Comments on The Pensive Quill: Disbelief in Dublin

John McGirr, I hold no brief for David Norris and...

2011-06-29T18:45:31.457+01:00

John McGirr,

I hold no brief for David Norris and have not followed his career. If what you say is true then he has much to answer for. Is this poet now in jail? But to reduce a political opinion to perversion seems a step too far. Where he copied Brady and sought to silence the victims of child abuse he should be held accountable. The problem is Brady was not removed from his position after silencing child victims and this will arm Norris with a defence. Norris is entitled to make an argument for removing the age of consent just as we have a right to oppose him. As long as he does not violate the age of consent as prescribed by society. But that age cannot be prescribed by the Church because it holds that you can’t consent even if you are 40 if you are not married. First I knew Norris is an atheist. Nor do I care. An atheist has no more right to rape children than a faith head.

Purgatory and Limbo ‘are still there.’

Where? Who discovered them?

So good old Christian love would exclude children from heaven for something they had no responsibility for? What sort of person was Christ if he thought that?

John, you make it easier for me to be anti-theist....

2011-06-26T18:45:11.785+01:00

John, you make it easier for me to be anti-theist. Irrational gobbledygook in place rationale and reason. Then the old indignation position when people posit the bare facts. Ithe burden of responsibility is really on theists like yourself reason out your indignation and hurt over a piece of wafer, not ours.

Alfie, ‘Ah for fuck's sake, John.’ It sums u...

2011-06-26T17:44:33.579+01:00

Alfie,

‘Ah for fuck's sake, John.’

It sums up how I felt the more bizarre and theological the arguments became. You tore strips of all the arguments and got theology for your troubles. While John is a seriously intelligent guy he gives these answers that simply do not add up. If those in the Catholic club want to believe that, fine. People should be free to believe what they want. But it should have no bearing on what society does.

John McGirr, 'I do believe you have used that...

2011-06-20T20:15:26.706+01:00

John McGirr,

'I do believe you have used that word more than once against me.'

If so I can't recall. But we all have madcap ideas at some time or another. Doesn't mean we are literally insane. How many times in your life have you done something and thought it was 'madness.'? It is a figure of speech.

Aquinas engages in theological hocus pocus. If people don't believe in god then it makes no sense to say they are targeting god's honour. If intent rather than outcome is what concern's Aquinas the non believer has no intent to attack god's honour because he does not believe god exists.

AM, "'If your practice is to label ‘insa...

2011-06-19T23:48:28.809+01:00

AM,

"'If your practice is to label ‘insane’ any dissenting view, then why do you talk about freedom?'"

‘Any dissenting view? Can you point out any other view?’

Not off-hand, but I do believe you have used that word more than once against me. But, I agree it is not something you do often, so I should rather have wrote ‘a’ than ‘any’.

‘I do not believe that most Catholics believe sticking a nail in the Eucharist as you call it is a crime worse than genocide or widespread clerical rape. I do not believe Catholicism is insane. I firmly believe that your view on this issue is.’

The greatest theologian of the Catholic Church, Saint Thomas Aquinas, makes some interesting comments which could be applied to this. Here is a passage where he discusses murder and blasphemy:

“If we compare murder and blasphemy as regards the objects of those sins, it is clear that blasphemy, which is a sin committed directly against God, is more grave than murder, which is a sin against one's neighbour. On the other hand, if we compare them in respect of the harm wrought by them, murder is the graver sin, for murder does more harm to one's neighbour, than blasphemy does to God. Since, however, the gravity of a sin depends on the intention of the evil will, rather than on the effect of the deed, as was shown above (I-II, 73, 8), it follows that, as the blasphemer intends to do harm to God's honour, absolutely speaking, he sins more grievously that the murderer. Nevertheless murder takes precedence, as to punishment, among sins committed against our neighbour.”

John McGirr, I believe it is religious insanity t...

2011-06-19T22:46:05.804+01:00

John McGirr,

I believe it is religious insanity that holds that sticking a nail in what you see as the Eucharist is worse than the Rwanda genocide or the clerical rape of children.

I certainly do not think you are insane but I believe that view is insane.

'If your practice is to label ‘insane’ any dissenting view, then why do you talk about freedom?'

