The Goat Pen

But Thor isnt real!!!!

hedge wrote:
None of them do too much in the way of proclamations or arguing or even discussing religious matters. Very much unlike the setup in here and most other internet chatrooms. Also, I don't deny doing my share of flaming (I guess it's only flaming if the person is saying something you don't like), but I'd hardly call a skeptical comment about the verity of the claims of some portion of those who say they believe in god to be "flaming".

I probably read too much into your "that's just my little personal protest against all you stupid, pompous fucks. I have reality on my side." heh

Any hoo - from what I've learned from some close non-believing friends, being atheist in the heart of the Bible Belt is a tricky 24/7 proposition. Moreso than I ever would have imagined, and the stakes are high when it involves someone's livelyhood.

Could be in certain quarters, I guess. Most of my fambly are methodists, i.e., show up on Sunday (not even every Sunday) and you're good. That type of religion I can handle. Like I said, I don't come in contact with many (any) bible-beaters in my day to day life, and I'd like to keep it that way. We did have a jehovah's witness working here years ago, that was pretty tedious, I'm glad we got rid of her, I got tired of having to politely listen to her frivolous bullshit...

For Prof. A mere 5 minutes. Watch it and let's discuss...

[youtube]o3766TOukRo[/youtube]

hedge wrote:For Prof. A mere 5 minutes. Watch it and let's discuss...

[youtube]o3766TOukRo[/youtube]

hey, i'm no catholic. but that man Chris Hitchens needed the catholic church more than anyone. he needed something to fill the space he needed to create by giving up the booze and cigarettes. he didn't, and now he's dead (way before his time.)

As far as I know, he never gave up the booze...

Here is a clip of Hitchens soul mate in hatred of Catholicism. Just substitute Hitchens' charming English accent with Paisley's Irish lilt, and it's hard to tell the difference. It is refreshing to see a militant atheist and a Protestant fundamentalist share so much common ground, not to mention credibility.

[youtube]3oJlJDpra7k[/youtube]

Well, if the people you represent are bombing targets of a papist funded terrorist group then you maybe able to understand the acrimony.

LOL at atheists always having to be described as "militant". Do you consider yourself a "militant" catholic? But anyway, kudos for managing to dodge any real discussion by way of an ad hominem barb at Hitchens. The real question is, why does Hitchens hate catholicism (but believe me, I think he hates Islam even more)? Is that hatred justified? Those are topics for debate or at least discussion. Or maybe not...

sardis wrote:Well, if the people you represent are bombing targets of a papist funded terrorist group then you maybe able to understand the acrimony.

LOL I am the grandson of two born and raised "bombing targets of a papist funded terrorist group." I have visited my relatives in Ulster several times, most recently in last summer. My grandfather was an orangeman in Armagh. I think I have a passing understanding of that situation.

kudos for managing to dodge any real discussion by way of an ad hominem barb at Hitchens.

First of all, I hate to break it to you hedge, but I'm not Catholic. I'm Eastern Orthodox.

A lot of people in the Catholic Church have done plenty of bad things. Pope John Paul 2 admitted that. Hitchens even mentioned that. The Catholic Church still has got a lot of making up to do, particularly in the case of child sex abuse. There is no sugar coating or justifying that horror. I still wouldn't send my kid to a Catholic camp where my wife and I couldn't keep a constant eye on things.

His assertion that the Catholic Church says you can't be gay and Catholic, or that the the Catholics consider gays "faggots" is untrue. In fact, most Catholics I know (and there are a LOT of them in the Chicago area) are politically and socially very liberal. That includes the clergy and hierarchy.

I've never heard Hitchens apologize for the crimes committed in the past by atheists. Hitchens hurls stones at the Catholic Church for the Crusades (a thousand years ago), Galileo (500 years ago), etc.. Yet in the past 70 years, tens of millions of innocents were slaughtered by the atheists Stalin, Mao and Pot. Why isn't Hitchens crawling on his knees begging the forgiveness of the world for the recent genocide committed by atheists in the cause of atheism?

Professor Tiger wrote:

sardis wrote:Well, if the people you represent are bombing targets of a papist funded terrorist group then you maybe able to understand the acrimony.

