Take a good hard look into the life of new pope. To give an overview he thinks that:

Homosexuality is still a sin. He tells people to respect homosexuals, but whent the Argintinian government is going to make sam-sex marriage legal he says, "Let's not be naive, we're not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God."

During his early life he gave up all his fancy posetions (personal cook, facy place to live, chauffeured limo) and made a pledge of poverty. This sounds awefully noble right? Wrong, look at why he had those things to start out with (because he was a cardinal). Think about what the Bible verson of Jesus would have done. He probably wouldn't have even considered giving those things out to preachers of his word anyway. So denying riches should be something that cardinals and popes HAVE to do an shouldn't be praised for. By the way, the pledge of poverty meant that he just had to live like everyone else in the community (what a saint -- sarcasm)

Lastly, there was a criminal complaint filed against him by a human rights lawyer for the abduction of two Jesuit priests. However, there was no evidence to prove that he had anything to do with it. :)

Please leave your thoughts and comments on the new pope

Tags: argentina, atheism, catholic, christian, church, corruption, francis, pope, power, religion, More…the, zealots

Views: 3110

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Only a few believed he was the son of god when he was alive and the Jews admit he existed and even islamic muslims claimed he existed but they never agreed he was the son of god. 

Now if all those people 2,000 years didnt believe, why should you? lol.

What Jews admit he existed? The very first gospel wasn't written until 70 AD, the next one in 75, the third in the 90's AD, and the last, John, not until around 150 AD. And Muslims didn't enter the picture until 700 AD.

Don't just read the Bible, J, learn the history behind it - there's a lot more there than you'll find between the covers.

Only a few believed he was the son of god when he was alive and the Jews admit he existed and even islamic muslims claimed he existed but they never agreed he was the son of god.

As opposed to what, non-islamic muslims? There you go again with the inane wordplay.

Of course muslims believe it, "Jesus" is a prophet in their religion.

A jew could well admit he existed but that doesn't actually matter, as they'd disagree that he was the messiah.

Also I should amplify a bit on what Archae said.

the Gospels make it clear that Yeshua (possibly you call him by his Greek name, Jesus) believed the Old Testament stories of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob/Israel and Moses, but there is SO much proof now that those were made-up bullshit stories,

It's more specifically true that whoever wrote Matthew (it almost certainly wasn't the apostle Matthew; and the text itself doesn't even make that claim) clearly believed the Septuagint translation into Greek from the Hebrew, rather than the original Hebrew, or he wouldn't have tried to hijack Isaiah 7:14 into somehow being a prophecy of a virgin birth when the original hebrew word meant "young woman" and (if you read Isaiah 7:14 in context) it's clear that Isaiah was prophesying that he himself would knock up a particular chick he knew.  I guess it's mildly impressive that he knew she wouldn't say no, or perhaps he didn't care if she did or didn't.

So they couldn't even get their bullshit right.

@Thomas Pickett - who wrote that, and who are they that anyone should listen to them?

Whew, thought for a minute there that we'd lost you to the Dark Side, Anakin --

Out of proportion? People are fag bashed to the point of hospitalization or even death. People are harassed and condemned to the point of depression and even suicide. People have had their ability to form a family with the person they loved challenged time and time again. People have been cast as pedophiles and perverts. People have been disowned by their families and cast out from their homes, even as children.

Many modern Christians who view homosexuality as a sin will talk about how the above things are not true Christianity or state how these things are obviously wrong, yet they cannot see that they are perpetuating the problem themselves by perpetuating this sin myth. They cannot see that in many cultures, it is the supposed followers of Christ kicking up the biggest fuss in opposition. Obviously you have every right to hold and voice your views, but without a coherent or objective argument as to why it is wrong, and in light of the fact that your deity refuses to take the witness stand, we reserve the right to call bullshit. Sorry bud, but you're part of the problem. Minor or major? Why should I care?

But fear not. I forgive you for this sin. Try not to keep repeating it.

