The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Pope Benedict's recent mass in Paris, oh gimme a break.

1356

Posts

  • MulysaSemproniusMulysaSempronius but also susie nyRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »

    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.
    The betterment of mankind can include things beyond just feeding people.

    MulysaSempronius on
    If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    So, you can teach that evolution occurs in your school, have an official church position that evolution was how mankind came into being, but be anti-evolution because you mention that God created the soul.

    Actually, unless you drink the Salvation Cool-aid, we have not established that the catholic position is "Woo evolution" in the scientific sense. In other words, the scientific sense is one that does not involve God. If you are involving a creator or a guiding hand, you are not teaching scientific evolution.

    MikeMan on
  • captainzmancaptainzman Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.

    But those artifacts have cultural, historical and religious meaning to them, and Catholics around the world. So no, it's not that simple.

    Oh wow that's awesome! I didn't realize "cultural, historical and religious meaning" trumped someone else's ability to fucking feed themselves and raise themselves out of poverty and not die of AIDS in some New Delhi ditch!

    The two are not mutually exclusive.

    captainzman on
  • AntihippyAntihippy Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Antihippy wrote: »
    ?

    You could also put that same argument for the insane US defense budget. Or countless other things.

    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.

    I did not realize that the Catholic Church was devoted to the betterment of mankind as well.

    Organized religions are generally devoted to the betterment of themselves and their image as far as my experience goes.

    Antihippy on
    10454_nujabes2.pngPSN: Antiwhippy
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Man, I think everyone can admit that the entire room made of gold housed inside a gigantic diamond guarded by gold-plated Swiss Guards is a little ostentatious.

    I'm just saying maybe they hang onto the finger-and-bodypart relics and sell a few of their more gold-based works.

    Edit: Honestly, after reading "A Canticle for Leibowitz" I'm more concerned about either enlarging the Vatican's library, or burning it down.

    durandal4532 on
    We're all in this together
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »

    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.
    The betterment of mankind can include things beyond just feeding people.

    I'm sure the joy Random Poverty Stricken Muslim X gets when he thinks of how awesome it is that the Church has all those artifacts undoes the torment he experiences every day living in war-torn Afghanistan.

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Antihippy wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Antihippy wrote: »
    ?

    You could also put that same argument for the insane US defense budget. Or countless other things.

    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.

    I did not realize that the Catholic Church was devoted to the betterment of mankind as well.

    Organized religions are generally devoted to the betterment of themselves and their image as far as my experience goes.

    Well of course they are, but that's not what they'd want you to believe. Charity is one of the highest and most virtuous acts according to Jesus and also the Catholic church.

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.

    But those artifacts have cultural, historical and religious meaning to them, and Catholics around the world. So no, it's not that simple.

    Oh wow that's awesome! I didn't realize "cultural, historical and religious meaning" trumped someone else's ability to fucking feed themselves and raise themselves out of poverty and not die of AIDS in some New Delhi ditch!

    The two are not mutually exclusive.

    Nor are they of equal importance.

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I am going to eat lunch. I will be back later.

    MikeMan on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »

    According to that link, the Church position in 2004 was that it had no position.

    Benedict XVI, more recently, has stated that evolution explains the physical realm, but cannot explain those things apart from the physical realm. And if you want to get into calling that not science, then we really are just having an atheism thread and I'll leave, because that's probably the most progressive stance any faith has (or can) take on this issue.

    Salvation122 on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Moreover, there's absolutely no compelling reason to do so. The Church is not, to the best of my knowledge, prevented from doing missionary and charity work due to lack of funds.

    Any amount of missionary work they could do would be increased by an amount X should they sell off X amount of their possessions.

    Are people still dying in poverty around the world? Yeah? Then there's still room for them to donate more money to charity, isn't there?

    Most of the places where people are still in poverty have this nasty tendancy to kill the missionaries.

    Salvation122 on
  • captainzmancaptainzman Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Moreover, there's absolutely no compelling reason to do so. The Church is not, to the best of my knowledge, prevented from doing missionary and charity work due to lack of funds.

