The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Well, he's a-comin whether you like it or not, but what do you think about the Pope's visit to the UK?
The biggest factor people are complaining about is the fact that as a head of state (Vatican City) the Government (ie the Tax Payer) fits the huge bill for his stay. The argument is that it shouldn't really be considered a state visit because Vatican City shouldn't really be considered a state (though it is by law).
Obviously there are those Hardline Atheists who believe they have the right to stop any religious leader from having an effect on the population because they don't want people to follow silly old religions and would rather they didn't believe in anything, but any attempt at this would be the same as a religious group stopping another leader of a worldwide recognised religion coming to the UK.
For me as a Catholic it should be a proud moment to have a Pope visit the country I was born in and perhaps if it was the last Pope I would be, but not with Pope Benedict. That's not to say I'm not pleased he's come to the UK, but I just don't agree with his actions in his short time as Pope.
The biggest factor people are complaining about is the fact that as a head of state (Vatican City) the Government (ie the Tax Payer) fits the huge bill for his stay. The argument is that it shouldn't really be considered a state visit because Vatican City shouldn't really be considered a state (though it is by law).
Obviously there are those Hardline Atheists who believe they have the right to stop any religious leader from having an effect on the population because they don't want people to follow silly old religions and would rather they didn't believe in anything, but any attempt at this would be the same as a religious group stopping another leader of a worldwide recognised religion coming to the UK.
For me as a Catholic it should be a proud moment to have a Pope visit the country I was born in and perhaps if it was the last Pope I would be, but not with Pope Benedict. That's not to say I'm not pleased he's come to the UK, but I just don't agree with his actions in his short time as Pope.
Page:
Well, he's a-comin whether you like it or not, but what do you think about the Pope's visit to the UK?
The biggest factor people are complaining about is the fact that as a head of state (Vatican City) the Government (ie the Tax Payer) fits the huge bill for his stay. The argument is that it shouldn't really be considered a state visit because Vatican City shouldn't really be considered a state (though it is by law).
Obviously there are those Hardline Atheists who believe they have the right to stop any religious leader from having an effect on the population because they don't want people to follow silly old religions and would rather they didn't believe in anything, but any attempt at this would be the same as a religious group stopping another leader of a worldwide recognised religion coming to the UK.
For me as a Catholic it should be a proud moment to have a Pope visit the country I was born in and perhaps if it was the last Pope I would be, but not with Pope Benedict. That's not to say I'm not pleased he's come to the UK, but I just don't agree with his actions in his short time as Pope.
The biggest factor people are complaining about is the fact that as a head of state (Vatican City) the Government (ie the Tax Payer) fits the huge bill for his stay. The argument is that it shouldn't really be considered a state visit because Vatican City shouldn't really be considered a state (though it is by law).
Obviously there are those Hardline Atheists who believe they have the right to stop any religious leader from having an effect on the population because they don't want people to follow silly old religions and would rather they didn't believe in anything, but any attempt at this would be the same as a religious group stopping another leader of a worldwide recognised religion coming to the UK.
For me as a Catholic it should be a proud moment to have a Pope visit the country I was born in and perhaps if it was the last Pope I would be, but not with Pope Benedict. That's not to say I'm not pleased he's come to the UK, but I just don't agree with his actions in his short time as Pope.
I look at it in much the same way I viewed the recent visit of a "Professional Psychic" to my local theatre. An irrelevant sham
I'm an atheist although not one the hardline ones pb speaks of. We seems to let all sorts into the country so why not the pope? The last pope was kind enough to let me visit his 'city' so it's only fair I don't object to his visit.
I had to laugh at the Daily Mail front page. Poor Stephen Fry. Anyone who heard what he was actually saying can see just how much the Daily Fail twisted and downright lied about the story.
Fry said he didn't consider the Pope's visit a State visit, a perfectly reasonable argument, also signed by many famous people.
The Daily Mail turned this in to:
"Athiest Hate Campaign led by Stephen Fry"
Fry said he didn't consider the Pope's visit a State visit, a perfectly reasonable argument, also signed by many famous people.
The Daily Mail turned this in to:
"Athiest Hate Campaign led by Stephen Fry"
pb wrote:
> I had to laugh at the Daily Mail front page.
I used to but it's just become boring and far too easy. They're a waste of time.
> "Athiest Hate Campaign led by Stephen Fry"
A question here. Why, when the atheists criticize a religion, is it a hate campaign but when said religions criticize and condemn us*, it's accepted as their right?
I think what has always bothered me about the 2 sides of this, and the reason I begrudgingly get into these discussions, is that I've never met an atheist who wasn't passive about it. It's always responsive instead of instigating, they don't go recruiting, they don't have a leader, they're happy to let you believe whatever you want until a contradictory set of values starts being advertised. Because of that, I think non-believers feel kind of defensive when it comes to this kind of pro-active belief system, it's kind of like "We leave you alone, can't you grant us the same courtesy"
I personally don't like it from any side and I've been getting increasingly annoyed with Richard Dawkins who has taken it upon himself to champion the atheist cause in a way I find unacceptable, insensitive and arrogant. I don't want a situation where atheism, after being attacked from all sides, feels the need to take the fight to the people, because at that point is stops being about personal freedom, which is the entire point.
