News-Record.com

... yea, it's a good thing the lame stream media wasn't around during the Spanish Inquisition, we might hear all kinds of made up stories about torture. Everyone knows this was really just aggressive interogation needed to get at the truth.

I have my doubts as to whether or not the Pope having prefaced his remarks with a condemnation of prior acts undertaken in the name of Christianity would have tempered the reactions to his speech within the Muslim world, but since my opinion is unprovable I'll let the lte writer's comment stand without rebuttal.

I'm more concerned with whether or not the writer paraphrased and plagarized her last paragraph from on of my posts from day before yesterday.

If she's starting to think like me, she's in serious need of intensive therapy.

The letter writer has made some very good points. We all know that many evil things have been done in the name of religion. We must also remember that many good things are also done by truly religious people of God.

James, IIRC, the Vatican apologized a few years ago for it's involvment in the Spanish Inqusition.

A few hundred years to late, but still a recognition of the event.

For me, I think it's important to recall that religion-based violence is not just a Muslim problem, so much as it is a HUMAN problem. All religions have material in their beliefs that voilent people will happily use to justify using excessive violence against "the bad guys." And of course, even us atheists have a list of philosophical supports that members of our community can look to if they feel the desire to "get all medieval" on someone.

The solution? Hard to see a way to that -- so long as there are people who think that violence is a valid way to solve problems.

This discussion is very important. I am a Catholic and I agree with the letter writer. We need open and complete dialogue. Our collective Christian past has had an unfortunate mix of church and state and maybe at times some misdirected initiatives which were coercive and bloody. As I stated in an earlier letter, I'm not sure why he added this quote in the first place; I read his treatise and found it very scholarly and hard to understad in places. His argument did not, in my opinion, need that reference regarding Islam and forced conversion to support his point.

I partially agree that had he also added our unfortunate past christian violent history, that violent outbursts would still have taken place.
I'm not judging their response other than, their response from a Westerner's perspective is their violent response is unfortunate--but then we are in "bloody Iraq and Afghanistan" and God knows where else. I think for Islam , religion is not just a part of their life as maybe it is here, Islam is their life and it is sacred. We may not like that, but if I'm in the ball park, we need to take that into consideration.

I think that the Holy Father needs to bite the bullet on this one and apologize for what he said regardless of his good and scholarly intentions and see if that facilitates a smoother transition. Maybe he needs at this point he needs to walk the moral humble highground and not just apologize for the outcome. I say this with all due respect. We, all of us, need to be aware of the other(s) when we communicate, so that we can avoid what happened here. Everyone, every people have their own ethnic and theological frame of reference which may be different from ours--difference does'nt make anyone better or worse, just different. In conclusion, this is what I think "consideration regarding Diversity" is all about.

Yeah, I remember well my eighth grade history class and all the bombs made from clay that the crusaders would strap on their children and send them into a crowded market place where they would scream "long live Jeasus" before detonating the IED...

And, more recently, who can ignore the worldwide death toll and destruction to property brought about by fanatic Christians when a painting of Christ submerged in a jar of urine was put on display as 'art'?

This letter is an especially sloppy example of moral equivalence. Whatever happened in the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc.--and please don't overlook the absurd coding of Nazism as a form of Christian violence--the overwhelming majority of Christians have adapted to post-enlightenment liberal society and aren't reluctant to condemn explicitly violence undertaken in the name of Christianity. The opposite is true of Muslim culture. Where Islam is a majority religion, there is violence and (with a few exceptions) a disregard for human rights as understood by western liberalism. Christianity has adapted; Islam hasn't. If you want to compare Islam to Christianity 500 years ago, feel free; the comparison today is absurd. And lacking time machines, today is what counts.

"Yeah, I remember well my eighth grade history class and all the bombs made from clay that the crusaders would strap on their children and send them into a crowded market place where they would scream "long live Jeasus" before detonating the IED..."

Do you wake up in the morning wondering how you can plumb further into the depths of jackassery, or do you just wander aimlessly along and keep going down by random chance? I can't deny that watching your spectacle has some level of entertainment value, but the uncertainty of the question lends a bit of drama to the whole affair.

"This letter is an especially sloppy example of moral equivalence. Whatever happened in the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc.--and please don't overlook the absurd coding of Nazism as a form of Christian violence--the overwhelming majority of Christians have adapted to post-enlightenment liberal society and aren't reluctant to condemn explicitly violence undertaken in the name of Christianity."

Interesting that it took a movement like the "enlightenment" to help civilize Christianity. Also interesting is the fact that you'd not really need to take your time machine all that far back to find, let's say, the Catholic church utterly failing to stand in the way of Nazi atrocities in the 1930's. Partly because the Nazis were only doing things that the church had been urging consistently for centuries.

Now, whether Islam can be similarly civilized is a good question. With the decline of Western power over the past century and the ascendency of the Orient, one has to imagine the liklihood is diminishing.

nemo, you're breakin' my heart. Do you wake up in the morning and wonder how many different ways you can inform the public of your atheism? We got the message already.

When was the last time we saw a video of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson calling for the complete destruction of a group of people "wherever they are found"?

It takes more than a strech of the imagination to compare the crusades to the radical islamic fanatics of today, it takes a pc idiot. imo of course. Your mileage will vary on this, I'm sure.

Nemo,

Your personal attack against neocon was uncalled for. (last sentence of your 10:17 am post).