Any dissenting view? Can you point out any other view?

'What you classify as ‘insane’ has been the major world-view of most of
the people, most of the time.'

I do not believe that most Catholics believe sticking a nail in the Eucharist as you call it is a crime worse than genocide or widespread clerical rape. I do not believe Catholicism is insane. I firmly believe that your view on this issue is.

AM, ‘There are always those who will seek to tak...

2011-06-19T22:05:57.014+01:00

AM,

‘There are always those who will seek to take offence for the purpose of silencing debate.’

So you feign an interest in debate, just after saying;

‘But not all arguments in defence of belief are of the insanity induced types we get here.’

Well that really encourages debate. Accusing someone of being insane can only be to stifle debate, not stimulate it.

If your practice is to label ‘insane’ any dissenting view, then why do you talk about freedom?

What you classify as ‘insane’ has been the major world-view of most of the people, most of the time. Does that make it right? Not necessarily, but neither is it ‘sane’ to label it as ‘insane’.

AM, ‘What perversions did David Norris suggest?’ ...

2011-06-19T21:39:47.799+01:00

AM,

‘What perversions did David Norris suggest?’

Apart from suggesting Ireland join the British Commonwealth, he tried to stop a film which exposed child sexual tourism by a well-known poet, in 2002 he is alleged to have advocated sex with children.

The 2002 McGill article quotes him as saying;

“But in terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think that there can be something to be said for it.”

‘I have noticed in passing he was embroiled in some controversy about the age of consent.’

And incest and paedophilia.

‘I haven’t heard that, like Cardinal Brady, he silenced children so that they could not publicly comment on the priest who raped them. ‘

He tried to silence the child victims of Kathmandu.

‘If Brady thinks the age of consent should be raised or lowered he is free to say so.’

According to the McGill interview, Norris goes further. He wants the age of consent removed, period.

Still no matter he is an atheist. Wonder if the Pope had said all that what would be said!

‘These clowns used to make up places like Purgatory and Limbo to terrify people with.’

What do you mean ‘used to’, the places are still there.

‘Their hatred was such that they had to ban children from heaven.’

Or was it that there love was so such that they could not comprehend how un-baptised children would go to Hell, but yet were mindful that Christ had said baptism was a necessary pre-requisite?

Alfie, seriously, could you stick a heaven where ...

2011-06-19T20:58:46.976+01:00

Alfie,

seriously, could you stick a heaven where the type of rubbish we have read here is spouted in your ear morning, noon and night? Hell couldn't be that bad. These clowns used to make up places like Purgatory and Limbo to terrify people with. Their hatred was such that they had to ban children from heaven. What nonsense religion breeds. None of them know a thing about god - they just make god what they want god to be. And given that there are only two options god either exists or he doesn't they opt for the fairytale and then embellish it with their myths which they call theology and metaphysics.

Anthony, I imagine your hell would be an endless ...

2011-06-19T20:34:39.128+01:00

Anthony,

I imagine your hell would be an endless landscape filled with churches and priests rather with than police stations and bicycles!

John McGirr ‘ Why do you have such a passion to ...

2011-06-19T15:18:31.732+01:00

John McGirr

‘ Why do you have such a passion to destroy what is destroyed?

I don’t. I just don’t think Catholicism should be privileged. The Church should be like a golf club; of relevance to those who join it and with no bearing on the lives of those who don’t. While the destruction of the club emblem might be a grave transgression in the eyes of the club membership, there is no reason whatsoever for society to see it as worse than the clerical rape of children and every reason to see such rape as infinitely worse than defacing emblems.

‘The enemy that you view as trying to subdue you is no more, or at least reduced to very small numbers.’

All in your mind John. If they are trying to subdue me I don’t notice it. Where they try to oppress the rights of gay people, women, children, Africans or whoever I think it fair comment to point this out. And they should be ignored when they scream ‘leave us be and stay silent.’

‘What perversions did David Norris suggest? I have noticed in passing he was embroiled in some controversy about the age of consent.’ I haven’t heard that, like Cardinal Brady, he silenced children so that they could not publicly comment on the priest who raped them. If Brady thinks the age of consent should be raised or lowered he is free to say so. He should not be free to intimidate into silence those raped by priests.

tulyachka1000 You are right – no reaffirmation is...

