George Carey is a prick

[Wij]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-step-to--third-reich-says-carey-8202954.html

Discuss...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well i think...thre's a...th...

Nope, got nothing.

 

[Gwadien]

Well i think...thre's a...th...

Nope, got nothing.

FUCKING REALLY?!

The guy's a prick, I don't understand why people can't just allow other people to be happy.

 

[soze]

I don't agree with the Nazi thing or that Gay Marriage is bad. But I do think the lack of respect shown to someone with a different view on this matter is way over the top. If you want to say everyone can decide if they are Gay or Straight or if they love buildings then you also need to allow people to feel how they want to feel about it. Everyone just needs to butt out of everyone elses life a bit.

 

[Scouse]

It's very much the tyranny of the majority, so in many ways he has a point.

Unfortunately for him, christianity has had it's time and been shown wanting, so, although "they've come for the christians" I'm still turning a blind eye on this one.

 

[Wij]

I don't recall Jews in nazi germany demanding the states laws should be based on their religion. I also haven't seen anyone marking out Christians with little badges. In fact many of them seem quite keen to do that themselves.

Fucking idiot.

 

[Tom]

I think with statements like this, the church is demonstrating that it has no moral authority and therefore no place in the House of Lords.

 

[Scouse]

Fucking idiot.

I hope you're referring to him

What I meant was he's got a point about intolerance. We are increasingly intolerant of christian viewpoints - which is true. In fact, many are dismissed out of hand - which isn't necessarily a good thing.

However, I see no middle-ground on the "marriage" thing. Culturally people still feel the need to get married and we've decided as a society that there can be no barriers based on people's sexual orientation. There's a fundamental clash here that's unresolvable.

By definition the act of the state taking ownership and changing through law what was previously a "church-owned" institution and ruleset is, technically, persecution of that particular set of beliefs. But then, as I've stated, christianity has had it's shot, so I lack sympathy for it.

The point he's making is one of intolerance. But the church is intolerant of same sex marriage, so whaddaya do...


...personally, I think it's a fucking stupid idea to get married. What's the point?


Edit: Also, Carey's probably actually "preaching to the converted". Perhaps he's trying to galvanise their mindsets by stoking a persecution complex. He knows the church is on its way out so he's attempting to turn what he's got left to a more extreme viewpoint.

If god-botherers feel persecuted they're more likely to flock together in tight-knit groups and hate the world around them. It locks in donations at sunday service

 

[old.Tohtori]

They should create a marriage system that has nothing to do with the church marriage system and call it something else.

Oh wait, you -can- get married without church involvement

 

[Wij]

I hope you're referring to him

Of course I was. Your idiocy is already established fact round here

Anyway the problem is that he's trying to claim that the church has a special say on marriage when marriage was in fact around a long time before Christianity. The laws in question are for the state institution of marriage not the Christian one. Therefore he should butt out unless he thinks Christians have the right to determine how everyone else lives. Isn't that the kind of behaviour we rightly chastise Islamists for?

Also, the third reich? Wtffddfdfffffff??

 

[Scouse]

he's trying to claim that the church has a special say on marriage

I went to a christening this weekend. The particular (catholic) god-bother in question laid claim to the sunlight that was streaming in through the church doors - it was apparently not the sun on a, luckily, nice day - it was the baby jebus's magnificence shining through - a "blessing" for their children.

Then he told us all that if we weren't christened we were going to hell. The cunt

Isn't that the kind of behaviour we rightly chastise Islamists for?

Yes. Exactly the same shit. As religious institutions they're effectively indistinguishable from one another. They just have a different brand of total and utter bullshit to sell.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Then he told us all that if we weren't christened we were going to hell. The cunt

Surely that shouldn't bother you though, since there is no hell?

 

[Scouse]

Surely that shouldn't bother you though, since there is no hell?

Of course. I'm not bothered by the fact that there's no hell. I'm angered that he genuinely thinks some people deserve eternal torture, eternal torture that he believes in. He didn't infer that - he was direct.

He's no different from the Nazi who thinks Jews deserve to burn for their ideas.

That sort of person - a religious one - makes me angry.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well if there IS a hell, every single person on this planet deserves it

But yeah i get the point why you thought it was angering, even if it has a silly side to it.

 

[Wij]

Jeez - get a room you two

 

[old.Tohtori]

We have; The Front Room

 

[Wij]

This room requires you two to bicker, not nuzzle each others' earlobes and unzip flies

 

[DaGaffer]

Surely that shouldn't bother you though, since there is no hell?

It bothers me if there are little kids who hear that drivel and then you have to explain to them that no, Daddy isn't going to burn and the man in the dress needs to go on the naughty step (and get a punch in the face).

 

[Scouse]

It bothers me if there are little kids who hear that drivel and then you have to explain to them that no, Daddy isn't going to burn and the man in the dress needs to go on the naughty step (and get a punch in the face).