Neocon made a point that the past is the past and nothing can be done about it. It has been acknowledged and apologized for on many occasions. The only thing that can be changed is the present and future.

YOu may not agree with neocon's point or his wording, but that does not warrant a personal attack and personal insults.

I’m sure Muslims world wide will thank you for justifying the murder of a Catholic Nun by blaming the Pope. As for me, I feel the Pope did nothing to apologize for. Muslims will continue to look for excuses to kill, justification of these acts is just what they are hoping for.

How many muslim hospitals exist to serve non-muslims? How much food aid have they sent to countries that don't believe the way they do? How many schools have they set up to teach the children of their enemies? How many people have they served in a humanitarian way who don't believe like they do?

While there is no defending Christian violence against any race, there is a lot that Christians have done "for the least of their brothers" that put it head and shoulders above Islam when it comes to moral high ground.

While we're at it, nemo, substitute atheist form muslim in the first paragraph. The answer is the same.

i tend to agree with waj on this issue, he said " I feel the Pope did nothing to apologize for.". now if the rcc wants to be pc in every word the pope speaks, then they will need to do a better job of writting his speeches.
in phillipians, paul told that church to let their lives be worthy of the gospel and should be singleminded in their faith and also to not be frightened by your opponent, for this will send a clear omen to them of their own destruction, while providing proof of their salvation which comes from God.
if Jesus was worried about being pc and tippy toeing around tough issues, He could never have accomplished the mission His Father sent Him to complete.
when the pope kow tows to muslims it appears he has lack of conviction and faith (imo). there's my two cents worth, do i get any change ?

And, more recently, who can ignore the worldwide death toll and destruction to property brought about by fanatic Christians when a painting of Christ submerged in a jar of urine was put on display as 'art'?

neocon, it wasn't a painting, it was a photograph. It wasn't Christ, it was a cross. It wasn't submerged, it was floating.

phillipa,
i had heard about this controversial piece of art but never bothered to look at it. after your comment to neoCon i found articles on the internet with pics.
here is what i found : "Piss Christ is a controversial photograph by American photographer Andres Serrano. It depicts a small plastic crucifix supporting the body of Jesus Christ submerged in a glass of the artist's urine"
here is a link to the piece of art : http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/de/Piss_Christ_by_Serrano_Andres_%281987%29.jpg

i guess you will need to judge whether your description of the piece is accurate or not. to me it looks as neocon described. but i am not authority.

Both right. phillipa speaks of the work by Mapplethorp...

my ignornace was showing....sorry :-(

Now I have to admit to my ignorance, because I was unaware of the Serrano piece. To clarify, I've never looked at either, but I've heard about the Mapplethorp piece on the news etc. I think both of them are a waste of space, by the way. JMHO

hugh said: "James, IIRC, the Vatican apologized a few years ago for it's involvment in the Spanish Inqusition."

.. but my comment was aimed at the rhetoric claiming the that the MSM is really a LSM - may be off base .. maybe they simply call it as they see it, without any Democratic spin (a claim the Neo's revel in ... that's what I was referencing.

phillpa,
out of curiosity i went to the Mapplethorp site....a big mistake. how anyone can view some of what he does as art - it's nothing more than pornography. i suggest you not go there......

"Your personal attack against neocon was uncalled for."

I disagree. If he had made a point worth discussing, I would have happliy engaged him on it. Instead, he decided to act the jackass as usual. It was amusing the first few times he did it oh so long ago. But it's gone past tiresome and into the realm of space-eating twaddle. So yeah -- I think he posts his stuff just to get personal attacks leveled at him, and I had a couple I was hoping to try out. Seems to have worked out well, overall.

"While we're at it, nemo, substitute atheist form muslim in the first paragraph. The answer is the same."

Phillipa.... did you read past my first paragraph? Because I did in fact include atheists as party tto the problem. I reiterate -- all humans, regardless of what group they belong to. have fellows in their groupings that value violence as a means of solving problems over rational behavior. That is the key, I think, not "which religion" works best, or which one works worst. In this regard, they are all the same. Practical experience ought to support that notion, don't you think?

"plumb further into the depths of jackassery"... New age intellectualism? No, just gobledygook. Sorry, I'm not impressed, but I'll bet there are a few here who are. Glad I could be of help in trying out your verbal assults. Feel free anytime, I dismiss them like a gnat buzzing around my ear. I suppose we should all suscribe to athiesm and end the strife and agony in the world.
Sorry to disappoint, but I don't post here just to draw the fire of liberals, it's just that they are unaccustomed to opinions expressed that run contrary to their world view without having their egos sufficiently stroked first. I was making the point that it is not the christians of modern times that are wreaking worldwide havoc and murdering innocents, it is the fanatic muslims and to try and equate them to the crusaders of times past is liberal lunacy. But that doesn't sit well with you because you and your ilk prefer to lay the majority of blame on American christians. (and America in general) IMO, of course. You are dismissed.

phillipa, appology accapted...*smile* It was the Serrano 'art' piece that drove the fanatic christians to engage in acts of worldwide murder and destruction and vowing to "kill the perps wherever they may be found". Maybe they could take a lesson from the 'religion of peace' and settle for the killing of an islamic woman or two exiting a mosque.

Why is ANYONE taking up for neoCON????

This must be the R-A-P-T-U-R-E the Baptists are always talking about.....strange things are happening....