* I say "us" but I wouldn't call myself an atheist in my understanding of the term
> I had to laugh at the Daily Mail front page.
I used to but it's just become boring and far too easy. They're a waste of time.
> "Athiest Hate Campaign led by Stephen Fry"
A question here. Why, when the atheists criticize a religion, is it a hate campaign but when said religions criticize and condemn us*, it's accepted as their right?
I think what has always bothered me about the 2 sides of this, and the reason I begrudgingly get into these discussions, is that I've never met an atheist who wasn't passive about it. It's always responsive instead of instigating, they don't go recruiting, they don't have a leader, they're happy to let you believe whatever you want until a contradictory set of values starts being advertised. Because of that, I think non-believers feel kind of defensive when it comes to this kind of pro-active belief system, it's kind of like "We leave you alone, can't you grant us the same courtesy"
I personally don't like it from any side and I've been getting increasingly annoyed with Richard Dawkins who has taken it upon himself to champion the atheist cause in a way I find unacceptable, insensitive and arrogant. I don't want a situation where atheism, after being attacked from all sides, feels the need to take the fight to the people, because at that point is stops being about personal freedom, which is the entire point.
* I say "us" but I wouldn't call myself an atheist in my understanding of the term
Think thats crossing the line between agnostic and athiest though Nin. Although it seems with the general consensus that difference in defination is no longer relevant :(
Atheists, or people who describe themselves as such, are really those that refuse to believe in the existance of a deity (one or more) and want others to realise this.
You could say it's a religion on it's own really. Hell even Buddhism can be construed as a form of atheism in its most literal sense.
Most of us are agnostics, thich means....bluntly... I don't really care. I don't believe that this is a deity's doing, but I don't mind you believing, or is it's proven, ill believe.
Atheists, or people who describe themselves as such, are really those that refuse to believe in the existance of a deity (one or more) and want others to realise this.
You could say it's a religion on it's own really. Hell even Buddhism can be construed as a form of atheism in its most literal sense.
Most of us are agnostics, thich means....bluntly... I don't really care. I don't believe that this is a deity's doing, but I don't mind you believing, or is it's proven, ill believe.
That's exactly why I don't consider myself an atheist. The definition is being blurred but I've always distinguished the two by atheism as a refusal to believe, and agnostic as unable to. I'm in the latter group but I do feel increasingly defensive of that position, which is actually pushing me to the former. It's very difficult to defend the rights of others to believe what they want when you feel yours are being infringed upon.
Yeah I agree, but I generally sum it up like this:
Person A : "I'm an atheist"
Person B : "Oh right"
Later...
Person B to person C : "Person A is an an agnostic you know"
But I won't go on further with definitions 'cos it's not really relevant.
I feel if you care about having beliefs pushed on you, then this defines you as human with a sense of his own rights (not whether you are agnostic or atheist) :D
Person A : "I'm an atheist"
Person B : "Oh right"
Later...
Person B to person C : "Person A is an an agnostic you know"
But I won't go on further with definitions 'cos it's not really relevant.
I feel if you care about having beliefs pushed on you, then this defines you as human with a sense of his own rights (not whether you are agnostic or atheist) :D
Warhunt wrote:
> Yeah I agree, but I generally sum it up like this:
>
> Person A : "I'm an atheist"
> Person B : "Oh right"
>
> Later...
>
> Person B to person C : "Person A is an an agnostic you
> know"
I have actually thought this on a number of occasions after speaking to a self-declared atheist who didn't know the difference.
> I feel if you care about having beliefs pushed on you, then this
> defines you as human with a sense of her own rights (not whether
> you are agnostic or atheist) :D
"her"?
> Yeah I agree, but I generally sum it up like this:
>
> Person A : "I'm an atheist"
> Person B : "Oh right"
>
> Later...
>
> Person B to person C : "Person A is an an agnostic you
> know"
I have actually thought this on a number of occasions after speaking to a self-declared atheist who didn't know the difference.
> I feel if you care about having beliefs pushed on you, then this
> defines you as human with a sense of her own rights (not whether
> you are agnostic or atheist) :D
"her"?
Sounds like I'm not a true atheist then. I was always of the opinion that an atheist simply didn't believe.
I personally don't refuse to believe, I did the chuch thing when I was young, it's simply a case that for me it's just an awful lot to take for granted and I've seen no evidence. If someone proves there is a god then I'll believe. I've no issue with religion and I've no desire to convince anyone they are wrong, after all I can't prove my disbelief is right.
I see the Orange Lodge in Edinburgh have an issue with the pope being there but they don't seem to have an issue with causing inconvenience to many when they are on their marches through city centres.
I personally don't refuse to believe, I did the chuch thing when I was young, it's simply a case that for me it's just an awful lot to take for granted and I've seen no evidence. If someone proves there is a god then I'll believe. I've no issue with religion and I've no desire to convince anyone they are wrong, after all I can't prove my disbelief is right.
I see the Orange Lodge in Edinburgh have an issue with the pope being there but they don't seem to have an issue with causing inconvenience to many when they are on their marches through city centres.
Page: