Pope Criticizes Atheism

[SadisticMonkey]

VATICAN CITY (AP) - Pope Benedict XVI strongly criticized atheism in a major document released Friday, saying it had led to some of the "greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice" ever known.

What a fucking wanker. Let's we look back at the Catholic church's not so squeaky clean history:

-Catholic church EXPLICITLY expressed favour in the slaughter of over 17 million slaves in 1830's
-Pope InnocentVIII sanctioned countless executions of "witches" throughout the 16th and 17th centuries.
-Pope sanctions crusades; 1 million non-combatant civilians killed.
-The inquisition: 350,00 innocent people murdered
-Participation in Rawanda Ethnic Cleansings
-Continued support for a bloody regime in Zimbabwe
-Support for Croatian Genocide of Serbs
-Countless rapes and molestations, covered up by the Vatican.
-Blocking of access to condoms to AIDS-stricken countries

I hate this fucking hypocritical bullshit. Fuck the pope.

[cellardoor6]

Even though I have beef with the Catholic church, you're going to need to prove some of those claims you made.

Crusades... obvious. Inquisition... obvious (and it was WAY more than 350,000 by the way).

But some of those other things are questionable.

[plebmonk]

Religion in itself is ridiculous, the pope needs to get some fucking logic. Nobody has ever committed an act of cruelty or whatever the fuck he's saying in the name of atheism, the fact that people like stalin and (debatably) hitler were atheists is irrelevant when you consider their actions, they never claimed to do anything in the name of atheism, in fact hitler often claimed that he was doing God's work (perhaps to canvas favour in the general public).

I do know that I just invoked Godwin's law, but I think the law is circumvened in this case, as it isn't an analogy, it's perfectly relevant and applicable.

On the other hand, the bible actively encourages murder or non-christians. Translations over the years have conveniently eliminated the 'non-christians' part of it. They did not however eliminate the stories of Sampson slaughtering thousands of people with a horses skull, and God burning countless non-believers in Sodom. The bible and christianity condones these acts, not atheism.

[PhoenixTails]

Guys, its the pope. I doubt he's going to jump up and down for atheists. The thing about the "worst forms of cruelty" is just typical Christian indoctrinations.

I miss JP2

[Gunter45]

Bolshevism is an atheistic belief.

Sure some people have used atheistic doctrines to slaughter millions. Stalin and Mao probably killed close to a hundred million people, put together. If you're looking at body count, atheism wins.

Of course, you have to step back and ask yourself: does any of that even matter? People kill each other for any reason under the sun. Religion and atheism aren't responsible for violence, people are, so don't go assigning blame to belief systems, that's ridiculous.

[Lindione]

I'm not surprized by this at all. Of course the pope is gonna look at any religion or ideology but Catholicism as evil or misled or idiodic. Of course the pope is going to to be idiodic or hypocritical himself since the church changes very slowly, so slowly that it will ignore human suffering just to keep the same image it has for its beleivers. Beleivers, which, at least the ones I know, would like some change in the church.

[Ravariel]

Waitwaitwait... the Pope, the leader of one of the largest and most powerful religions in the world, criticized a belief system that runs directly counter to his own!? NO WAY!

that intolerant bastard!

[Drakim]

Although slightly different situation, I feel that this comic fits.

[WlliamTylerBomar]

At 12/1/07 11:11 AM, Drakim wrote: Although slightly different situation, I feel that this comic fits.

I'm not going to let Atheists off the hook either. They do the same thing here on Newgrounds saying believing in God is stupid and you should convert to Atheist.

[SmilezRoyale]

In defense of atheists, Mao and Stalin had an easier time killing millions of people than the catholics did. Remember that was much higher in the first half the 20th century than it was prior to the 17th century and back, when the bulk of the killings done by the catholic church had met their end.

More population makes it easier to kill more people, also stalin and mao had more efficient means of killing people. You can do more damage with a repeating rifle than you can with a noose, some wood, and a torch.

Do i agree with the pope that scientists like Richard Dawkins will be the next ones to launch a crusade against non beleivers? No...

Do i beleive groups of liberated thinkers [Euphemism to teenagers] would go around yelling and harassing individuals who arn't intelligent enough to devert to the true faith? It's probably going to happen.

The pope is just jealous that his religon wasn't founded on enlightened thinking combined with western 20th century morals of tollerance. And he's also angry because people keep saying he looks like palpatine.

[stafffighter]

At 12/1/07 11:19 AM, SmilezRoyale wrote:

The pope is just jealous that his religon wasn't founded on enlightened thinking combined with western 20th century morals of tollerance. And he's also angry because people keep saying he looks like palpatine.