Agreed. My missus described what he was saying as "terrifying".

It certainly would be to the kids.

To quote a busy thread title, "The Catholic Church: Child Abuser"

 

[old.Tohtori]

Then it's the parents responsibility to say that to -their- children, leave the kids at home and butt out of other peoples parenting

 

[Scouse]

Then it's the parents responsibility to say that to -their- children, leave the kids at home and butt out of other peoples parenting

If you know kids are being abused, and that their parents are unwittingly colluding in it, should you leave well enough alone?

 

[old.Tohtori]

No, but telling people will burn in hell is more akin to santa claus believing or not, or some other kid in school saying there's a big giant testicle monster living in earths crust that will eat all humans.

 

[Tom]

I went to a Christian indoctrination ceremony this weekend.

FTFY.

 

[DaGaffer]

No, but telling people will burn in hell is more akin to santa claus believing or not, or some other kid in school saying there's a big giant testicle monster living in earths crust that will eat all humans.

Toht, ask a four year old if they believe in Santa. The answer will be pretty emphatic from most of them. Tell them Daddy's going to burn because he doesn't go to mass on Sunday and they're going to believe that too. They have no frame of reference to disbelieve you. This is where the Jesuit saying "give me the child until the age of six and I'll give you the man" comes from. Yes, some people break their conditioning, but sadly the vast majority of humanity don't, as is self-evident just by looking around. So if I go to a christening, to support the parents in their happy day of nonsense, I don't expect the Priest to scare the shit out my child (NB. Priests aren't supposed to talk about Hell any more). Now, I could stick to my principles and not allow my kids to darken the door of the church in the first place, but that's a. a bit boorish (although it would be my natural inclination), and b. my missus would kick my arse (which overrules my inclination towards a.).

 

[soze]

I think it should be illegal for a child to go to any regular religious events. Christening, Easter and Christmas Mass ok. Indoctrinating your child to believe the same as you by making them go to a Church or Mosque x times a week is brainwashing. Until a kid is 13 - 14 and decides they want to know more about religion they should not be allowed.

 

[old.Tohtori]

But that's what priests do, scare the sh*t out of people with hell. You have to prepare your kid for it, by whatever means you think is appropriate, or live with it and do damage control. The kids will get a lot more of those scares in their life. Or perhaps ask your friends who are organizing it about the topics the priest is handling.

Parents are ultimately responsible for what their kids take in and not, be it with games they play, limitations to their routines, correcting of madmen ravings. All part of it and you can't protect them from it all.

Aaaanyway, on the topic at hand;

As said earlier, they should seperate judge weddings from church weddings and be done with it. No gays in church weddings if the church doesn't want them and gays get to get hitched if they choose that particular hell path

 

[Gwadien]

Everyone scares the shit out of everyone, that's just a matter of life, but scaring someone into submission like that is so dumb.

I went to a normal primary school, but the head was a fanatical Christian, he made us sing hymns etc, but carefully edited them, so there was no obvious religious significance, Yes, the moral lessons etc were important, but it was so blatant what he was doing, and if anything, it makes me dislike religion even more.

the Catholic church has been exposed as being a scandal in the last 50 years or so, for obvious reasons, I don't like religion, I don't support religion, I do not want it to stay around, but, I will appreciate someone's needs to have faith in something, and when that person is depressed all the time, simply because they are restricted by their religion to come out, I beg the question; how dare you abuse these children then turn around and say, we do not accept homosexuality.

The Church, Catholic or Protestant should adapt with the times, move on, get old Lizzie to have a word for gods sake, she's the head, she actually still has a voice there, don't say 'Oh it's in the 10 commandments' Because so was divorce, so was cheating, yet there are many many 'good Christians' who have broken many of these rules.

 

[Wij]

As said earlier, they should seperate judge weddings from church weddings and be done with it. No gays in church weddings if the church doesn't want them and gays get to get hitched if they choose that particular hell path

That's what they are proposing. Our ex archbish though thinks he should be able to mandate state marriage as well as church marriage and those who disagree with him are nazis.

Like I said, prick.

 

[Lamp]

The Nazis had one great thing going for them: awesome uniforms. Still hasn't been a uniform since that inspires such power & fear as the SS black. I digress.

But +1, yeah, he's talking out of his anointed anus.

 

[opticle]

Free speech right ?

I understand when they are reluctant to give up "religious marriage" - that is their's and we can't exactly re-write beliefs. That's their choice and religion - provided they aren't forcing it on others or leading to other people suffering (lol@the past). But as I understand it, this legalisation of gay marriage has nothing to do with the "religious" institution of church. Therefore I don't really understand why their say is particularly important or relevant.
(Legal marriage as in giving it full legal rights as per heterosexual marriage, as "civil partnerships" didn't carry the full status legally as marriage does)

Fair enough, they have their views, that's the end of it. I don't understand why it keeps coming up over and over again.

Maybe if we called it something other than "marriage" they'd stfu.