The Pope Is Here

[DarthOkkata]

Pope Benedict is visiting the US, as I'm sure you're all aware.

 

Bill Mahr said something the other night that made a great deal of sense to me.

 

I'm paraphrasing a bit as I don't have a copy of what he said at hand, but the general idea is sound.

 

Benedict is the one who wrote the letter ordering the Bishops under his command to hide child molesting priests. He was of course, acting as John Paul's 'Dick Cheney' at the time.

 

If a corporation that ran day care centers had a CEO who did the same thing to child molesting employees, he would be in Jail, and probably confined away from the rest of the prison population for his own safety. Even criminals don't put up with shit like that.

 

So, why the hell did we even let this guy into our country?

 

I'm sure, if we did arrest and prosecute him, he'd say "I was only following orders." Boy, does that sound familiar or what? [Heil Jesus!]

 

Sure, he's got diplomatic immunity, so we can't really prosecute him. Still, it leaves the question why we allowed him to visit in the first place. He seems to have declared 'war' on our children's virginity.

 

At any rate, this man has far too much power.

 

Why exactly does he get to make the rules anyway? Isn't it dangerous to give that much personal power to one man? Especially one with a nation that encompasses the entire world?

 

He's not got an army any longer, and that seems to have helped, but this one man, can dictate the thoughts, behavior, and rules of billions of lives.

 

Does anyone else have problems with this? Christians as well. Are you sure, you should be giving one man, former Nazi youth or not, that much power?

 

I know it's a soft spot, but I only bring up his ties to the Nazi youth becase he does have so much say over so many lives.

 

He of course, denies being part of that particular christian organization.

 

I'm willing to accept that he might be honest, but I've got my doubts that he wasn't following along because of 'fear' or even that he might have had a change of heart later in life.

 

It's a dangerous risk to take. Why should you entrust him with so much power? Why on earth would the church take such a bone headed risk at all? It would seem wiser to choose someone else who was qualified, without such a blemish on his record.

 

Yes. I am saying he should have been barred because of it. If only for the distant possibility that he might not have 'honestly converted' all the way. That's not even taking into account his letter to the bishops, which also should have set up another qualified applicant for the job.

 

That still doesn't clear up the confusion I feel about just the position of Pope in general.

 

Why does the catholic church need to give him so much power at all? The rules should already be in place, if they were given by God himself, why do we need someone around to 'tweak' them at all?

 

What exactly gives him that right? Jesus left Peter in charge, but I don't recall him giving the man permission to screw around with the rules. My understanding is he was just there to keep things stable and running.

 

I thought he was supposed to be an administrator, not an all powerful mouthpiece of God and ruler of all catholics.

 

Where did he get off deciding he had the power to speak for God? Why would you let him have such dominion over you, and your faith? WTF?

 

This just seems like a bad idea on so many levels. Especially given the past history of the current Pope. A safer choice would have been prudent, especially considering the strain science is putting on the church now. It seems to be just another issue people like me can pick at.

 

I feel as if he's got far too much power for anyone's good, and it's being handed to him willingly by billions of catholics.

 

Seriously, I mean, name one other religion that has it's own country. Really. Just one.

 

It makes my head hurt.

[SWIM]

Good rant, and I really like Bill M. he really gets going good on some of his rants. I agree, he should be arrested, if that's not possible, keep his sorry ass out.

[hereticzero]

It's kind of like not arresting Putin for poking his tongue into a little kid's belly button. The Bizarres have taken over the world.

[MonolithTMA]

Fortunately none of the Catholics I know blindly follow the Pope. It would be one thing if thousands of priests molested kids and the Catholic church dealt with it appropriately, but they made every effort to cover it up. Bill Maher speaks the truth. The Fox gang asked if Maher had made these comments about Jews, Muslims or some ethnic group would he be treated the same. If any of those groups had a phenomenal track record of abusing kids and then covering it up, yes.

[R. S. Martin]

Why does the catholic church need to give him so much power at all? The rules should already be in place, if they were given by God himself, why do we need someone around to 'tweak' them at all?

 

What exactly gives him that right? Jesus left Peter in charge, but I don't recall him giving the man permission to screw around with the rules. My understanding is he was just there to keep things stable and running.

 

I thought he was supposed to be an administrator, not an all powerful mouthpiece of God and ruler of all catholics.

 

Where did he get off deciding he had the power to speak for God? Why would you let him have such dominion over you, and your faith? WTF?

 

There's this verse about "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosened in heaven." I was taught this refered to the rules of the church. Jesus inserted a disclaimer about not being able to tell the disciples everything because they couldn't handle hearing it all right then but the Holy Ghost would tell them later. Maybe that's what this is all about. I dunno--I can't speak for the RCC.