    Any amount of missionary work they could do would be increased by an amount X should they sell off X amount of their possessions.

    Are people still dying in poverty around the world? Yeah? Then there's still room for them to donate more money to charity, isn't there?

    I recognize (and sympathize) where you're coming from, but I just don't like the all or nothing position.From a strictly utilitarian position it makes sense, but the Roman Catholic Church doesn't think that way.

    I mean, I have obligations to give to charity and fix the world too (and probably more than I have done so already), but I'm not living in the streets because of it.

    captainzman on
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »

    According to that link, the Church position in 2004 was that it had no position.

    Benedict XVI, more recently, has stated that evolution explains the physical realm, but cannot explain those things apart from the physical realm. And if you want to get into calling that not science, then we really are just having an atheism thread and I'll leave, because that's probably the most progressive stance any faith has (or can) take on this issue.

    Oh, agreed. The Catholics have always had a contradiction of being very very conservative and yet usually science-friendly.

    durandal4532 on
    We're all in this together
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2008
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.

    He says as he roams around in his expensive customized car, his bling, and then returns to his giant god damn city state castle back in Italy.

    Love how the highest ranking Catholic in the world, who presides over a facet of Christianity that forced people to bribe them to rid themselves of guilt, can even remotely assume that "greed" is a pagan institution.

    The car is required, the bling is traditional, and Vatican City is not really all that big.:P

    I question a man who puts all of his faith in God while standing behind bullet proof glass.

    "HA HA! I have God on my side. You can not harm me!"
    Oh, agreed. The Catholics have always had a contradiction of being very very conservative and yet usually science-friendly.

    It's not a contradiction. I'm a Christian and believe in evolution. I look at all of these 4000 Year believers and just shake my head in disbelief. They have faith in God to create man, but not enough faith in God to create a complex, naturally occurring system of events that results in man. Like, God's too stupid to think of that or something.

    Sheep on
  • MulysaSemproniusMulysaSempronius but also susie nyRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    So, you can teach that evolution occurs in your school, have an official church position that evolution was how mankind came into being, but be anti-evolution because you mention that God created the soul.

    Actually, unless you drink the Salvation Cool-aid, we have not established that the catholic position is "Woo evolution" in the scientific sense. In other words, the scientific sense is one that does not involve God. If you are involving a creator or a guiding hand, you are not teaching scientific evolution.
    The church is not going in and saying that the science behind evolution is flawed, or that it cannot be looked at in a scientific way because it contradicts religious teachings. They haven't been the best at this in the past, but they are now coming around to the fact that religion and science do not need to be mutually exclusive. Maybe you think they are, but I have a different opinion.

    MulysaSempronius on
    If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Sheep wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.

    He says as he roams around in his expensive customized car, his bling, and then returns to his giant god damn city state castle back in Italy.

    Love how the highest ranking Catholic in the world, who presides over a facet of Christianity that forced people to bribe them to rid themselves of guilt, can even remotely assume that "greed" is a pagan institution.

    The car is required, the bling is traditional, and Vatican City is not really all that big.:P

    I question a man who puts all of his faith in God while standing behind bullet proof glass.

    "HA HA! I have God on my side. You can not harm me!"

    God helps those who helps themselves. Having faith doesn't mean you don't take reasonable precautions.

    Salvation122 on
  • NeadenNeaden Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Man, can't we have one single thread on religion that doesn't boil down to "olol atheism"? Just one?
    The thing that some people here really don't seem to get is the reason that these are priceless relics is because they have extreme religious significance. They aren't just some random asset the church picked up at some point. And since all of these things have been blessed, the Church cannot actually sell them according to Canon law, any more then I could sell my rosary.
    Honestly though, the Pope says that people are becoming to fixated on possessions. Does anyone actually really dispute that? Are you all just so eager to attack religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular that you have to spin and twist everything that is said on the subject so we can have the same pointless and repetitive argument over and over and over again?

    Neaden on
  • AntihippyAntihippy Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Antihippy wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Antihippy wrote: »
    ?

    You could also put that same argument for the insane US defense budget. Or countless other things.

    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.