2011-06-19T11:23:54.110+01:00

tulyachka1000

You are right – no reaffirmation is necessary. But the discussions are interesting. It is often about secularism rather than atheism per se.

You should get a burial or cremation easy enough without clerical ghouls chasing after your soul.

My kids don’t get taught religion at school. It is the best way. For those who want to do the first communion thing a payment is made for after hours preparation.

There are some brilliant scientists who believe in god. Ken Miller is good on it. The Intelligent Design bigots can’t cope with those who know evolution is how we got to be what we are but who hold a belief in god at the same time. It ruptures their ‘special creation’ myths.

‘To me, religion is a humiliation, an insult to human intelligence.’

Much to be said for that. But not all arguments in defence of belief are of the insanity induced types we get here.

‘I wouldn't feel so strongly about religion if religious people would have left us in peace and would not constantly attempt to "convert" us.’

The power to do that in Ireland is much diminished. Who seriously listens to a priest these days? I think in the US of all western societies there is a problem. It more closely resembles the societies of mullahs than any other western country.

Saint?MaryHedgehog

There are always those who will seek to take offence for the purpose of silencing debate. They shout respect when they really mean submission.

John, "No. He is the fullness of being, w...

2011-06-15T00:27:17.801+01:00
John,

"No. He is the fullness of being, whereas evil is a privation of being."

OK, God cannot choose to do evil and so he mustn't feel temptation either. Then how is he fit to judge human beings, who struggle with their "fallen nature"? And what was the point of Jesus' trials in the desert and the garden of Gethsemane if he was incapable of succumbing to temptation? A being who cannot choose to do evil is not really good - no matter what high-falutin definition of goodness you use!

"Any creature with free-will has to be able to refuse to choose the (moral) good."

Of course, but there was nothing stopping God from creating beings who have free-will and are subject to temptation, but invariably choose to do good - for example, the Virgin Mary. If God did know the fate of his creations before they were born, he could easily have done this.

"If Adam had not messed up in the garden of Eden it would be something like that."

Ah for fuck's sake, John.

"Catholicism insists that God wants the Salvation of all."

But how can he if he creates souls who he knows are doomed from the start?

"The noblest part of man is his ability to choose good."

It would seem then that man is more noble than God.

'St Augustine said;

“As you, by your memory, do not cause past acts to be done, so God, by His foreknowledge, does not cause future acts to be done.”'

You have to wonder what the point of creating the world was if God had complete foreknowledge of everything.

Alfie, ‘Is God capable of doing evil?’ No. He i...

2011-06-14T19:52:59.767+01:00
Alfie,

‘Is God capable of doing evil?’

No. He is the fullness of being, whereas evil is a privation of being.

‘If not, can he really be called good?’

We need to distinguish three types of goodness. Ontological, physical and moral. Only the first of these applies to God, who is the fullness of being and thereby good. The other two are applicable only to creatures.

‘If he is capable of doing evil but always chooses to do good, then why couldn't he have made humans like that?’

Any creature with free-will has to be able to refuse to choose the (moral) good.

‘To me, it seems that evil people do not have to exist in order for good people to exist.’

No but they have to be free not to choose the good. But the evil here is moral evil and is the consequence of free-will, which has to be allowed to not choose the good as well as to choose it.

‘Evil deeds would just have to be conceptually possible, but not necessarily an integral part of human behaviour.’

If Adam had not messed up in the garden of Eden it would be something like that. The Blessed Virgin Mary, ‘our tainted nature’s solitary boast’, shows how God turns our evil into good.

'If God creates human beings who he knows will succumb to temptation, make bad choices and thus go to hell, how can those human beings do anything to change their fate?'

Calvinism would have it that some souls are doomed because that is God’s plan. Catholicism insists that God wants the Salvation of all. He offers the graces necessary for all. The only way He could insist on their acceptance of this gift is to take away their free-will. The noblest part of man is his ability to choose good.

St Augustine said;

“As you, by your memory, do not cause past acts to be done, so God, by His foreknowledge, does not cause future acts to be done.”

Alfie, It just gets madder by the minute. The ...