No, he's the pope. Meaning he thinks the Catholic deal is pretty dandy in itself. Considering how the 20th century western morality was formed around christian values you don't really have a leg to stand on here assuming the Pope is a reactionary teenager like you.

[Earfetish]

At 12/1/07 11:30 AM, stafffighter wrote: Considering how the 20th century western morality was formed around christian values

No it wasn't, 20th century morality was a discarding of traditional Christian morality. You want Christian morals, go back a few hundred years. We call our current moral system 'enlightened humanism' which has the one rule 'don't cause unnecessary suffering'.

I think the Pope is just very unaware of the atheist mindset, views it as a threat, and is unaware that atheist politics is not Communism.

[Gunter45]

At 12/1/07 11:19 AM, SmilezRoyale wrote: In defense of atheists, Mao and Stalin had an easier time killing millions of people than the catholics did. Remember that was much higher in the first half the 20th century than it was prior to the 17th century and back, when the bulk of the killings done by the catholic church had met their end.

More population makes it easier to kill more people, also stalin and mao had more efficient means of killing people. You can do more damage with a repeating rifle than you can with a noose, some wood, and a torch.

I already downplayed the body count myself, you're not really doing anything to my point. The fact is that, under atheist regimes, leaders eliminated EVERYONE from certain groups. It is a well-known fact that Stalin would kill somebody for being suspected of being against the State along with everyone from that particular group. If you grew up as a priest, but decided that Bolshevism was the way to go, it didn't matter, you got murdered with the rest of them. Mao was no better. It's not a matter of how many people you can kill, it's the fact that you have the drive to kill people simply for having beliefs in something else.

Humans are going to be intolerant and destructive no matter what ideology they adhere to. My whole point is that the Pope and the OP were both being naive by saying that atheism and Catholicism, respectively, are to blame for the horrible acts of some of their proponents.

[Drakim]

At 12/1/07 11:17 AM, WlliamTylerBomar wrote:

At 12/1/07 11:11 AM, Drakim wrote: Although slightly different situation, I feel that this comic fits.

I'm not going to let Atheists off the hook either. They do the same thing here on Newgrounds saying believing in God is stupid and you should convert to Atheist.

Yes, and they are perfectly free to do so, by freedom of speech.

But, how often does atheist threaten to kill people if they don't stop believing in God? How many atheist will threaten to kill and burn you if you speak up against them? How many atheist will demand that criticizing atheism should be punishable by law? How many times does an atheist discriminate against believers in society because they have a religion at all? A Catholic school would probably not even hire an atheist as a janitor, while there are no secular schools who would stop somebody from working there for being a Christian.

The problem, I feel, isn't that people speak up against each other. In fact, I think debate and discussions is needed in society. There can be nothing better than issues coming up and people talking about it. It's when you start to threaten people that you cross the line.

[Earfetish]

At 12/1/07 11:40 AM, Gunter45 wrote: it's the fact that you have the drive to kill people simply for having beliefs in something else.

I've never heard any atheists saying 'the religious should be killed'. Even Richard Dawkins, and he's apparently a dick. I just hear them saying 'it should be kept out of the public sphere'. Communism is not secularism.

[Drakim]

At 12/1/07 11:43 AM, Earfetish wrote:

At 12/1/07 11:40 AM, Gunter45 wrote: it's the fact that you have the drive to kill people simply for having beliefs in something else.

I've never heard any atheists saying 'the religious should be killed'. Even Richard Dawkins, and he's apparently a dick. I just hear them saying 'it should be kept out of the public sphere'. Communism is not secularism.

I never quite got that. Listen to anything by Richard Dawkins on youtube. He is quite nice, and often speak for hours with religions people without any anger (unless they start being an asshole to him, then you can see a vein pop up in his forhead ^^).

Compared to say, the Pope, Richard Dawkins is a lot more tolerant.

But then again, there is a completely different standard for when people call atheist intolerant and fundamentalists. While believers need to bomb places and chant death to entire nations, atheist become fundamentalist if they argue angry and heatedly in debates.

[stafffighter]

At 12/1/07 11:37 AM, Earfetish wrote:

At 12/1/07 11:30 AM, stafffighter wrote: Considering how the 20th century western morality was formed around christian values

No it wasn't, 20th century morality was a discarding of traditional Christian morality. You want Christian morals, go back a few hundred years. We call our current moral system 'enlightened humanism' which has the one rule 'don't cause unnecessary suffering'.