[Shion]

Arresting the pope would seriously complicate our relations with Catholic nations. We reliant on Latin America for oil and other industries. Also America is predominantly Christian, including the president.

[DarthOkkata]

Arresting the pope would seriously complicate our relations with Catholic nations. We reliant on Latin America for oil and other industries. Also America is predominantly Christian, including the president.

 

Then we shouldn't have let him in. He's not been good to us in the past.

[Shion]

Arresting the pope would seriously complicate our relations with Catholic nations. We reliant on Latin America for oil and other industries. Also America is predominantly Christian, including the president.

 

Then we shouldn't have let him in. He's not been good to us in the past.

 

Sigh...yeah, I agree, but our current President is as unlikely to promote good foreign relations as a camel does at speaking perfect French. America is notoriously bad at these sort of things. On one hand we like to be the big shot heroes on the stage, but on the other hand we do not want anything to do with outsiders. We welcome the pope, we ignore his atrocities, because we do not want to evolve into the next stages of civilized foreign relations. Our presidents have less power and understanding of kings, but they are expected to do more then all the monarchs in history. Besides the pope still carries the persona of 'a man of God,' an untouchable man of the cloth, and even with all of our protestations of being a secular society, we cannot bare to apply our convictions in difficult circumstances.

[Guest BaylorBear]

So, why the hell did we even let this guy into our country?

 

 

Diplomacy.

 

At any rate, this man has far too much power.

 

Foreigners probably say the same thing about the Presidency of the United States, but it doesn't make it true.

 

Why exactly does he get to make the rules anyway? Isn't it dangerous to give that much personal power to one man? Especially one with a nation that encompasses the entire world?

 

Because the Conclave elected him Pope. Vatican City is approximately 110 acres and has a population around 800-the city-state does not encompass the world.

 

but this one man, can dictate the thoughts, behavior, and rules of billions of lives.

 

Really? Do you realize that many Roman Catholics world-wide totally disregard the moral teachings of their church? Ask American RC if they use birth control. Go to Brazil and ask the RCs down there about the other religion they practice called Santeria.

 

Does anyone else have problems with this? Christians as well. Are you sure, you should be giving one man, former Nazi youth or not, that much power?

 

You seem to be engaging in fallacious argumentation.

 

I know it's a soft spot, but I only bring up his ties to the Nazi youth becase he does have so much say over so many lives.

 

Which is a red herring-he was required to join just like thousand of other German children. *rolleyes*

 

. . . that particular christian organization.

 

The Nazis were not a Christian orginization. *rolleyes*

 

Why should you entrust him with so much power? It would seem wiser to choose someone else who was qualified, without such a blemish on his record.

 

According to the Bible every person has a blemish on their record. I have a feeling that if another cardinal would have been elected pope you'd try to find flaws and try to discredit him too.

 

Yes. I am saying he should have been barred because of it.

 

Your debating tactics are extremely weak and not found in rational logic. BTW, if you think the current pope's Nazi Youth record is bad just read a biography of Pope Alexander VI.

 

Why does the catholic church need to give him so much power at all? The rules should already be in place, if they were given by God himself, why do we need someone around to 'tweak' them at all?

 

LOL What power? You seem to think that we are living in the Rennaissance period where popes (some of whom were murderers, philanderers, etc.) really had a lot of secular power over various monarchs of Europe. Since you seem to be confused on what year we are living in let me give you a Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008

 

What exactly gives him that right? Jesus left Peter in charge, but I don't recall him giving the man permission to screw around with the rules. My understanding is he was just there to keep things stable and running.

 

Here's what Catholic Answers say: http://www.catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp

 

Where did he get off deciding he had the power to speak for God?

 

Again Catholic Answers: http://www.catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp

 

Also, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/index/s.htm#Supreme%20Pontiff

Look under Supreme Pontiff to see what the Vativan actually teaches about the role of the pope.

 

This just seems like a bad idea on so many levels. Especially given the past history of the current Pope. A safer choice would have been prudent, especially considering the strain science is putting on the church now. It seems to be just another issue people like me can pick at.

 

You can pick at this all you want, but all you are doing is engaging in numerous logical fallacies and are going on unprooven assumptions.

[Grandpa Harley]

This foreigner says it about the President of the US AND the Pope... I said it about the previous pope... in fact every pope other than JP I and John XXIII... and John XXIII was a bit of a twat...

[Jincks013]

Is he gone yet? I really need to bring my children out of hiding..

[Deva]

You can pick at this all you want, but all you are doing is engaging in numerous logical fallacies and are going on unprooven assumptions.

 

That was quite a spirited defense of the pope. Maybe there are some fallacies and assumptions, but my question to you, Diane, is-- are you now giving in to your "tendency toward Roman Catholicism" ?