2011-06-14T19:42:19.292+01:00
Alfie,

It just gets madder by the minute.

The Third Policeman which you got me to read would not have a look in here. Whatever else religion might do it most certainly stupefies.

John, "If evil is not possible, goodness ...

2011-06-14T11:57:56.220+01:00
John,

"If evil is not possible, goodness is not either."

Is God capable of doing evil? If not, can he really be called good? If he is capable of doing evil but always chooses to do good, then why couldn't he have made humans like that? To me, it seems that evil people do not have to exist in order for good people to exist. Evil deeds would just have to be conceptually possible, but not necessarily an integral part of human behaviour.

"Where we spend eternity is up to us."

If God creates human beings who he knows will succumb to temptation, make bad choices and thus go to hell, how can those human beings do anything to change their fate?

ffffffffffff, ‘Metaphysics is philosophy, not sci...

2011-06-14T11:24:18.255+01:00
ffffffffffff,

‘Metaphysics is philosophy, not science.’

A science is a body of related data, set forth systematically, expressed with completeness, and presented together with the evidence (proofs and explanations) which justifies and establishes these data as certain and true.

Philosophy is a body of related data that is systematic, complete, evidenced, and certain and therefore a science. Evidence for this need not be experimental, but rather it is reasoned evidence.

Metaphysics is the science of non-material real being and its culmination is natural theology, sometimes known as theodicy. This is the perennial philosophy, whose father is Aristotle a pagan, that has reigned supreme for 2,500 years, perfected by Aquinas but accepted by Arabs as well as Jews, and on which our entire civilisation was founded.

It is SCIENCE not religion.

PS,
I hope I have spelled your name right. I have only seen you on here this AM. Welcome to the PQ!

BBC news :Archbishop criticizes coalition...unders...

2011-06-14T08:40:34.114+01:00
BBC news :Archbishop criticizes coalition...understandable I,d criticize an organisation that lies,cheats,is massively corrupted and takes advantage of and robs all the people who follow it to...

Bob doh brains stumbled across a mass baptism at a...

2011-06-14T08:36:31.966+01:00
Bob doh brains stumbled across a mass baptism at a river,he walks into the river and stands beside the preacher
"are you ready to find Jesus my son?"
Bob says"doh I sure am"
the preacher puts him under the water then says "have you found Jesus"
"no sir"
he puts him under for two minutes,"have you found Jesus"
Bob replies"doh are you f##kin sure this is where he fell in"

AM, 'all religious rubbish. Unless you come u...

2011-06-13T22:57:07.342+01:00
AM,

'all religious rubbish. Unless you come up with something tangible or something which can improve on your present position it is pointless for me to take another trip on the merry go round discussing a man who believed in fairies.'

It is not remotely religious, it is philosophy. I am not shy of discussing religion, but I am not doing so now.

Your reply reminds me of when you summed Maritain up as 'rubbish'. One of the greatest philosopher's of the twentieth century, who was tormented with your atheist despair in his youth, summed up as 'rubbish'.

You are immersed in scientism and this belief system of yours does not allow you to break free and see beyond a microscope. There is a whole world out that that cannot be weighed or measured.

Maritain broke out of that narrow outlook. I guess it is hard to break the intellectual legacy that has ovetraken and is now destroying the Western World.

John, Metaphysics is philosophy, not science. Al...

2011-06-13T22:38:42.674+01:00
John,

Metaphysics is philosophy, not science. All that waffle reminds me of the Church of the SubGenius, you should check them out. As documented in their bible, you can find out about "Sadofuturistics, Megaphysics, Scatalography, Schizophreniatrics, Morealism, Sarcastrophy, Cynisacreligion, Apocolyptionomy, ESPectorationalism, Hypno-Pediatrics, Subliminalism, Satyriology, Disto-Utopianity, Sardonicology, Fascetiouism, Ridiculophagy, and Miscellatheistic Theology".

It's a religion I could have a lot of time for.

John McGirr, all religious rubbish. Unless you co...

2011-06-13T22:18:42.543+01:00
John McGirr,

all religious rubbish. Unless you come up with something tangible or something which can improve on your present position it is pointless for me to take another trip on the merry go round discussing a man who believed in fairies.

Alfie, ‘Do you really expect Hitler, Stalin and S...

2011-06-13T22:11:07.248+01:00
Alfie,

‘Do you really expect Hitler, Stalin and Saddam Hussein to reach heaven? Or Sean Fortune and Marcial Maciel?’

I guess it depends if they repented and made a perfect act of contrition, or confessed their sins. I wouldn’t rate their chances, but then I am not their Judge.

‘It is obvious that if God exists and made the world, then he created many souls that became evil and are almost certainly hell-bound.’

That is probable.

‘Why?’

Don’t know, but He has revealed the existence of hell so we know it exists. If evil is not possible, goodness is not either. Where we spend eternity is up to us.

AM,

‘Aquinas believed in fairies - or the heavenly equivalent of, angels.’

He believed in angels through Faith, he knew that they could not be demonstrated, unlike the existence of God which he did demonstrate.

‘If they demonstrate the scientific existence of god then Dawkins has a problem and would need to look at things like metaphysics and theology.’

It is demonstrated scientifically in the science of metaphysics. It will never be demonstrated in the experimental sciences as they are only interested in secondary causes not the ultimate causes studied in metaphysics. He certainly would not need to study theology, if by that you mean revealed theology. Natural theology, however is a branch of metaphysics and is indispensable if he wishes to attempt to refute Aquinas. If he is not prepared to gain an understanding of Aquinas it is more than a little conceited to try to refute him.

'But there is no point in him looking at Spaghettiology or Thorology or Zeusolgy.'

There might be something in what you say if Aquinas attempted to demonstrate the existence of a particular Deity, eg; the God of the Bible. He limits himself however to demonstrating that there is a First Mover, a First Cause, a Necessary Being, an Absolutely Perfect Being and a Supreme Intelligence. Each of his arguments taken individually are proofs, taken together they undoubtedly add up to God, and form the basis of the science of natural theology. All of this without recourse to Faith, without invoking religion.

John McGirr, Aquinas believed in fairies - or the...

2011-06-13T19:59:16.201+01:00
John McGirr,

Aquinas believed in fairies - or the heavenly equivalent of, angels. As Marx once said it leads to the conjuring of things that abound in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties. If they demonstrate the scientific existence of god then Dawkins has a problem and would need to look at things like metaphysics and theology. But there is no point in him looking at Spaghettiology or Thorology or Zeusolgy.

Just watching your exchange with the others and it seems to me that your arguments grow even more deranged. I'm off!

John, Do you really expect Hitler, Stalin and Sa...

2011-06-13T11:59:00.934+01:00
John,

Do you really expect Hitler, Stalin and Saddam Hussein to reach heaven? Or Sean Fortune and Marcial Maciel? It is obvious that if God exists and made the world, then he created many souls that became evil and are almost certainly hell-bound. Why?

Comments on The Pensive Quill: Disbelief in Dublin

John McGirr, I hold no brief for David Norris and...

John, you make it easier for me to be anti-theist....

Alfie, ‘Ah for fuck's sake, John.’ It sums u...

John McGirr, 'I do believe you have used that...

AM, "'If your practice is to label ‘insa...

John McGirr, I believe it is religious insanity t...

AM, ‘There are always those who will seek to tak...

AM, ‘What perversions did David Norris suggest?’ ...

Alfie, seriously, could you stick a heaven where ...

Anthony, I imagine your hell would be an endless ...

John McGirr ‘ Why do you have such a passion to ...

tulyachka1000 You are right – no reaffirmation is...

John, "No. He is the fullness of being, w...

Alfie, ‘Is God capable of doing evil?’ No. He i...

Alfie, It just gets madder by the minute. The ...

John, "If evil is not possible, goodness ...

ffffffffffff, ‘Metaphysics is philosophy, not sci...

BBC news :Archbishop criticizes coalition...unders...

Bob doh brains stumbled across a mass baptism at a...

AM, 'all religious rubbish. Unless you come u...

John, Metaphysics is philosophy, not science. Al...

John McGirr, all religious rubbish. Unless you co...

Alfie, ‘Do you really expect Hitler, Stalin and S...

John McGirr, Aquinas believed in fairies - or the...

John, Do you really expect Hitler, Stalin and Sa...