To turn the other cheek, as one may say? As untrendy as it might be basic tenents of respect and mercy are at the base of christain beleif. Of course the same could be said for Judiasm, Buddism, and so on. Don't think you're doing anything but repackaging the same (admittidly useful) ideals just because you don't put a father figure in the sky.

[Earfetish]

At 12/1/07 11:49 AM, stafffighter wrote: To turn the other cheek, as one may say?

Well actually I'd say 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', the 'Golden Rule', which is the one decent moral line located in almost every religious text, and I would say is a moral absolute that is innate in humans and all social animals.

[Earfetish]

At 12/1/07 11:52 AM, Earfetish wrote: Well actually I'd say 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', the 'Golden Rule', which is the one decent moral line located in almost every religious text, and I would say is a moral absolute that is innate in humans and all social animals.

And I think it's completely bogus to claim that the fact that this one moral precept is in Western society is due to a massive book that is full of rules. Many of which are wholly ignored.

[Gunter45]

At 12/1/07 11:43 AM, Earfetish wrote: I've never heard any atheists saying 'the religious should be killed'. Even Richard Dawkins, and he's apparently a dick. I just hear them saying 'it should be kept out of the public sphere'. Communism is not secularism.

Thanks for ignoring my whole point. I appreciate how you took something out of context, disregarded the entire meaning of my post and slapped on how you interpreted a sentence fragment. That's really classy.

I know that atheists don't want to kill religious people. No shit. I really shouldn't have to repeat myself a third time, but what the fuck, I'll make it easy this time:

ATHEISM AND RELIGION ARE NOT TO BLAME FOR THE ACTIONS OF A FEW OF THEIR PROPONENTS. PEOPLE WILL USE ANY AND ALL REASONS THEY CAN TO SUPPORT VIOLENCE AND HATRED. IT IS AS RETARDED TO SAY THAT CATHOLICISM IS EVIL BECAUSE OF THINGS THAT PEOPLE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST AS IT IS TO SAY THAT ATHEISM IS EVIL BECAUSE OF BOLSHIVISM AND MAOISM.

If anybody still misinterprets that, I'm going to lose all faith in people.

[stafffighter]

At 12/1/07 11:54 AM, Earfetish wrote:

And I think it's completely bogus to claim that the fact that this one moral precept is in Western society is due to a massive book that is full of rules. Many of which are wholly ignored.

The first white people here were pretty fond of that book. And while not as many of us per capita can quote said book anymore we have all grown from that base.

Another book I'm fond of is faking it: how to seem like a better person without actually improving yourself. Let's look up aeistiest

"Ironincally enough, all aithiests have a holier than thou additude"

Pretty suiting wouldn't you say? Go ahead, tell me why your path to truth is better than the others again. Prove how wrong your father was.

[The-Hydra-of-Spore]

Really? The Pope does not like Atheism! Oh no! I think we need to just point out that although Atheists have killed as much as people who believe in religion I can not remember a time when they killed FOR atheism, why kill for something you DON'T believe in. Although I heard Stalin might have killed a bit for Atheism I am not sure on the subject but then again Stalin was crazy while many sane people killed millions and in this age they would be perfectly nice people but they did these things because they thought it was GOOD. Also about Hitler throughout his career he made many references to god and Jesus also when he escaped assassination he quoted an organization who thought god had sent him to Germany and said that this was proof. Anyway this is just my two cents.

[Earfetish]

At 12/1/07 12:00 PM, Gunter45 wrote: and slapped on how you interpreted a sentence fragment. That's really classy.

It was relevant to the thread. Maybe less a comment on what you said than what the Pope said.

I know that atheists don't want to kill religious people. No shit. I really shouldn't have to repeat myself a third time, but what the fuck, I'll make it easy this time:
IT IS AS RETARDED TO SAY THAT CATHOLICISM IS EVIL

Now, what I would say is, organised religion is an ideology that will always impact on world affairs negatively. Religious sectarianism is bound to happen. If one religion says 'dress like an orthodox Jew' and another one says 'dress like a Muslim', those two groups are going to be culturally divided based on some old books. If these two cultures decide to start fighting each other on the other side of the world, that sectarianism will spread globally until these guys that dress that way are fighting with those guys that dress that way.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people, but if the world lost this tool there'd be a lot less killing. There are two major dividing lines you'll kill or die for, and Lennon summed it up well;

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

At 12/1/07 12:01 PM, stafffighter wrote: The first white people here were pretty fond of that book. And while not as many of us per capita can quote said book anymore we have all grown from that base.

Yeah, and also lots of immigrants over the years that paid little respect to that book.

Pretty suiting wouldn't you say? Go ahead, tell me why your path to truth is better than the others again. Prove how wrong your father was.