[DarthOkkata]

Diplomacy.

 

 

Sending out a letter, ordering his minions to hide child molesters was pretty close to an act of war.

 

Foreigners probably say the same thing about the Presidency of the United States, but it doesn't make it true.

 

Maybe, but the fact that someone might say the same thing about the President of the United States doesn't make it not true either. There is no reason to grant him such influence. He's a crazy old man in a stupid hat, with a bad background.

 

Because the Conclave elected him Pope. Vatican City is approximately 110 acres and has a population around 800-the city-state does not encompass the world.

 

No, but they have lots of franchise locations the world over! I still fail to see how one religion thinking itself important enough to warrant it's own nation, when no others do, isn't rather arrogant.

 

You're trying to be manipulative here, as if I was just talking about the people who live in the Vatican.

 

Really? Do you realize that many Roman Catholics world-wide totally disregard the moral teachings of their church? Ask American RC if they use birth control. Go to Brazil and ask the RCs down there about the other religion they practice called Santeria.

 

 

And the fact that there are a lot of bad catholics makes the problem go away how? This man can literally decide to make the millions of loyal catholics the world over, wear stupid hats and tinfoil pants on the second Tuesday of every month.

 

The problem here is that a great deal of the catholics would do it, and decry and condemn those who did not. This is how the church gets good people to do bad things. Perhaps the example is a bit extreme, but the point is valid.

 

You seem to be engaging in fallacious argumentation.

 

 

Which is a red herring-he was required to join just like thousand of other German children. *rolleyes*

 

 

I don't trust your judgment of that matter. I've got no idea how thrilled or displeased he was about it either way, and neither do you. A very important reason a more qualified and safer pontiff should have been appointed, even without the issues of his child molester protection racket.

 

It is better to err on the side of caution.

 

 

The Nazis were not a Christian orginization. *rolleyes*

 

 

Yes they were, and I can prove it.

 

With the full support of the Pope at the time no less. Go back and read your history books again. Hitler was not an atheist, he was given a christan education, the Swastica is an old christian symbol used extensively during the crusades, the entire reasoning behind the 'final solution' was the fact that the Jews killed the lord and savior.

 

You've been woefully misinformed. If the Nazi's weren't christians, then neither were the Inquisitors in Spain. The German words, "Gott Mit Uns" means 'God With Us' and appeared on many Nazi soldiers belt buckles during WWII. They also celebrated Christmas, watch the History channel some time, and you can see video of this exclusively christian practice in Nazi Germany.

 

If that's not good enough, I can just quote Hitler for a while:

 

"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.." - Adolf Hitler

 

My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.... When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.

 

-Adolf Hitler

 

Just as the Jew could once incite the mob of Jerusalem against Christ, so today he must succeed in inciting folk who have been duped into madness to attack those who, God's truth! seek to deal with this people in utter honesty and sincerity.

 

-Adolf Hitler

 

No, it is not we that have deserted Christianity, it is those who came before us who deserted Christianity. We have only carried through a clear division between politics which have to do with terrestrial things, and religion, which must concern itself with the celestial sphere. There has been no interference with the doctrine (Lehre ) of the Confessions or with their religious freedom (Bekenntnisfreiheit ), nor will there be any such interference. On the contrary the State protects religion, though always on the one condition that religion will not be used as a cover for political ends....

 

National Socialism neither opposes the Church nor is it anti-religious, but on the contrary it stands on the ground of a real Christianity.... For their interests cannot fail to coincide with ours alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against a Bolshevist culture, against atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for a consciousness of a community in our national life... These are not anti-Christian, these are Christian principles! And I believe that if we should fail to follow these principles then we should to be able to point to our successes, for the result of our political battle is surely not unblest by God.

 

-Adolf Hitler

 

I can provide lots more evidence of this, there were lots and lots of speeches. Christian values was one of his favorite topics.

 

 

According to the Bible every person has a blemish on their record. I have a feeling that if another cardinal would have been elected pope you'd try to find flaws and try to discredit him too.

 

Well, I have little to no reason to believe there is anything factual in the bible at all. In fact, it's pretty easy to debunk most of the Bible, especially the old testament. It also begs the question of how an omnipotent, omnipresent, perfect being, would change his mind and personality as if he'd started taking anti depressants and developed a huge weed habit.

If he changes at all, then he's not really perfect then is he? After all, why would a perfect being need to change?

 

Your debating tactics are extremely weak and not found in rational logic. BTW, if you think the current pope's Nazi Youth record is bad just read a biography of Pope Alexander VI.

 

Loss of points for not providing evidence to support that my arguments are indeed 'irrational arguments'. I don't see how someone else being a bigger asshole makes the new guy any less of one. That's just irrelevant.

 

Besides, you should check back on recent history, as you seem to have forgotten about Pius XII.

 

LOL What power? You seem to think that we are living in the Rennaissance period where popes (some of whom were murderers, philanderers, etc.) really had a lot of secular power over various monarchs of Europe. Since you seem to be confused on what year we are living in let me give you a Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008

 

 

Well, I did mention that he became a much nicer guy after they took his army away. That still leaves you confused on the amount of direct influence he has on the behavior of a dangerously large group of delusional, historically very agreeable, easily controlled and manipulated people.

 

The last thing I'd want to see is another christian ruled empire. They always suck historically, and I don't see why christians imagine it would be any different now. It's always a bad thing. Just look back at when they do have power, Dark Ages, the Inquisition, the extermination of the American Natives, and the Nazi Party.

 

Great resume! Seems to happen every time as well! Wow, give me more of that man!

 

I'm not the one who has too much bias to not fail at simple pattern recognition.

 

I used to be catholic, so I'll ignore the stuff I've read many times in the past. It's pretty much irrelevant, and you seem to have missed the point. Selective evil, moral hypocrisy, and all that.

 

You can pick at this all you want, but all you are doing is engaging in numerous logical fallacies and are going on unprooven assumptions.

 

Please note that I have provided proof of my claims, and you've yet to point out my 'illogical fallacies' or 'unproven assumptions'. I'd like to know where they are, and why you went cherry picking for the worst sounding, least serious portions of my little rant?

 

Seems like another apologist trying to twist things in their favor by misquoting, pretending to misunderstand the actual point, and taking things out of context.

 

Go ahead and prove me wrong then, otherwise you're just puffing your chest out and bluffing. You seem to have bought into the whole 'they weren't christians, because they were too evil,' line of BS. I can give multiple examples of people being evil -because- they were christian and driven by faith. Scroll up if you've forgotten already, there's a short list that can easily be expanded just a bit further up. Maybe not all of them were driven by faith, but the masses of fearful, well brainwashed, and carefully cultivated ignorant masses that facilitated such evil certainly were.

 

I've yet to see any proof of someone being evil, just because they're atheist. An Atheist might be an evil prick, but it's not the Atheism that motivates them. Witch Hanging, burning, the torture and murder of the Inquisition, and assorted other atrocities can be directly attributed to their wonderful commodity of 'faith', or as I like to call believing in something for no good reason, 'gullibility'.

 

Don't be a confused Jew, just say 'NO!' to Jesus.

[Grandpa Harley]

TBH, invoking the bible as anything like an authority seems pretty weak to me...

 

The bottom line - the vile old hypocrite ran an underground rail road for kiddie fiddlers, using a piece of John XXIII's misguided attempt to protect clergy and their adult sexual partners from local reprisals following some ugly stuff in some staunchly catholic countries (that resulted in a few deaths of the women involved)

 

Voldemort-Palapatine I took that 'guideline' and expanded it to cover RCC kiddie fiddling on a Factory scale... this man now is the 'moral' leader of the largest single 'Christian' group in the world. Basically, he got elected since he knows where the bodies are buried, and there are enough people to remember what happens when you get an 'honest' Pope on the Throne of Peter... he starts asking to look over the books.

 

For further reading

The Vicars of Christ - Peter De Rosa

 

In God's Name - David Yallop

 

 

 

For the record, my personal favourite Pope EVER is Julius II - spent a lot of time at war, fathered nearly 200 bastard children (120 sons who were 'Cardinals'), intimidated Michaelangelo into painting the Sistine Chapel, and by the time of his death was so riddled with Syph he couldn't remove his armour without bits dropping off and attracting flies. If he'd lived another three weeks he'd have given France and her dependencies to his 'Good, Noble, and Faithful Servant, Henry Tudor [Henry VIII] of England'...

[L.B.]

Um, hey BaylorBear, I have to ask. You mentioned that there are so many catholics who refuse to follow the pope's teachings. If that's so, then why in the world are you defending the leader of a religion that can't even get its adherents to abide by their supreme pontiff's decrees?

 

Really, now. Is there a reason to keep sticking up for the RCC as an organization when it's obvious that their medieval stranglehold on the illiterate peons of the world is long over?

 

GH said it best. This fucker got elected because he knows enough to keep his trap shut. People that ask too many questions about an organization like the RCC get quieted QUICK. Romero, anyone? Oh, you can make assertions about how the church has only silenced theologians or what have you, but I am positive that JPI died at the hand of assassins, JPII's agonizing demise was white-washed into a noble struggle and final farewell, and all this because there are power brokers behind the scenes who don't want their positions of authority and wealth threatened. This is exactly why Benedict-Arnold-Ratburger was not and will not be touched by any civil authorities for his complicity in matters immoral. Touched by an altar-boy or two, however...