    I did not realize that the Catholic Church was devoted to the betterment of mankind as well.

    Organized religions are generally devoted to the betterment of themselves and their image as far as my experience goes.

    Well of course they are, but that's not what they'd want you to believe. Charity is one of the highest and most virtuous acts according to Jesus and also the Catholic church.

    I was just wondering why you were so vehement at the Vatican trying to keep things that they value culturally.

    Charity is one thing, but keeping the heritage of their culture is another thing entirely.

    Antihippy on
    10454_nujabes2.pngPSN: Antiwhippy
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »

    According to that link, the Church position in 2004 was that it had no position.

    Benedict XVI, more recently, has stated that evolution explains the physical realm, but cannot explain those things apart from the physical realm. And if you want to get into calling that not science, then we really are just having an atheism thread and I'll leave, because that's probably the most progressive stance any faith has (or can) take on this issue.

    I have already said it is a progressive stance, and I have already applauded it for being the best of any possible religious worlds, evolutionarily speaking.

    It's not evolution, though. Sorry. Feel free to leave the thread if that offends you or whatever. Just the way things are, though. You wanna be scientific, don't involve God. Or at least render him completely impotent.

    MikeMan on
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2008
    Sheep wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.

    He says as he roams around in his expensive customized car, his bling, and then returns to his giant god damn city state castle back in Italy.

    Love how the highest ranking Catholic in the world, who presides over a facet of Christianity that forced people to bribe them to rid themselves of guilt, can even remotely assume that "greed" is a pagan institution.

    The car is required, the bling is traditional, and Vatican City is not really all that big.:P

    I question a man who puts all of his faith in God while standing behind bullet proof glass.

    "HA HA! I have God on my side. You can not harm me!"

    God helps those who helps themselves. Having faith doesn't mean you don't take reasonable precautions.

    I know. I'm just being a prick. :P

    Sheep on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Neaden wrote: »
    Man, can't we have one single thread on religion that doesn't boil down to "olol atheism"? Just one?
    The thing that some people here really don't seem to get is the reason that these are priceless relics is because they have extreme religious significance. They aren't just some random asset the church picked up at some point. And since all of these things have been blessed, the Church cannot actually sell them according to Canon law, any more then I could sell my rosary.
    Honestly though, the Pope says that people are becoming to fixated on possessions. Does anyone actually really dispute that? Are you all just so eager to attack religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular that you have to spin and twist everything that is said on the subject so we can have the same pointless and repetitive argument over and over and over again?

    Amazing.

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Antihippy wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Antihippy wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Antihippy wrote: »
    ?

    You could also put that same argument for the insane US defense budget. Or countless other things.

    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.

    I did not realize that the Catholic Church was devoted to the betterment of mankind as well.

    Organized religions are generally devoted to the betterment of themselves and their image as far as my experience goes.

    Well of course they are, but that's not what they'd want you to believe. Charity is one of the highest and most virtuous acts according to Jesus and also the Catholic church.

    I was just wondering why you were so vehement at the Vatican trying to keep things that they value culturally.

    Charity is one thing, but keeping the heritage of their culture is another thing entirely.

    So you're saying these items deserve to be hoarded by the church and that ownership is worth more than the lives of people who are dying of diseases in abject poverty around the world?

    I'm just trying to get this straight.

    MikeMan on
  • NeadenNeaden Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Neaden wrote: »
    Man, can't we have one single thread on religion that doesn't boil down to "olol atheism"? Just one?
    The thing that some people here really don't seem to get is the reason that these are priceless relics is because they have extreme religious significance. They aren't just some random asset the church picked up at some point. And since all of these things have been blessed, the Church cannot actually sell them according to Canon law, any more then I could sell my rosary.
    Honestly though, the Pope says that people are becoming to fixated on possessions. Does anyone actually really dispute that? Are you all just so eager to attack religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular that you have to spin and twist everything that is said on the subject so we can have the same pointless and repetitive argument over and over and over again?

    Amazing.