Because Christianity is just as wrong as the Aztec religion. And my grandparents are racist, and my great great grandparents might have had slaves.

[Zeistro]

At 12/1/07 10:47 AM, Ravariel wrote: Waitwaitwait... the Pope, the leader of one of the largest and most powerful religions in the world, criticized a belief system that runs directly counter to his own!? NO WAY!

that intolerant bastard!

I completely agree. This topic starter needs to grow some thick skin and not make a topic anytime someone maligns your particular ideology.

[Earfetish]

At 12/1/07 12:16 PM, Zeistro wrote: I completely agree. This topic starter needs to grow some thick skin and not make a topic anytime someone maligns your particular ideology.

Look at Drakim's picture please. Drakim's been on the money here; Christians have got to kill abortion doctors and protest funerals before they get called out, atheists just need to start internet threads.

If some important international Muslim cleric had insulted Christians, there'd be a totally different reaction from the religious.

The Pope's totally only saying it cos he's scared though.

[stafffighter]

At 12/1/07 12:10 PM, Earfetish wrote:

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

Austin Powers had it right. "And I'd like a toilet made of solid gold but it's just not in the cards baby."
Whatever they do or don't think will happen when they die people are not going to stop striving ford efiniton or wanting things othewrs don't want them to have. It's the human condition.

At 12/1/07 12:01 PM, stafffighter wrote:
Pretty suiting wouldn't you say? Go ahead, tell me why your path to truth is better than the others again. Prove how wrong your father was.

Because Christianity is just as wrong as the Aztec religion. And my grandparents are racist, and my great great grandparents might have had slaves.

You're just a melting pot of liberal guilt aren't you? Luckily your beleif structure makes you beleive you've accended above these sins.

At 12/1/07 12:23 PM, Earfetish wrote:

The Pope's totally only saying it cos he's scared though.

No, Catholosism survived the lutherins, the mormons, the prodistants, and as we've established your group of people isn't any more special. I mean come on, defining yourself by not beleiving something is still defining yourself.

[Zeistro]

At 12/1/07 12:23 PM, Earfetish wrote: Look at Drakim's picture please.

I did.

Drakim's been on the money here; Christians have got to kill abortion doctors and protest funerals before they get called out,

Actually, all christians have to do is thrive before they get called out here on the BBS. Tell me, how many threads started by christians have you seen, which insult the intelligence of atheists? Zero you say, now think about how many there are in vice versa.

atheists just need to start internet threads.

Okay, whatever.

If some important international Muslim cleric had insulted Christians, there'd be a totally different reaction from the religious.

I can think of the Piss Christ fiasco, but no national outcry arose. Infact, I can think of numerous times when some leftist pundit insulted christians in general, yet no nationally generated controversy.

The Pope's totally only saying it cos he's scared though.

Or maybe he's trying to be troll, in which case this topic starter fell for it.

My point remains, people, if someone degrades your ideology don't make a topic about it. It accomplishes nothing and confirms you're a little bitch.

[LordJaric]

Fuck the pope he doesn't speak for all of us Catholics.

[Earfetish]

At 12/1/07 12:30 PM, stafffighter wrote: It's the human condition.

People say this, but my experience of Mankind is one of a peaceful, tolerant religion that doesn't want to upset anyone and feels empathy and guilt. I think war is a byproduct of faulty societies co-existing; not necessarily the human condition. And yes, without religion there would still be wars, over commodities if anything, but there'd be fewer wars.

Because Christianity is just as wrong as the Aztec religion. And my grandparents are racist, and my great great grandparents might have had slaves.

You're just a melting pot of liberal guilt aren't you? Luckily your beleif structure makes you beleive you've accended above these sins.

What the fuck, no I'm not. But the beliefs of my ancestors were not necessarily intelligent beliefs. One only needs to look at history to see a progression of increasingly intelligent, enlightened beliefs. Your ancestors used to believe in white superiority, even witchcraft; does that need respecting? Throughout history we've tried to one-up our ancestors on humanity. It's nothing to do with 'liberal guilt', it's just an appropriate response to 'how can you say your ancestors are wrong'?

No, Catholosism survived the lutherins, the mormons, the prodistants, and as we've established your group of people isn't any more special. I mean come on, defining yourself by not beleiving something is still defining yourself.

The Lutherans and Mormons didn't have scientific progress attacking their doctrine. Most organised religions in the West are noticing the pews emptying.

[Earfetish]

At 12/1/07 12:50 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 12/1/07 12:30 PM, stafffighter wrote: It's the human condition.

People say this, but my experience of Mankind is one of a peaceful, tolerant religion

*species