to the comment and who it was made by one would be hard pushed, in light of my observations above, to accept that Sirius is, in the conventional sense, an atheist let alone an extreme atheist.

Originally Posted by speedfreak

so he made the paedophilia comment in the same way the Nazi comment was made

He didn't. He may have intended to but he didn't. The "atheist extremism" is aimed at extremists, not athiests in general per se. Sirius's comment was aimed at "christians" in general and not specifically catholics.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

I don't think so. Athiests do not believe in God(s) therefore it follows that they would pay no heed, whatsoever, much less take offence at anything to anyone purporting to be a spokesperson or represenrtative of any such deity here on earth might say.

What a strange concept. The man has tremendous influence over lots of people and calls for more influence of religion on politics and daily life. I'd say his statements are very relevant to non-believers.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by danielf

What a strange concept. The man has tremendous influence over lots of people and calls for more influence of religion on politics and daily life. I'd say his statements are very relevant to non-believers.

His statements and the outcome / affects of same combined with his influence may well be relevant to believers and non-believers alike but the fundamental fact remains that the atheist position is that he cannot speak for God as God does not exist.

The fact that they get so tied up in the theology of the arguments they have put forward over the years instead of addressing the papal mission creep is a major part of the problem - and no small coincidence.

[Cobbydaler]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

His statements and the outcome / affects of same combined with his influence may be relevant to believers and non-believers alike but the fundamental fact remains that the athiest position is that he cannot speak for God as God does not exist.

The fact that they get so tied up in the theology of the arguments they have put forward over the years instead of addressing the papal mission creep is a major part of the problem - and no small coincidence.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

His statements and the outcome / affects of same combined with his influence may be relevant to belivers and non-believers alike but the fundamental fact remains that the athiest position is that he cannot speak for God as God does not exist.

The fact that they get so tied up in the theology of the arguments they have put forward over the years instead of addressing the papal mission creep is a major part of the problem - and no small coincidence.

I fully agree that the theological argument should be completely irrelevant to Atheists. The outcome however isn't. And if that is associating Atheism with Nazism, I think people are right to be aggrieved. Having said that, there is indeed no need to counter affront with further affront.

[speedfreak]

wow. I only wrote a couple of lines and you managed to get that much from it, I feel like I've just been mentally analysed over a forum

I dont have the time to pick posts apart like that. If I did Id point out why I disagree with most of the points you made. I was just voicing my opinion in that I can see where Sirius is coming from. He'd explained why he said what he said but you left that bit out when you quoted him. Not after a row, yes I know you arent either I was just making a quick point not entering a debate, poor show I know

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by danielf

In fairness, he wore that uniform because, like all German youths at the time, he was required to.

But he seems to think that by virtue of being an atheist that we should be nazi's, he wore the uniform and is still busy back pedalling and we the atheists will feel that the is more likelihood of him being the real nazi.