The Pope’s Denial Problem

It was a comment. Go through and read the longest of these posts and think about the content: The point could have been made in far fewer words. NotsoAtall seems to be saying that ever since the Enlightenment, men have been more likely to rely on their own reasoning. While I don't think that is very true, it could have been said more clearly.

Unity, in a word, is the objective that the Pope as head of the Roman Catholic Church was serving by his action. There is a lot of misunderstanding that is demonstrated by the posts below. Fajalou, in particular, as do some others, goes a long way toward clearing up some of these misunderstandings. The Church as instituted by Jesus Christ accepts God as creator of all things, and seeks to unite us as one "body" in God. In a pluralistic culture the search for unity creates many a paradox. If anyone has done even a bit of reading on what Benedict the XVI has written over many years they would quickly realize he understands well the plurality in religious belief and secularism that has been developing for at least the last 500 years. One of the results of the "Enlightenment" is a flattening of hierarcichal authority (such as the Pope's) and the endowment of every being with the power of reason and will to authority. For many of us we start from the truth of the propostion that reason and will are from our creator and we choose to use them to seek unity with our creator.

Spoken like a true Anti-Theist. Almost like having Lenny Bruce write an article on the benefits of manners.

How smug. Let's just recall the witch trials in Salem and the inhumane treatment of Catholics in Ireland before you start patting your conscience on the back.

Well, I'm Glad I'm Protestant.

It isn't organized religion...it's our inability to deal with the reality that we are in charge. There is no higher power to which we can appeal. I believe that the Papacy as an institution consciously and cynically plays on the fears of those among us who are "not exactly plagued by ideas." They want to be led because it's easier than facing up to the ultimate responsibility. And it isn't just the Catholic Church. It's all religions. Just as politics is Hollywood for the ugly, religion is politics for the gullible. At least policians don't claim to control your soul.

This debacle is yet another reason why letting one person control the beliefs and actions of millions is ridiculous. Catholicism is nothing but a sham, a way for a male-dominiated few to run roughshod over many people who sincerely want to believe in the dictates of a higher power.By reaching out to these anti-Semite bishops, the Pope has clearly demonstrated that his goosestepping days are not that far behind him. My sincere hope is that this gesture will wake people up to the fact that organized religion is indeed the opiate of the masses, with Catholicism simply being one of the worst, ost mind-numbing drugs.

It's like the movie Pulp Fiction when Tim Roth tries to rob Samuel Jackson in the restaurant. You have the Weak and the Bad. You are the Weak.

Hitchens what is the following quote saying?

This belief in the truth is approaching its final conclusion within us - you know what that is: that if there is anything at all to worship, it is the 'illusion' that must be worshiped; that the lie - and not the truth - is divine.

What were the forces that gave birth to Nazism and Zionism soon after?
Where do you see faith, hope, and charity? Isn't your article just jabbing at a ghost. What are you going to do this time?

Please don't equate man made churches with God and his son. I don't believe Jesus taught us to hate anyone or accuse anyone of his death.

None of this makes any difference. If it's not one group religious zealots it's another. We're all doomed by thinking like this. It's no longer a question of if, only a matter of when. The thing about having totally blind faith is it makes one the perfect sheeple, steerable to whereever and whatever the leader desires. Of all the methods man has tried to gain power one wonders if this method isn't the most effective of them all.

"So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence. "
Bertrand Russell
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/b/bertrandru123107.html

Time Magazine: Anti Israel or Anti Semitic

Turkey's Prime Minister Erdogan recently said: just because someone criticizes Israel does not mean they are anti semitic. Does this then mean that Time Magazine's Tim McGirk is not an anti-semite? I don't think so.... Tim has come to Israel from Iraq, a place where Sunnis and Shiites slaughter each other in the tens of thousands, where acid is thrown into the faces of children, where so many Palestinians have been threatened and attacked by Arabs that they call it: The Second Negba (catastrophe). Tim knows all this, yet he implies Israelis are: "devils" because they use phosphorus flares in their night operations. Rape is so common among Middle Eastern armies that it is almost considered "a tradition" (for example: the Turks raped Lawrence of Arabia), yet, while no Israeli has ever even been accused of rape in the last 60 years, Tim McGirk is horrified because a soldier wrote on some wall in Gaza: "you have nice underwear". Hamas has repeatedly declared 1) It wants to destroy Israel and will not give up terrorism 2) It will never recognize the Jewish State 3) It will not abide by previous agreements, yet, in the title of his article on George Mitchell, Tim asks: "Will Israel listen?". Egyptian border guards regularly shoot Sudanese refugees in the back only 100 meters from the freedom provided by the Israeli border, yet Tim McGirk doesn't even mention these events. Likewise, one week ago, Hamas shot over 150 Gazan men and women in the legs "to set an example to the P.L.O.", yet Tim does not feel the need to comment (obviously, these things aren't as news worthy as a woman's underwear). Time Magazine is anti Israel, Tim McGirk is an anti semite. The "time" has come to make a change: transfer Tim to Mecca or Rome.