LOL I am the grandson of two born and raised "bombing targets of a papist funded terrorist group." I have visited my relatives in Ulster several times, most recently in last summer. My grandfather was an orangeman in Armagh. I think I have a passing understanding of that situation.

You're a chink?

hedge wrote:(but believe me, I think he hates Islam even more)?

Ding-ding! Yes he most certain did. Give Hedge a cookie.

Professor Tiger wrote:Here is a clip of Hitchens soul mate in hatred of Catholicism. Just substitute Hitchens' charming English accent with Paisley's Irish lilt, and it's hard to tell the difference. It is refreshing to see a militant atheist and a Protestant fundamentalist share so much common ground, not to mention credibility.

[youtube]3oJlJDpra7k[/youtube]

Catholic vs Protestant vs Orthodox?

Christ is savior. The rest? Meh...

http://christianityinview.com/comparison.html

Catholic vs Protestant vs Orthodox?

Christ is savior. The rest? Meh...

In some cases, as demonstrated above, it's fundamentalist Protestants and atheists vs. the Catholics.

Although, if my fundamentalist Protestant relatives are an indication, anti-Catholicism has decreased dramatically in the younger generation. When I converted to Orthodoxy it was like an asteroid strike. My 20-something niece just converted to Catholicism and it was quietly accepted by all - even the older folks.

"First of all, I hate to break it to you hedge, but I'm not Catholic. I'm Eastern Orthodox. "

Doesn't matter to me if you worship Zeus, it's all the same nonsense to me. My complain was that you characterized Hitchens as a "militant" atheist, simply b/c he presents his views in an articulate way. Would you characterize the pope (or anyone else who was vocal about their religious beliefs) as a "militant" catholic (or a "militant" whatever)?

Non-militant:

Most of my fambly are methodists, i.e., show up on Sunday (not even every Sunday) and you're good. That type of religion I can handle.

Militant:

We did have a jehovah's witness working here years ago, that was pretty tedious, I'm glad we got rid of her, I got tired of having to politely listen to her frivolous bullshit...

So when Hitchins gets in front of a microphone or TV camera and heaps insults on Catholicism, yes I absolutely consider that an example of militant. He's certainly allowed to do that, but he is your ex-Jehovah's Witness on steroids. You just happen to like his frivolous tedium.

"Why isn't Hitchens crawling on his knees begging the forgiveness of the world for the recent genocide committed by atheists in the cause of atheism?"

The difference is, atheism didn't warrant those atrocities. Those guys were just brutal assholes who happened to be atheist. The programmatic atrocities committed by so-called religious people have been committed BECAUSE they felt their religious beliefs justified their actions. For example, 9/11. And just b/c you want to brush off the Crusades, the Inquisition and the brutal suppression of enlightened, rational thought for centuries upon centuries just b/c it happened "back then", don't expect me to let your assholish world-historic disaster of a religion.

And even if it was the case that Stalin, et al., were just brutal assholes who merely used religion as their justification, even if they didn't really believe it, that's more than enough to condemn whatever religion it is they professed. But in most cases, I think they really believed it. And besides all that, as Hitchens said elsewhere, "just b/c religion comes to us now in this smiley faced, ingratiation way b/c it has had to give so much ground and b/c we know so much more, we have no right to forget how it behaved when it was strong and when it really did believe that it had God on its side"...

"but he is your ex-Jehovah's Witness on steroids. You just happen to like his frivolous tedium."

Absolutely incorrect. The fact that I like it is proof that it is not frivolous tedium...

Hitchens's view is that people like Stalin and Mao could only achieve power in the first place b/c of the generations that were beaten down by religious charlatanry to the point that they would allow themselves to bow down to "the leader", even if he happened to be a mass murdering brute. Religion paved the way for that type of behavior. The opposite of religious sensibilities isn't brutal, mass-murdering atheism. Those are merely two sides of the same coin. The opposite of religious sensibilities is a humanistic atheism that advocates that everyone think for themselves and questions authority. Religious leaders hate that kind of thing just as much as tyrants and dictators . Neither of them can have power without unquestioning, dim-witted adherents who are too terrified to think for themselves....