    OK, let me give you an example. I have a picture I really like, it has some extremely positive memories attached to it, so that picture is very valuable to me. I also have a computer, which is really expensive and has no real emotional attachment to, but I still also value. Can you see how I value those two things in different ways? Can you see how this applies to relics?
    Edit: Are you aware that most of the problems going on in the world right now cannot really be solved by money? I mean, you use Afghanistan as an example. Do you really think we can really help at this point by sending them money?

    Neaden on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Neaden wrote: »
    OK, let me give you an example. I have a picture I really like, it has some extremely positive memories attached to it, so that picture is very valuable to me. I also have a computer, which is really expensive and has no real emotional attachment to, but I still also value. Can you see how I value those two things in different ways? Can you see how this applies to relics?

    If you claimed to devote your life to improving the quality of life for others, as one of your highest goals and aspirations, you should definitely sell whatever you can, immediately move to another country, and improve other people's lives.

    You don't make that claim, so far as I know, so YOU are not being inconsistent.

    The catholic church does and also desires to hoard these items.

    Plus it's not like they'd be vanishing. They'd go into museums, sometimes just down the street, where millions more would be able to enjoy them. I understand the church rents the items out to museums but it still retains ownership of them instead of selling them and getting gobs of money which it could use for charitable purposes.

    MikeMan on
  • LibrarianThorneLibrarianThorne Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »

    According to that link, the Church position in 2004 was that it had no position.

    Benedict XVI, more recently, has stated that evolution explains the physical realm, but cannot explain those things apart from the physical realm. And if you want to get into calling that not science, then we really are just having an atheism thread and I'll leave, because that's probably the most progressive stance any faith has (or can) take on this issue.

    Oh, agreed. The Catholics have always had a contradiction of being very very conservative and yet usually science-friendly.

    Galileo says "sup?"

    But seriously, for the people attacking Catholicism for its stance on evolution, what the fuck more do you want? Catholic (fuck, Judeo-Christian) belief teaches that there is a spiritual world and a physical one. It's not contradictory to say that evolution explains one world and the bible the other. You can disagree, sure, but why don't you tell me about how much Sarah Palin is supporting that theory? Anyone? Right, because Catholicism has taken a stance that allows for the coexistance of religion and science and that's something people should, at the least, respect. Or would you prefer out and out hostility from the Catholic church on this issue?

    Also, in response to the pope-mobile crack, you can youtube the video of John Paul II getting shot. JP2 and Benedict are just not being idiots, though honestly I think Benedict needs it more because JP didn't look like Emperor Palpatine.

    Just to get this out there, I'm a lapsed Catholic. Mostly because the church's stance on single mothers is the single most idiotic thing I've ever heard espoused, and that's impressive considering their stance on homosexuality. I'm confident, though, that the church will reform to be more accepting because that's the trend, ever since the Vatican stopped having a standing army.

    LibrarianThorne on
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Neaden wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Neaden wrote: »
    Man, can't we have one single thread on religion that doesn't boil down to "olol atheism"? Just one?
    The thing that some people here really don't seem to get is the reason that these are priceless relics is because they have extreme religious significance. They aren't just some random asset the church picked up at some point. And since all of these things have been blessed, the Church cannot actually sell them according to Canon law, any more then I could sell my rosary.
    Honestly though, the Pope says that people are becoming to fixated on possessions. Does anyone actually really dispute that? Are you all just so eager to attack religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular that you have to spin and twist everything that is said on the subject so we can have the same pointless and repetitive argument over and over and over again?

    Amazing.

    OK, let me give you an example. I have a picture I really like, it has some extremely positive memories attached to it, so that picture is very valuable to me. I also have a computer, which is really expensive and has no real emotional attachment to, but I still also value. Can you see how I value those two things in different ways? Can you see how this applies to relics?
    Edit: Are you aware that most of the problems going on in the world right now cannot really be solved by money? I mean, you use Afghanistan as an example. Do you really think we can really help at this point by sending them money?

    Is the more pertinent point. I mean, if your sentimental picture was say, made of 3 tons of gold, it would probably have a reasonably high material value.

    durandal4532 on
    We're all in this together
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »

    According to that link, the Church position in 2004 was that it had no position.

