My comments to that:
- Europe has not been all that Christian for a long time now. It's a great mix of many beliefs.
- It's not a choice between "Christian" and "pagan". That's a false choice, like the one between, um, "intelligent design" and "divine creation" or however that nonsense goes.
- I don't know a single European who "hates Christians". What they don't like are fundamentalists from any religion, especially when the fundamentalism is used to wage war.
- I personally have strong doubts that Bush is really a Christian. I can't see that bubble-head being sincere about any devotion. I think that if the USA were, say, mostly a hindu country, a person like him would don the dress and lingo of hinduism to further his political career.
Pascal offered:
Here are the descriptions for three authentic candidates to their country's leadership:
- First one is associated with seedy politicians and consults astrologists. He's had two mistresses, smokes like a factory and downs 8 to 10 martinis a day.
- Second candidate has already gotten fired from two jobs. He sleeps until noon. In college, he used to smoke opium, and he downs a quarter liter of whisky every evening.
- Third candidate is a medal-awarded war hero. He's a vegetarian, supports legislation against animal cruelty and experimentation, firmly believes in family values, and is also an amateur artist. He barely drinks the occasional beer, and never had any extra-marital affair.
Now, which whould you vote for, based on that CV?
Take your time, think about it.
Now I'll tell you the names of these three persons.
Each once got elected as leader of a major country.
#1 : Franklin D. Roosevelt.
#2 : Winston Churchill.
#3 : Adolf Hitler.
25 comments:
Europe has not been all that Christian for a long time now. It's a great mix of many beliefs.
I'd say it's still predominantly Christian. Other religions are still definitely in the minority. The same with North America.
It's not a choice between "Christian" and "pagan". That's a false choice, like the one between, um, "intelligent design" and "divine creation" or however that nonsense goes.
It was originally "Creationism" and when they failed to get that into schools, they changed it to "Intelligent Design." As the saying goes, "Same shit, different pile."
I don't know a single European who "hates Christians". What they don't like are fundamentalists from any religion, especially when the fundamentalism is used to wage war.
I don't hate Christians themselves, but I do hate religion because it tells people it's okay to hate, and it's okay to not know things or not want to know things.
I personally have strong doubts that Bush is really a Christian. I can't see that bubble-head being sincere about any devotion. I think that if the USA were, say, mostly a hindu country, a person like him would don the dress and lingo of hinduism to further his political career.
You're probably right, he would do whatever it took. He would see what way the wind was blowing. However, if he is a true believer his fundamentalism is actually the "real Christianity". If you read the Bible it's full of the kind of crap he believes it. It tells you not only is it okay to hate others who don't believe as you do, it's encouraged that you should kill them. Among other things. It's really a pretty grotesque book, right up there or even worse than, say, Mein Kampf.
Could you give us your thoughts on Muslim fundamentalists or is that to dangerous for someone living in England.Also can you pilot an aircraft of any kind much less the F-102 Delta Dagger I believe it was also called the "coffin". Maybe if you read some of Bill Whittles writing on Mr. Bush you might get beyond the Bubblehead line.I recommend Seeing the Unseen Part 1, War of the Bumper Stickers from Nov 6 2006.When you call him a bubblehead you are somewhat insulting all pilots.Because you didn't care for his politics does not make him stupid or a bubblehead.Another question for you.Would you be able to persue your work if you were living under Sharia law as opposed to the laws of England now that mainly come from a Judaeo-Christian tradition.My self I'll take the laws and political tradition we have here in Canada that basicly comes from England and a touch of France and the USA.There will always be religion of somesort everywhere in the world thankfully you and I still have the freedom to choose our poison. c.j.g. of eroticalee
Also can you pilot an aircraft of any kind much less the F-102 Delta Dagger I believe it was also called the "coffin".
Learning to fly it is one thing. Did Bush ever fly it in combat? No. That would not make any difference, though, unless you believe that military service (especially in combat) somehow makes a man immune to criticism.
Maybe if you read some of Bill Whittles writing on Mr. Bush you might get beyond the Bubblehead line.
I doubt it. I have not read Whittles but have, as the saying goes, followed GWB's career with considerable interest. The bubblehead line fits. You might think it a cheap shot, were he not a warmongering, braindead war criminal.
When you call him a bubblehead you are somewhat insulting all pilots.
It is not an insult to pilots, and anyway Bush hardly qualifies as the Real McCoy.
Because you didn't care for his politics does not make him stupid or a bubblehead.
Eolake did not say or imply that it did. Bush's words and actions are how he is judged.
Another question for you.Would you be able to persue your work if you were living under Sharia law as opposed to the laws of England now that mainly come from a Judaeo-Christian tradition.
The laws of England, like those of every other Western nation, are thankfully not based on the Bible. (Otherwise it would be very much like living under Sharia law.) Although Biblical ideas of justice and morality underpin Western civilization, we have luckily moved so far beyond those savage beginnings (granted we still have far to go).
My self I'll take the laws and political tradition we have here in Canada that basicly comes from England and a touch of France and the USA.
What from France? From what I know of it in Canada the province of Quebec follows the Civil Code of France, the rest of the country's laws are based on the Common Law of England. Very little cross-fertilization there.
There will always be religion of somesort everywhere in the world
Really? What are you basing that on? There is no reason to think that religious belief might one day be eradicated. Whether this would be a good thing depends on your perspective but it remains that there is no way to know either way what will happen.
The touch of France or the civil code you refer to Jimbo is what I meant.Quebec is a proud part of my country and it's laws have an effect outside of that province however subtle it might be.Religious belief might be someday be eradicated but not in our time Jimbo without a lot of blood being spilled.Are you up for that? Can you point out to me where in the world now there is not some belief system?I in my ignorance haven't heard where this is.Mr. Bush is no longer president if you haven't noticed now it's Mr. "I've been to all 57 states" Obama. I'm not really so sure we've moved that far away from those savage beginnings you speak of.Try reading a little of Mr. Whittle and then decide for yourself whether the real mac fits.Mr. Whittle is an acomplished pilot so I'll be going with his judgement over yours thankyou so much. c.j.g. of eroticalee
> It seems that the story now in some quarters of the conservative West, like Fox News, is that the reasons many Europeans dislike Dubya is that he's a Christian!
Thanks for sharing this, it is quite funny indeed. But I feel the moderator does not agree with that first man talking (he suggests that maybe the Irak war had something to do with the strong dislike), and the last two people don't seem to agree either... So the question now is to know if this is a generally shared opinion, or just one guy talking.
"Europe is no longer a Christian continent, it's a pagan continent, and they hate Christians".
It just sounds funny at first. Then, one starts to wonder: are these gentlemen wishing to find a excuse to bomb Europe? :-)
Gentlemen! Please don't base your judgements on whatever you've been getting from Fox News - they're relative newbies in the business, have been ridiculed by the more established news services for resorting to sensationalism and in effect "cooking the books", to capture audience share from the ones who are usually relied upon for factual information.
Back when Dubya was desperately seeking an excuse to get even with those terrorist hordes in the Middle East, he made several crafty speeches on TV and elsewhere, quoting bits of the Bible to us, and generally trying to create the impression that America was the last defender of truth and justice and freedom on the planet. In other words, a lot of excessively patriotic flag-waving bullshit aimed at convincing his fellow Americans to again send their sons and daughters off to some foreign land to die for their fearless leader's ulterior motives.
Dubya would have been nothing if not for his dear old Daddy, who greased the right palms to get him through university and into the Air Force, where it has been said that he goofed off a lot and would have been in big trouble had it not been for Daddy's connections in very high places.
Please don't forget that the Bush family has been in the oil business for decades and Bush senior has been on the best of terms with leaders of Saudi Arabia for a long time. The Saudis weren't happy when that first Desert Storm war left some of their aggravating problems nearby unresolved - and when Junior took over the dynasty from Daddy, he wanted to show Daddy that he could clean up something which the old man could not - and they were all very aware of the fact that Iraq sits on the second-largest pool of crude oil on the planet. So they flim-flammed their way into convincing their people to go to war against Saddam and Co., and invade Iraq - not to bring law and order, or democracy, or freedom to anyone, but to put themselves in a position of deciding when, where, and who gets all that Iraqi oil that's underneath the whole mess.
Religion had nothing to do with it.
So let's keep our eye on the bouncing ball while we're singing along with the chorus, shall we?
And let's remember that George 'Dubya' Bush is one of the most unpopular presidents that America has ever had - and they've had some real dandies over the years.
Jimbo said...
"It was originally "Creationism" and when they failed to get that into schools, they changed it to "Intelligent Design."
Have you seen 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'? It ain't "allowed" in schools!
"If you read the Bible it's full of the kind of crap he believes it. It tells you not only is it okay to hate others who don't believe as you do, it's encouraged that you should kill them."
I find quite the opposite in my research, Jimbo.
"It's really a pretty grotesque book, right up there or even worse than, say, Mein Kampf."
And, again...I believe that it is the greatest love story ever written for anyone who cares to read it. It's ALL right there.
Who's Dubya and why should I care? ;o)
Note to 'The Dissonance'-
Isn't it past your bedtime?
I've got nothing against christians. Hell, some of my best friends are christians.
Even though I'll never get that whole "eating their god on Sundays" stuff. ;-)
[That peseudo-non-intolerant routine comes from the classic works of Marcel Pagnol. His father was a vintage atheist.]
I'd say the problem people have with fundamentalists, is that the latter cannot stand difference. How can you be tolerant towards intolerance? That's like granting others the freedom to take away your freedom.
Europe is not a christian-hating pagan continent, it's a fundamentalist-allergic laic continent.
Alas, traditional culture in the muslim world IS fundamentalist, and tends to preach that "you can only be tolerant within Islam, the rest is against God's law so it's fundamentally unacceptable".
The difference with the christian education I endured... I mean received, is that many muslim teachers state it explicitly, jihad and all. Quoting the Koran.
While the equivalent texts in judeo-christian tradition are generally sat upon today, "converting the whole world by any means for their eternal salvation's sake" has been set aside by social evolution.
Many daredevil muslim philosophers say it (usually from the relative safety of a Western country): Islam not only still has its Renaissance to make, but compared to 100 or 200 years ago, it has dramatically gone backwards.
Then again, some signs are emerging that things might be quietly shifting for the long term.
I'm not too convinced about the Captain's take on Dubya. I think he's just a dummy... I mean, puppet, who'd never have the smarts himself to be that cunning. "God saved him" because some charismatic windbags hammered it into his thick but roomy skull, that's all.
He WOULD be sincere about devotion, IF he knew what it means. Are you aware that he officially told the now former German Foreign Minister he was "getting instructions from God, He speaks to me"? He's just got that bigoted stupidity that naturally borders on clinical insanity. The rest is all educated proselytism and getting manipulated by the real cunning people.
Oh, BTW, "intelligent design" and "divine creation" are only the new and older version of fundies attacking Darwin. Since it's "apparently" proven that God didn't make all species in one day, then they "may have evolved", but only following God's direct plan, and this somehow is supposed to be onvious when you "let the Bible open your eyes". With blind faith? :-P
I love it how that "blind faith" expression makes the principles of bigots perfectly clear... by their own admittance!
"Europe has not been all that Christian for a long time now."
France, 1901. The Separation of Church and State law. Almost led to civil war.
Are 108 years "a long time"?
And how about the way the Church and Vatican very openly send the flock into the streets in frantic demonstrations every time the State wants to legislate about abortion in Spain, Italy, Ireland, Poland, etc, etc, etc?
Nope, they're pretty much well implanted still.
And it's probably THAT which "unfondamentalists" are starting to really hate.
But, alas, too many people (such as Bill Maher) still lack the open mind to know what to attack precisely. Lacking a discerning view, they bash at the whole thing without thinking.
Which is simply another style of narrow-mindedness.
Sure, I've outgrown the mental infantilism of discarding any blatant contradiction in conventional religion teaching. But I've also grown lucid enough to realize that many (most?) people NEED to have a religious-type belief, or faith, and that's a part of them that needs to be respected as much as any other part of a person that you respect.
You may be "clueless about politics" IMO, but that doesn't mean I have the right to call you a retard and kick you to the ground.
The line between respecting and needing to criticize, I believe, is quite clear. When a religious attitude causes harm to others or to others' free right to think and live otherwise, it's time to stop feeling respectful and get civic activist on some incense-farting asses.
And, of course, fire away with the satire and mockery. Be it only because it's healthy.
That Pagnol quote up there? From his autobiography. His father was a post-1901 school teacher, ergo an atheist. His mom's sister married a Catholic. Religious, but laid-back. Sparks would often fly at home with Daddy's intolerant atheism, while Uncle Jules always remained cool and smiling. They eventually became hunting buddies. :-)
[And no, there never was "a tragic accident"!!!]
"but I do hate religion because it tells people it's okay to hate"
Damn right. The widespread teaching of religion says, explicitly or implicitly, just that. Doesn't even matter whether the original Text says it. Doesn't matter, given that these hate proponents have confiscated the right to say what's in the Religion and what's not. (Maybe THAT's why some atheists reject all about religion. Lack of a better option?...)
And all that, from a God whose Love for (the Chosen fave ones of) his human children (which he ALL created, hello fair treatment) knows no bounds... as long as we do strictly like we've been told, GOT THAT? Otherwise it's straight down to the stoning range for a good, community-uniting lapidation, huzzah!
Why, just a couple days ago, I was at a family gathering, and some started (as usual) mixing religion, politics, and the customary bashing of Jews/Israel, whom of course God hates as Jesus (=God) explicitly stated to them. ("Jews, Pharisies, Israelis, whatever!")
I got firmly put back in my place after claiming that nonsense about Hamas using human shields according to authentic Palestinian witnesses. "Peshah! All Fatah partisans lyin' thru their teeth, and Fatah is sold out to the Jews!"
Why do I even bother then? Well, it sure as Ragnarok kept my worst fear from coming true: the excitement and verbal action prevented me from falling asleep out of boredom. :-)
As a bonus, by obediently listening to "educational values" (not that I had much choice once the angel was out of the bag), I got seen as the good nephew, and you know what that means.
That's right: spontaneous Christmas and Easter loving bonuses. Easter is at the doors, innit? :-)
I'm still not done with the yummy chocolate cake I got to take home that very same day.
So, you see, religion has its place in this world. ;-)
Dissonance, "Dubya" is a phonetic spelling of "W", and is the nickname of George W. Bush. You'd not encountered this?
It's funny about Bush. Does anybody divide people more? For me, he repulses me on a visceral level. I think he's the only person on the planet I actually despise. It's amazing.
Have you seen 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'? It ain't "allowed" in schools!
That piece of shit? Yes, I've seen it. You're wrong. Creationism has actually made its way into schools in the U.S. In Kansas. It didn't last, but it happened.
I find quite the opposite in my research, Jimbo.
That is because you are obviously a fan of the centuries-old Christian pastime of cherrypicking passages of the Bible. In your link, where are the passages advocating genocide? I wonder, tc, can you tell me about the Midianites? What happened to them?
And, again...I believe that it is the greatest love story ever written for anyone who cares to read it. It's ALL right there.
Only someone who hasn't read it, or at least hasn't read certain parts, would ever be so abominably stupid to call it the greatest love story ever told!