@KrisFeenstra: "People are ... bashed to the point of hospitalization or even death. People are harassed and condemned to the point of depression and even suicide. People have had their ability to form a family with the person they loved challenged time and time again. People have been cast as pedophiles and perverts. People have been disowned by their families and cast out from their homes, even as children."

That sounds like what happens to a lot of Christians in atheist and former atheist regimes like the Soviet Union, China, N. Korea, etc. 

Sometimes it's worth spending as much time examining our own arguments and biases as those of others.  Whenever we choose to stereotype another group, or blame the whole group for the errors of the few, don't we do exactly what you complain about here?  "Perpetuate the problem?" 

That sounds like what happens to a lot of Christians

So that makes it ok? Do you support school-shooters too because they were bullied?

@Professor Robert

There is no 'etc' there.  North Korea is not Atheist - in fact it is a theocracy ruled by their god.  As far as communist countries - please name the Atheist doctrine that proclaimed that Christians were an abomination deserving death?  Oh wait, Atheism has no doctrines and does not define 'abominations'.

Perhaps you should examine your own lies/arguments.

Labels are not that useful, especially the "atheist" label is about as useful as a cock-flavored lollipop. Since it only means "a lack of belief in god(s)" it does not have any positive statement of belief/dogma. If being an atheist is somehow a philosophical (or even religious) ideology, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Instead of investigating further, people tend to be satisfied when they can put a label on a person, classify them and move on with their everyday life.

I find it kinda odd that you label these regimes as"atheist"as this only shows what they are not, in that sense a lot of countries could be considered "atheist" (if you were to think of secular countries as "atheist states"). Then again, I could just as well make a group for "non-Zoltarians" and it would be an equally valid classification, wouldn't it? 

This is the main problem when discussing matters of religion with a lot of theists, to "us" atheists the label "atheist" doesn't mean as much as it seems to mean to the theists themselves. This kind of baggage in terminology is endlessly enforced (on both sides) which seriously hampers a fruitful discussion. 

That being said, I find it despicable that people (regardless of their faith) tend not to examine their arguments and biases. In the end, the reason why people are opposed to homosexuality (for instance) is because they find it "icky", not because some supposed deity said so, but when push comes to shove, that is where theists hide when they are forced to argue. 

The problem being perpetuated is that people do not think for themselves, do not question their motivations and label others easily while thinking that the label holds some kind of meaning. 

  • I am not holding every Christian accountable for promoting homosexuality as a sin, but rather only those who promote it as a sin.
  • My problem here isn't even the idea that it is promoted as a sin, but rather the "what's the big deal?" sort of attitude. It is a big deal, just as it's a big deal that I am fully "pro-choice" in the face of those who view abortion as murder. I can at least cop to the seriousness of my viewpoint in that light.
  • I have always denounced the rationale behind such mistreatment and violence of other humans beings based on their religious views.
  • Such rationale is not (correctly or incorrectly) derived from any codified aspect of atheism, largely because no such thing exists.
  • Even if the above was not true and I was a hypocrite, this would in no way excuse the actions of either party anyway.

So Robert, thanks for the vacuous assumption that I have not examined my views, but your point doesn't hold.

RSS

Forum

My Grandpa died last week

Started by Physeter in Small Talk. Last reply by Erock68la 37 minutes ago. 7 Replies

Why do we tolerate this?

Started by Belle Rose in Crime and Punishment. Last reply by Erock68la 56 minutes ago. 22 Replies

Ear-piercing a baby

Started by Simon Mathews in Atheist Parenting. Last reply by Davis Goodman 2 hours ago. 2 Replies

In Defense of ‘Islamophobia’

Started by Brian Daurelle in Society. Last reply by Erock68la 5 hours ago. 201 Replies

Blog Posts

Pabst Blue Ribbon to the rescue!

Posted by Ed on December 15, 2014 at 9:33pm 0 Comments

Finally, a cool billboard in Arkansas!

Posted by Ed on December 15, 2014 at 8:21am 2 Comments

Atheist Sites

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service