    Benedict XVI, more recently, has stated that evolution explains the physical realm, but cannot explain those things apart from the physical realm. And if you want to get into calling that not science, then we really are just having an atheism thread and I'll leave, because that's probably the most progressive stance any faith has (or can) take on this issue.

    Oh, agreed. The Catholics have always had a contradiction of being very very conservative and yet usually science-friendly.

    Galileo says "sup?"

    But seriously, for the people attacking Catholicism for its stance on evolution, what the fuck more do you want? Catholic (fuck, Judeo-Christian) belief teaches that there is a spiritual world and a physical one. It's not contradictory to say that evolution explains one world and the bible the other. You can disagree, sure, but why don't you tell me about how much Sarah Palin is supporting that theory? Anyone? Right, because Catholicism has taken a stance that allows for the coexistance of religion and science and that's something people should, at the least, respect. Or would you prefer out and out hostility from the Catholic church on this issue?

    Also, in response to the pope-mobile crack, you can youtube the video of John Paul II getting shot. JP2 and Benedict are just not being idiots, though honestly I think Benedict needs it more because JP didn't look like Emperor Palpatine.

    Just to get this out there, I'm a lapsed Catholic. Mostly because the church's stance on single mothers is the single most idiotic thing I've ever heard espoused, and that's impressive considering their stance on homosexuality. I'm confident, though, that the church will reform to be more accepting because that's the trend, ever since the Vatican stopped having a standing army.

    Yeah, they'll reform, just in about 200 years. Just long enough to be behind the ball on the universal rights all countries expect of people then.

    MikeMan on
  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »

    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.
    The betterment of mankind can include things beyond just feeding people.

    I'm sure the joy Random Poverty Stricken Muslim X gets when he thinks of how awesome it is that the Church has all those artifacts undoes the torment he experiences every day living in war-torn Afghanistan.
    Actually, Muslims would probably respect that to the Catholics, those artifacts have deep religious and historical significance. They tend to be a pretty religious group themselves.

    If the Catholic Church had millions of dollars worth of stuff, but were doing nothing charitable, that wouldn't be right. However, they raise a shitload of money on a regular basis with which they do charitable work. The value of their artifacts in actual usable dollars pales in comparison to what they do spend on charity.

    Why don't you sell everything you own that has significance, but isn't essential to your survival?

    TubularLuggage on
  • NeadenNeaden Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Neaden wrote: »
    OK, let me give you an example. I have a picture I really like, it has some extremely positive memories attached to it, so that picture is very valuable to me. I also have a computer, which is really expensive and has no real emotional attachment to, but I still also value. Can you see how I value those two things in different ways? Can you see how this applies to relics?

    If you claimed to devote your life to improving the quality of life for others, as one of your highest goals and aspirations, you should definitely sell whatever you can, immediately move to another country, and improve other people's lives.

    You don't make that claim, so far as I know, so YOU are not being inconsistent.

    The catholic church does and also desires to hoard these items.

    Plus it's not like they'd be vanishing. They'd go into museums, sometimes just down the street, where millions more would be able to enjoy them. I understand the church rents the items out to museums but it still retains ownership of them instead of selling them and getting gobs of money which it could use for charitable purposes.
    The Church believes that the best thing to do is to save souls however. You reject the notion of Souls so do not think these relics are serving any purpose. The Church believes that they are serving an important purpose. Can you at least see how what you think is hypocrisy is actually just a fundamental disagreement over the nature of the universe? And how that is just maybe a little different?

    Neaden on
  • Ethan SmithEthan Smith Origin name: Beart4to Arlington, VARegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Man, why the fuck is the United States government keeping the Constitution around? It's just some old paper. Why don't they sell it I mean jesus christ?

    Ethan Smith on
  • captainzmancaptainzman Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Man, why the fuck is the United States government keeping the Constitution around? It's just some old paper. Why don't they sell it I mean jesus christ?

    It's not like we use it anymore.

    captainzman on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Man, why the fuck is the United States government keeping the Constitution around? It's just some old paper. Why don't they sell it I mean jesus christ?

    We are to busy worshiping it.

    Couscous on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Man, why the fuck is the United States government keeping the Constitution around? It's just some old paper. Why don't they sell it I mean jesus christ?
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.
    Why don't you sell everything you own that has significance, but isn't essential to your survival?

    I am not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.

    MikeMan on
  • CenoCeno pizza time Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Sending money wouldn't help. Because the people who would get the money are the people in the government, who keep it for themselves and tell the populace to go fuck themselves. And should any Christian (be it Catholic or otherwise) try to fly into the country to hand some poor guy a tenspot (whatever the hell good that would do), he'd likely be persecuted and killed.

    It should also be noted that many of these Muslim war-torn countries are war-torn because they keep using themselves to blow each other the fuck up.

    I am Catholic and while I can and do have issues with some of the statements made by the church, I do not think for a second that holding onto some 2000 year old relic is actively causing the starvation of anyone in Afghanistan or insert-country-here.

    Ceno on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Ceno wrote: »
    Sending money wouldn't help. Because the people who would get the money are the people in the government, who keep it for themselves and tell the populace to go fuck themselves. And should any Christian (be it Catholic or otherwise) try to fly into the country to hand some poor guy a tenspot (whatever the hell good that would do), he'd likely be persecuted and killed.

    It should also be noted that many of these Muslim war-torn countries are war-torn because they keep using themselves to blow each other the fuck up.

    I am Catholic and while I can and do have issues with some of the statements made by the church, I do not think for a second that holding onto some 2000 year old relic is actively causing the starvation of anyone in Afghanistan or insert-country-here.

    So all charity is pointless. Good to know.

    MikeMan on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Neaden wrote: »
    OK, let me give you an example. I have a picture I really like, it has some extremely positive memories attached to it, so that picture is very valuable to me. I also have a computer, which is really expensive and has no real emotional attachment to, but I still also value. Can you see how I value those two things in different ways? Can you see how this applies to relics?

    If you claimed to devote your life to improving the quality of life for others, as one of your highest goals and aspirations, you should definitely sell whatever you can, immediately move to another country, and improve other people's lives.

    You don't make that claim, so far as I know, so YOU are not being inconsistent.

    The catholic church does and also desires to hoard these items.

    Plus it's not like they'd be vanishing. They'd go into museums, sometimes just down the street, where millions more would be able to enjoy them. I understand the church rents the items out to museums but it still retains ownership of them instead of selling them and getting gobs of money which it could use for charitable purposes.

    Right, but the question is whether or not the "gobs of money" (and I suspect that you probably overestimate how much they'd bring in unless they sold, like, the entire Holy See) would make any practical difference in their ability to assist others. And since the Church does not (and cannot reasonably be expected to) offer direct financial aid in the same manner as nations, I very much doubt it would. Mission work is pretty cheap.

    Salvation122 on
  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Ceno wrote: »
    Sending money wouldn't help. Because the people who would get the money are the people in the government, who keep it for themselves and tell the populace to go fuck themselves. And should any Christian (be it Catholic or otherwise) try to fly into the country to hand some poor guy a tenspot (whatever the hell good that would do), he'd likely be persecuted and killed.

    It should also be noted that many of these Muslim war-torn countries are war-torn because they keep using themselves to blow each other the fuck up.

    I am Catholic and while I can and do have issues with some of the statements made by the church, I do not think for a second that holding onto some 2000 year old relic is actively causing the starvation of anyone in Afghanistan or insert-country-here.

    So all charity is pointless. Good to know.

    With the amount of skipping over points you can't counter, and generalizing the shit out of other points, I'm convinced that you're just being a dick for the sake of it.
    Sending money to a country where the corrupt government is just going to steal it DOESN'T do any good. That's not to say no charity of any kind does any good.

    TubularLuggage on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Neaden wrote: »
    OK, let me give you an example. I have a picture I really like, it has some extremely positive memories attached to it, so that picture is very valuable to me. I also have a computer, which is really expensive and has no real emotional attachment to, but I still also value. Can you see how I value those two things in different ways? Can you see how this applies to relics?

    If you claimed to devote your life to improving the quality of life for others, as one of your highest goals and aspirations, you should definitely sell whatever you can, immediately move to another country, and improve other people's lives.

    You don't make that claim, so far as I know, so YOU are not being inconsistent.

    The catholic church does and also desires to hoard these items.

    Plus it's not like they'd be vanishing. They'd go into museums, sometimes just down the street, where millions more would be able to enjoy them. I understand the church rents the items out to museums but it still retains ownership of them instead of selling them and getting gobs of money which it could use for charitable purposes.

    Right, but the question is whether or not the "gobs of money" (and I suspect that you probably overestimate how much they'd bring in unless they sold, like, the entire Holy See) would make any practical difference in their ability to assist others. And since the Church does not (and cannot reasonably be expected to) offer direct financial aid in the same manner as nations, I very much doubt it would. Mission work is pretty cheap.

    There is no actual reason that trumps other people's health and survival to keep those items. The apologetics in this thread are strange to me. The catholic church used to be the single most powerful force in Europe. Now that it's not it still is hoarding the money and items it obtained through conquests and purges from that time period, as well as other relics that it seized from nobility.

    It is holding on to those items through sheer inertia.

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Ceno wrote: »
    Sending money wouldn't help. Because the people who would get the money are the people in the government, who keep it for themselves and tell the populace to go fuck themselves. And should any Christian (be it Catholic or otherwise) try to fly into the country to hand some poor guy a tenspot (whatever the hell good that would do), he'd likely be persecuted and killed.

    It should also be noted that many of these Muslim war-torn countries are war-torn because they keep using themselves to blow each other the fuck up.

    I am Catholic and while I can and do have issues with some of the statements made by the church, I do not think for a second that holding onto some 2000 year old relic is actively causing the starvation of anyone in Afghanistan or insert-country-here.

    So all charity is pointless. Good to know.

    With the amount of skipping over points you can't counter, and generalizing the shit out of other points, I'm convinced that you're just being a dick for the sake of it.
    Sending money to a country where the corrupt government is just going to steal it DOESN'T do any good. That's not to say no charity of any kind does any good.

    Then why did Ceno bring it up as a counter? Obviously the money should be spent well. No one disputed that.

    He basically said "Sending money wouldn't help because it doesn't get to the people." Well, some money DOES get to the people and, obviously, that's where they money should be sent.

    I'm not being a dick for the sake of being a dick, and I am not skipping over posts.

    MikeMan on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Neaden wrote: »
    OK, let me give you an example. I have a picture I really like, it has some extremely positive memories attached to it, so that picture is very valuable to me. I also have a computer, which is really expensive and has no real emotional attachment to, but I still also value. Can you see how I value those two things in different ways? Can you see how this applies to relics?

    If you claimed to devote your life to improving the quality of life for others, as one of your highest goals and aspirations, you should definitely sell whatever you can, immediately move to another country, and improve other people's lives.

    You don't make that claim, so far as I know, so YOU are not being inconsistent.

    The catholic church does and also desires to hoard these items.

    Plus it's not like they'd be vanishing. They'd go into museums, sometimes just down the street, where millions more would be able to enjoy them. I understand the church rents the items out to museums but it still retains ownership of them instead of selling them and getting gobs of money which it could use for charitable purposes.

    Right, but the question is whether or not the "gobs of money" (and I suspect that you probably overestimate how much they'd bring in unless they sold, like, the entire Holy See) would make any practical difference in their ability to assist others. And since the Church does not (and cannot reasonably be expected to) offer direct financial aid in the same manner as nations, I very much doubt it would. Mission work is pretty cheap.

    There is no actual reason that trumps other people's health and survival to keep those items. The apologetics in this thread are strange to me. The catholic church used to be the single most powerful force in Europe. Now that it's not it still is hoarding the money and items it obtained through conquests and purges from that time period, as well as other relics that it seized from nobility.

    It is holding on to those items through sheer inertia.

    If they sold everything they had, how long do you think the income derived from those sales would last? And how much additional work would they be able to do? "It doesn't matter" is not a valid answer.

    Salvation122 on
Sign In or Register to comment.