Your views on the pope

[SirNitram]

If we take Pintos defintion of fundamentalist then athiests can be fundies as well.

The philosophy doesn´t have to be a religious philosophy after all. One could be an athiest and at the same time fundamentlisticly subscribe to the philosophy of for example Popper.

You're demonstrating the idiocy pretty well. You are aware that Atheism has no philosophy behind it, right?

[Zero]

The only thing vaguely resembling a philosophy behind atheism is the belief that there is no God. In this way, any atheist is a fundamentalist atheist, which makes the whole label crap. If you don't strongly believe that there is no God, then you're an agnostic.

[wolveraptor]

Everyone is an agnostic, because no one can definitively prove or disprove the existance of God. Press any religious folk hard enough, and he'll/she'll eventually fall back on the, "You have to have faith," line, admitting that he/she doesn't have a damn clue whether there is or is not a god/s.

That's why the term agnostic as it is used today is meaningless, since no one REALLY knows, not in the way that we know the wind to be true.

[Zero]

You don't have to be able to disprove the existance of something to not believe in it in any way. I don't believe in any kinds of gods, but I don't have to disprove every myth to claim a lack of belief in the matter. I'm an atheist, not an agnostic.

[Straha]

The new Pope already proved his contempt for democracy with his enduring sabotage of the 12/6 referendum.

Might I ask what this is?





Anyway, a side note on Pedophilia being "America's problem" and how the main church shouldn't do anything (ignoring Pedophilia in Europe for now): The US Catholic Church has, since its founding pretty much, had a very independent charecter. For a while American Priests could even appoint their own bishops and this sticks on even today in that American Leity/lower priests' input into the appointment of superior priests is unparalleled anywhere else. Needless to say, this rankles other parts of the catholic church, and I would not be at all suprised if the rationale behind Ratzinger's statements was not "LA-LA-LA-LA-LA! THERE ARE NO AMERICANS IN BAGDHAD! LA-LA-LA-LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" as much as "You told us to fuck off, and then you made this mess, and yet you want us to clean it up for you? How about you hand over some of that obscene amount of power you have, and then we'll talk, and until then screw you!"

[salm]

If we take Pintos defintion of fundamentalist then athiests can be fundies as well.

The philosophy doesn´t have to be a religious philosophy after all. One could be an athiest and at the same time fundamentlisticly subscribe to the philosophy of for example Popper.

You're demonstrating the idiocy pretty well. You are aware that Atheism has no philosophy behind it, right?

Nah, misunderstanding.

A person can be an athiest and at the same time subscribe to some philosophy. If this person follows this philosophy fundamentalisticly then this person is an athiest and at the same time a fundamentalist.

It´s impossibel to have fundamentalist athiest views because, like you said, there´s no philosophy attached to it.

[Jarl Sven]

[quote="SirNitram.]..Annnnnd you demonstrate yourself to either be a shitty liar or just plain illiterate. I wasn't referring to getting other folk's opinion, you simpleton. It's this stuff called 'evidence'.[/quote]

Huh? Not quite sure what you’re on about or what brought on this particular hard on.

And I know I’ll hate myself in the morning for this but……Evidence of what?

How Benny chose his name? That seems to be the topic that set you off to begin with. Frankly is not worth a search. There have been 16 Bennies out of 265 popes so it is not an uncommon name no big surprises.
True the Malachy “predictions” said this “penultimate pope” would be the “glory of the olives” but you apparently didn’t look up that Benedict doesn’t mean “olive” and while the Benedictines are called “Olivetans” because of the olive branch on their crest, you apparently failed to look up that Ratzinger is not nor ever was a Benedictine.

AND You obviously didn’t research that not only are the "predictions in no way shape or form official but also that scholars have considered them forgeries since the 17th century.

Hmmmm Malachy…Malarkey coincidence? I think not?

Perhaps he chose Benedict to honor the founder of the European monastic movement? Perhaps to honor the (failed) peace attempts by his predecessor in WWI? Maybe it was just because he had a puppy named Benedict when he was a boy.

Who gives a Ratzingers ass why?

But it obviously doesn’t take any “evidence” to know he didn’t chose it because he wanted to end the world.


But to satisfy your pettiness I checked and found the text of a speech given April 27, 2005 where Benny himself explains his choice of name. It was for Benny 15 and St Benedict…apparently the puppy didn’t get a mention.
http://vatican.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/ ... dict+name+

Satisfied? No malarkey at all.

[quote="SirNitram.]……
Also part of the reality is that the Vatican has the power to enforce it's will on those bishops.[/quote]

Of course the Pope has the ultimate authority over all the clergy! It is a hierarchical organization! Is this somehow news to you? Do you need evidance for that? I think it was codefied in the 4th century.

But like a CEO dealing with a factory floor dispute or a general dealing with a private soldier, the guy at teh top get involved after the shit hits the fan and even then relies on their subordinates to handle the details. Ever work in a large organization? Even the most dynamic leader is often hidebound by the bureaucracy.

Personally I think that they should have taken a stronger role in the whole affair and not one that necessarily involved a comfy chair. But looking at the politics of the situation it was a perfect opportunity for those in opposition to reform to say “Ok American Bishops, here is the greater local autonomy that you have been clamoring for since Vatican I…deal with it”. Now they can say “look what a mess you made! You can’t be trusted to run things.”

of course that would be a cynical thing to say.


[quote="SirNitram.]But this part of reality doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions, so you'll ignore it.[/quote]

Gee and your vast evidence for this is the maybe four lines of text that I wrote? Wow, staggering insight or ad hominem waste of electrons?

You know nothing about me or any notions that might be in (or near) my head.

[quote="SirNitram.]……I wouldn't know what your incestuous dealings and or fantasies involve; don't involve me in them.[/quote]

It was a multi level pun actually...it’s called “wit”. Try it sometime
Not my best effort I must admit but ok as a one off.

(I know "toss off" would have been funnier there but it's getting late)


[quote="SirNitram.] I'm merely able to read actual, conclusive evidence and refer to it. Unlike you, who thinks everything must be subjective, and whines when someone points out you could find objective data on things you whined about.[/quote]

Sigh
“actual, conclusive evidence” of what?
What exactly are you riled about

[quote="SirNitram.] But hey. Feel free to continue your whining.[/quote]

Hey thanks!
I appreciate that
And you have a nice day too.

[Jarl Sven]

Oops
I hate that no editing bit

Let’s try again

..Annnnnd you demonstrate yourself to either be a shitty liar or just plain illiterate. I wasn't referring to getting other folk's opinion, you simpleton. It's this stuff called 'evidence'.

Huh? Not quite sure what you’re on about or what brought on this particular hard on.

And I know I’ll hate myself in the morning for this but……Evidence of what?

How Benny chose his name? That seems to be the topic that set you off to begin with. Frankly is not worth a search. There have been 16 Bennies out of 265 popes so it is not an uncommon name no big surprises.
True the Malachy “predictions” said this “penultimate pope” would be the “glory of the olives” but you apparently didn’t look up that Benedict doesn’t mean “olive” and while the Benedictines are called “Olivetans” because of the olive branch on their crest, you apparently failed to look up that Ratzinger is not nor ever was a Benedictine.

AND You obviously didn’t research that not only are the "predictions in no way shape or form official but also that scholars have considered them forgeries since the 17th century.

Hmmmm Malachy…Malarkey coincidence? I think not?

Perhaps he chose Benedict to honor the founder of the European monastic movement? Perhaps to honor the (failed) peace attempts by his predecessor in WWI? Maybe it was just because he had a puppy named Benedict when he was a boy.

Who gives a Ratzingers ass why?

But it obviously doesn’t take any “evidence” to know he didn’t chose it because he wanted to end the world.


But to satisfy your pettiness I checked and found the text of a speech given April 27, 2005 where Benny himself explains his choice of name. It was for Benny 15 and St Benedict…apparently the puppy didn’t get a mention.
http://vatican.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/ ... edict+name+

Satisfied? No malarkey at all.

……
Also part of the reality is that the Vatican has the power to enforce it's will on those bishops.

Of course the Pope has the ultimate authority over all the clergy! It is a hierarchical organization! Is this somehow news to you? Do you need evidance for that? I think it was codefied in the 4th century.

But like a CEO dealing with a factory floor dispute or a general dealing with a private soldier, the guy at teh top get involved after the shit hits the fan and even then relies on their subordinates to handle the details. Ever work in a large organization? Even the most dynamic leader is often hidebound by the bureaucracy.

Personally I think that they should have taken a stronger role in the whole affair and not one that necessarily involved a comfy chair. But looking at the politics of the situation it was a perfect opportunity for those in opposition to reform to say “Ok American Bishops, here is the greater local autonomy that you have been clamoring for since Vatican I…deal with it”. Now they can say “look what a mess you made! You can’t be trusted to run things.”

of course that would be a cynical thing to say. Wink

But this part of reality doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions, so you'll ignore it.

Gee and your vast evidence for this is the maybe four lines of text that I wrote? Wow, staggering insight or ad hominem waste of electrons?

You know nothing about me or any notions that might be in (or near) my head.

……I wouldn't know what your incestuous dealings and or fantasies involve; don't involve me in them.

It was a multi level pun actually...it’s called “wit”. Try it sometime
Not my best effort I must admit but ok as a one off.

(I know "toss off" would have been funnier there but it's getting late)

I'm merely able to read actual, conclusive evidence and refer to it. Unlike you, who thinks everything must be subjective, and whines when someone points out you could find objective data on things you whined about.

Sigh
“actual, conclusive evidence” of what?
What exactly are you riled about Question

But hey. Feel free to continue your whining.

Hey thanks!
I appreciate that
And you have a nice day too.

[SirNitram]

..Annnnnd you demonstrate yourself to either be a shitty liar or just plain illiterate. I wasn't referring to getting other folk's opinion, you simpleton. It's this stuff called 'evidence'.

Huh? Not quite sure what you’re on about or what brought on this particular hard on.

And I know I’ll hate myself in the morning for this but……Evidence of what?

How about.. Exactly what I originally said? That he's a fruitcake doomsage? Which you, in your fit of stupidity, immediately claimed was 'just an opinion' and 'you wouldn't search for someone's opinion'?

And now the Troll will attempt amnesia to wave it all away.

How Benny chose his name? That seems to be the topic that set you off to begin with. Frankly is not worth a search. There have been 16 Bennies out of 265 popes so it is not an uncommon name no big surprises.

'Set me off'? What sort of delusions are you having this time?

It's a matter of record. I pointed out how to find that record. You are now just dancing around this, because you're a sad little troll.

True the Malachy “predictions” said this “penultimate pope” would be the “glory of the olives” but you apparently didn’t look up that Benedict doesn’t mean “olive” and while the Benedictines are called “Olivetans” because of the olive branch on their crest, you apparently failed to look up that Ratzinger is not nor ever was a Benedictine.

Here's me pointing out I don't give a fuck. If you had bothered to do as suggested, you'd see the evidence for yourself. I don't know who you're trying to impress. It's not working on anyone here.

AND You obviously didn’t research that not only are the "predictions in no way shape or form official but also that scholars have considered them forgeries since the 17th century.

Yep, more reason to laugh at the fruitbat pope who beleives in them.

Hmmmm Malachy…Malarkey coincidence? I think not?

Perhaps he chose Benedict to honor the founder of the European monastic movement? Perhaps to honor the (failed) peace attempts by his predecessor in WWI? Maybe it was just because he had a puppy named Benedict when he was a boy.

Maybe the evidence you refuse to look at shows why, and you're just an infantile brat. That would be supported by the evidence before us now.

Oh wait, you're a little Troll who doesn't beleive in that evidence stuff.

Who gives a Ratzingers ass why?

But it obviously doesn’t take any “evidence” to know he didn’t chose it because he wanted to end the world.

Like you'd know, as you're clearly just dancing in circles to get away from the fact this stuff exists and you just don't want to look at it..

But to satisfy your pettiness I checked and found the text of a speech given April 27, 2005 where Benny himself explains his choice of name. It was for Benny 15 and St Benedict…apparently the puppy didn’t get a mention.


Satisfied? No malarkey at all.

No. I'm generally not satisfied by PR bullshit contrary to all stuff before they're called out on it.

Moreover, I'm not satisfied by illiterate fuckers who screw up formatting by being unable to use the 'preview' button. Especially when all they're doing is an elaborate dance to get around what's been presented to them.

……
Also part of the reality is that the Vatican has the power to enforce it's will on those bishops.

Of course the Pope has the ultimate authority over all the clergy! It is a hierarchical organization! Is this somehow news to you? Do you need evidance for that? I think it was codefied in the 4th century.

But like a CEO dealing with a factory floor dispute or a general dealing with a private soldier, the guy at teh top get involved after the shit hits the fan and even then relies on their subordinates to handle the details. Ever work in a large organization? Even the most dynamic leader is often hidebound by the bureaucracy.

Perhaps you're just an imbecile, and missed where this man is not merely trying to stopped, but has been on the record as saying 'Don't touch it'.

Oh, wait. You're one of those imbeciles who beleives evidence is opinion, like you said previously in the thread. Oh yea.

Personally I think that they should have taken a stronger role in the whole affair and not one that necessarily involved a comfy chair. But looking at the politics of the situation it was a perfect opportunity for those in opposition to reform to say “Ok American Bishops, here is the greater local autonomy that you have been clamoring for since Vatican I…deal with it”. Now they can say “look what a mess you made! You can’t be trusted to run things.”

Now they'll continue to say 'American Problem.. American Problem.. Quick, move the pedo to a new parish.'

of course that would be a cynical thing to say.

It'd be an upgrade from your normal, banal, halfhearted attempts to engage your brain.

But this part of reality doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions, so you'll ignore it.

Gee and your vast evidence for this is the maybe four lines of text that I wrote? Wow, staggering insight or ad hominem waste of electrons?

Wowee, you don't even know what ad hominiem means. What a surprise.

You know nothing about me or any notions that might be in (or near) my head.

I know what you do, and what you do is throw up piles of bullshit in a desperate attempt to paddle away from your own words.

……I wouldn't know what your incestuous dealings and or fantasies involve; don't involve me in them.

It was a multi level pun actually...it’s called “wit”. Try it sometime
Not my best effort I must admit but ok as a one off.

Your so-called 'wit' was stale before it was baked. WOW, you made a reference to incest. You must feel special. Unfortuntely, while you are special, it's just going to earn you a unique bus pass.

(I know "toss off" would have been funnier there but it's getting late)

And you think that's wit. That's just pathetic.

I'm merely able to read actual, conclusive evidence and refer to it. Unlike you, who thinks everything must be subjective, and whines when someone points out you could find objective data on things you whined about.

Sigh
“actual, conclusive evidence” of what?
What exactly are you riled about

'Riled'? Well, I'm not. You're delusional if you think I am, but whatever.

My initial comment merely points out that he's a doomsage fruitbat. I pointed out how you could see the actual, objective evidence of this. It was in plain English, but as we've established, you're illiterate.

But hey. Feel free to continue your whining.

Hey thanks!
I appreciate that
And you have a nice day too.

Do come back when you attain the ability to use the formatting. That's that whole 'Literacy' thing you fail in.

[Spoonist]

An atheist fundamentalist is a contradiction in terms since a fundamentalism by definition assume strict adherence to specific philosophical rules and ideas. Atheism lacks anything that fundamentalism can latch on to.

I'd say that there are lots of atheist fundamentalists. It's the people who want to outlaw religion altogether for peoples own good.
Like some communists for instance.

And you would be wrong. "Atheist fundamentalist" is a bullshit phrase concocted by the religious as a Tu Quoque fallacy to throw at atheists. It is meaningless. An atheist cannot be a fundamentalist since it is a logical impossibility.

And I'd say that I'm right.
The first usage of the word was by a select few protestants who considered reading the bible as the literary truth would bring enlightenment.
The old usage of the word was religious literalist.
The modern usage of the word is hardline literalist of any ideology.

So there could be fundamentalist democrats, fundamentalist republicans, fundamentalist nazis and so on.
With the meaning that they buy totally into the propaganda/litterature/ideas of their political/religious ideology and don't have any critisicm of it.

[salm]

So there could be fundamentalist democrats, fundamentalist republicans, fundamentalist nazis and so on.
With the meaning that they buy totally into the propaganda/litterature/ideas of their political/religious ideology and don't have any critisicm of it.

The problem is, that there is no atheist ideology to buy into or critisize.

[Ford Prefect]

Atheist ideology = The belief there is no god. I'm pretty sure you could by into that or criticise it, if you were so inclined.

[Zero]

That's really the definition, more then the ideology.

[SirNitram]

That's really the definition, more then the ideology.

What would this mythical ideaology be, then?

[wolveraptor]

If you can be a fundie atheist, then there must be a way to be a moderate atheist. And what would that involve? That there sort've isn't not really a non-god? You either believe in God, you don't know, or you do.

[Darth Wong]

Atheist ideology = The belief there is no god. I'm pretty sure you could by into that or criticise it, if you were so inclined.

Do you consider it an "ideology" that there's no Santa Claus?

[Zero]

That's really the definition, more then the ideology.

What would this mythical ideaology be, then?

My point exactly. We don't have an ideology. There are several secular systems of thought, but you can't be a fundie atheist, as there is no real unifying philosophy behind it. We have a definition, and any variations from it put you in a category outside of atheist.