(Maybe THAT's why some atheists reject all about religion. Lack of a better option?...)
It could be...or maybe just a total, complete lack of any evidence or even the hint of evidence. Either one.
let's nuke 'em all and let God sort 'em out
Jimbo said...
"...I wonder, tc, can you tell me about the Midianites? What happened to them?"
Here you go, Jimbo. I "cherry-picked" this link just for you. :-)
"Only someone who hasn't read it, or at least hasn't read certain parts, would ever be so abominably stupid to call it the greatest love story ever told!"
Right...kind of like your probably not understanding why your parents had to chastise you, while you were in their care. I think the abominable one is actually you.
Here you go, Jimbo. I "cherry-picked" this link just for you. :-)
I really wish you hadn't. It just makes you look more foolish, if possible. I always kind of regret having to do this to the religious types. I don't have any problem with "spiritual" types like Eolake because they reject religion even if they accept belief in the supernatural. I can't see him ever condoning hate or many of the other crimes Christianity supports whole heartedly.
I read through that article. I might have laughed at a few points were it not for the fact that many people believe it. Trying to justify God ordering genocide by arguing about historical inaccuracies! Wow, historical inaccuracies in the Bible?!
Sorry, but there is just no getting around it. God orders his followers to perform horrible acts which should be considered the crimes they are. He orders a man to kill his own son. The father happily sets about doing it, only to have God call it off at the last second. "April fool! You don't really have to do it!"
I feel sorry for you.
I think the abominable one is actually you.
No.
Jimbo said...
"...condoning hate or many of the other crimes Christianity supports whole heartedly."
Jimbo...if this type of behavior was happening, out of control, in your country...after having signed a *peace deal,* would you just want to ignore them, when you are asked for help? Come on...Christian or not, this is totally unacceptable behavior!
"Wow, historical inaccuracies in the Bible?!"
Those come from when the Bible was assembled...by imperfect humans.
"He orders a man to kill his own son. The father happily sets about doing it, only to have God call it off at the last second. "April fool! You don't really have to do it!""
And, now, you're both missing the point of that passage and..."cherry-picking". The passage had to do w/God testing Abraham's obedience.
"I feel sorry for you."
Likewise.
Christian/pagan - It's a false dichotomy since Christianity is still a completely pagan religion. Sure the rituals were given different background stories and the myths were taken over and attributed to different men (or gods). Still if it quacks like a duck or rises from the dead in the springtime.... well, you know.
For those who are actually interested in some thought-provoking material, I suggest this video, and this website.
"Unless you believe that military service (especially in combat) somehow makes a man immune to criticism."
Here are the descriptions for three authentic candidates to their country's leadership:
- First one is associated with seedy politicians and consults astrologists. He's had two mistresses, smokes like a factory and downs 8 to 10 martinis a day.
- Second candidate has already gotten fired from two jobs. He sleeps until noon. In college, he used to smoke opium, and he downs a quarter liter of whisky every evening.
- Third candidate is a medal-awarded war hero. He's a vegetarian, supports legislation against animal cruelty and experimentation, firmly believes in family values, and is also an amateur artist. He barely drinks the occasional beer, and never had any extra-marital affair.
Now, which whould you vote for, based on that CV?
Take your time, think about it.
Now I'll tell you the names of these three persons.
Each once got elected as leader of a major country.
#1 : Franklin D. Roosevelt.
#2 : Winston Churchill.
#3 : Adolf Hitler.
My conclusion : don't trust people with too healthy and impeccable a life.
Me, I'd elect Gomez Addams and cease worrying about a thing!
"The laws of England, like those of every other Western nation, are thankfully not based on the Bible. (Otherwise it would be very much like living under Sharia law.)"
"Thou hast said!" [Matthew 26 : 64]
Adolf Hitler.
FFS - can we have an end to the disinformation that Hitler was a veggie - he wasn't. No evidence for it and plenty to the contrary - that like most Austrians (and Germans), his was an omnivorous diet biased towards meat.
Anyone who thinks religion "tells people it's okay to hate" certainly is ignorant about Christianity and Judaism. This is true about Islam, though.
And, anyone who thinks Dubya was a 'hater' or stupid is ignorant about the man. Disagree with his conclusions, or his ideology, but you can't honestly call the man hateful or unintelligent. Certainly if you think Al Gore is smart, then Bush is smarter because he had a higher GPA in college and unlike Gore finished grad school (Harvard MBA). Bush didn't lead the USA into war in Iraq because he hated Saddam, liberal ranting to the contrary. He led us into war there because he believed that, in a post-9/11 world, the USA could not trust Saddam to behave responsibly... and he was determined to ensure that another 9/11 didn't happen while he was president.
Today we have 6 years of hindsight concerning Iraq. The country is largely at peace now, and the overwhelming majority of the Iraqi people are thankful to America for ridding them of Saddam. However, peace is still tenuous, and Obama needs to listen to his generals instead of his ignorant supporters. If he does, then Iraq will be seen as a major transformational event in the Middle East, the first Arab democracy... and that is why the fundamentalist Islamic countries like Iran want to see the USA fail in Iraq. As it is, the USA broke the back of Al Qaeda in Iraq, capturing and killing tens of thousands of Al Qaeda recruits, most of whom were from outside Iraq.
The reason there was so much antipathy towards Bush (and the USA) in Europe was because Bush had the strength of character to do what he felt was right even if it was unpopular with some. And let's face it... the reason France opposed US intervention in Iraq is because they wanted to maintain French influence with Iraq, and they wanted to benefit from their secret contracts with Saddam to exploit Iraq's western oilfields. Yep... the folks running France and Germany had been bribed. I never understood why taking millions of dollars to turn a blind eye towards Saddam's weapons smuggling while Iraqi children starved wasn't "blood for oil."
What really amazes me is how many give the Islamists a pass for their violent fundamentalism, yet excoriate folks like Bush. Certainly the Islamists have a special place in their Hell for folks who run websites like DOMAI.
"He led us into war there because he believed that, in a post-9/11 world, the USA could not trust Saddam to behave responsibly... and he was determined to ensure that another 9/11 didn't happen while he was president."
So we need to wage war on *every* country on Earth which might possibly breed terrorism? Killing hundreds of thousands of women and children in the process?
Even if we think this is a good idea, I don't think the US has the resources, given that there must be fifty countries which are about as likely as Iraq.
Also given that unless you kill every single person in a country (which nobody has managed yet), the rest will be much more likely to want to attack you from the wreck of their country, standing amongst their dead family members and friends.
Those come from when the Bible was assembled...by imperfect humans.
This may be your opinion, but many believe the Bible to be God's word relayed through human beings. As a holy book that is supposed to be a guide to people through this world, it seems it might have been worth God's time to get it right.
And, now, you're both missing the point of that passage and..."cherry-picking". The passage had to do w/God testing Abraham's obedience.
I did not miss the point. You, however, have. Once again. God testing a man's obedience but asking him to sacrifice his own son? For no reason other than to see if he will do what you say? Barbaric. Needlessly cruel. Sadistic. Worse still, the man obeyed.
Likewise.
The difference is of course that you have no reason to feel sorry for me. I'm not living my life with my head buried in the sand. I'm not the one worshiping a sadistic, tyrannical bully. I'm not the one believing in the supernatural. It would be great if one day you could switch your brain back on.
Anyone who thinks religion "tells people it's okay to hate" certainly is ignorant about Christianity and Judaism. This is true about Islam, though.
"Ignorant" is certainly a word that describes you, John.
Christianity does tell its adherents it's okay to hate - followers of other religions. Not their own, fellow Christians.
It's in there, but I doubt you've ever read it.
Post a Comment