Canada declares war on Catholicism

[giblets]

So you concede that the scientific 'consensus' that you claimed existed, does not in fact exist. Thanks Gribbler!

If you define 'consensus' as 'unanimous agreement' then no, and I never claimed that, so congratulations on defeating a stawman, idiot. Why don't you quote the post where I claimed that every scientist on Earth (instead of most of them, the ones who listen to reason) agreed with me. Or you can keep telling lies like you usually do when you're not fiddling kids.

[Ben Kenobi]

If you define 'consensus' as 'unanimous agreement' then no, and I never claimed that, so congratulations on defeating a stawman, idiot. Why don't you quote the post where I claimed that every scientist on Earth (instead of most of them, the ones who listen to reason) agreed with me. Or you can keep telling lies like you usually do when you're not fiddling kids.

So what percentage determines 'consensus'? 50 percent plus 1?

[giblets]

Whatever percentage doesn't consist of religious nutjobs who can't be reasoned out of a position they weren't reasoned into. I never claimed there was a "consensus" by the way, which bears repeating because your illiteracy means I have to say everything twice before you'll comprehend it, I only claimed that the morning after pill does not cause the destruction of fertilized eggs, and the evidence is clearly on my side.

[Asher]

So what percentage determines 'consensus'? 50 percent plus 1?

For starters, it's more than one guy in Germany.

[Proteus_MST]

...

Couple things here. One, this is India, the Catholic church in India is around 1 percent or so. That law on the books, is generally used against Christians who try to convert people to their faith, and away from Hinduism, etc. It wasn't the Catholics who put that law into place. Strange the folks running the shrine would use that law for this purpose. They aren't going to get relief from it, I'd be very, very surprised if they did. This is why the skeptic isn't in a Hindu shrine. Even skeptics are pragmatists.

According to his wikipedia entry, Sanal de facto was active against superstition within the various hindu religions and to expose fake miracles made by various gurus. His best known TV action (before the catholic church) was, to challenge a tantric guru, to kill him with his magic powers. Something which the Guru surprisingly, despite repeated chants of magic spells, wasn´t able to do. And it seems like in all these cases the law was never used against him.

Also (according to one of the articles I linked) it wasn´tg Sanals idea to expose the local wonder of this catholic parish, but rather an invitation made by a TV channel based in Mumbai (which became aware of the local "wonder" due to the fact that this parish ran a large PR campaign in which they advertised the wonder).

Two, Our Lady of Velankanni, I don't believe is one of the approved apparations of Mary, (along with Our Lady of Guadaloupe, Lourdes, Fatima, etc.) There's only 9 of them worldwide and Velankanni is not one of them. So yes, it's possible that the apparation is not real, and no Catholic is required to believe that it is true. So if he's exposed the apparition as a fake, then he has done the Church a service.

Well, I don´t know about the apparitions of Mary (which, according to wikipedia happened durign the 17th century and before). The miracle Sanal exposed (i.e. a weeping cross) seems to be a miracle that was independent of any apparitions of Mary.

Three, no one is required to believe in any of the apparitions. There are teachings that are required, but this is not one of them.

Which I didn´t claim with a single word.
The only thing which lets me scratch my head is the reaction of the church upon his deposal of the miracle (i.e. that he was accused of blasphemy according to the law cited and pressure put upon authorities to arrest him)

[Asher]

Here's a bright one.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/14-year-old-conservative-radio-host-slams-obama-making-kids-gay-article-1.1091240

14-year-old conservative radio host slams Obama for ‘making kids gay’

A vehemently anti-gay radio show host is making headlines with his latest proclamation that Obama is “making kids gay” — and he’s only 14 years old.

Caiden Cowger of West Virginia hosts the “Caiden Cowger” Internet radio show twice a week, where he gabs about his staunchly conservative political beliefs.

During one of his recent broadcasts, which are syndicated by Spreaker Web Radio, the teen explains how he is “sickened” by watching some of his friends “turn to” homosexuality, which he says the Obama administration encourages.

“They are encouraging kids to think, ‘Well, you know what? They’re talking about being a homosexual and they’re saying there’s nothing wrong with being gay, so you know what, I think I might try that out for a little bit,” Cowger says. “That is what’s going on!”

The teen adds that the President should be urging young people to turn away from homosexuality, “a perverted belief.”

Cowger added that he doesn’t believe in bullying his gay peers, but that the definition of bullying has been skewed.

“When you’re trying to teach them the word of God and they consider that bullying ... I find that a big problem, not being allowed to convert other people to my religion,” he said.

On his show, the teen has interviewed former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain and John Raese, a Republican running to represent West Virginia in the U.S. Senate.

Cowger identifies himself as a Pentecostal Christian on his Facebook page, where he also names Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck as role models.

Critics have taken to the show’s YouTube page, where the May 26 broadcast is posted and has nearly 4,000 comments.

“Tell me: If it was a choice to be gay, who in their right minds would choose to be discriminated against, choose to live a harder life, choose to be constantly harassed?” one commenter wrote. “I’m so sorry that you’re so brainwashed.”

In March, Cowger announced he is writing a book, “Restoring America.”

Cowger could not be reached for comment by the Daily News.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...#ixzz1xALjkdN3

[Ben Kenobi]

Whatever percentage doesn't consist of religious nutjobs who can't be reasoned out of a position they weren't reasoned into.

So, IOW, we should dismiss scientific evidence contrary to what you believe. Gotcha.

means I have to say everything twice before you'll comprehend it

You cited a report of a paper, I cited a report of a paper that argued the contrary. You call me illiterate for arguing that since there is published scientific evidence to the contrary, ergo, there is no 'scientific consensus' on this issue. Now you backpedal. Hey call me all the names you want, it's not going to make the scientific evidence contrary to your position go away.

I only claimed that the morning after pill does not cause the destruction of fertilized eggs, and the evidence is clearly on my side.

What is a 'fertilized egg'? There is no such thing. Sperm and egg cease to exist at conception.

[Ben Kenobi]

According to his wikipedia entry, Sanal de facto was active against superstition within the various hindu religions and to expose fake miracles made by various gurus. His best known TV action (before the catholic church) was, to challenge a tantric guru, to kill him with his magic powers. Something which the Guru surprisingly, despite repeated chants of magic spells, wasn´t able to do. And it seems like in all these cases the law was never used against him.

Got any reliable evidence to support this contention? Newspaper articles from India documenting his work?

Also (according to one of the articles I linked) it wasn´tg Sanals idea to expose the local wonder of this catholic parish, but rather an invitation made by a TV channel based in Mumbai (which became aware of the local "wonder" due to the fact that this parish ran a large PR campaign in which they advertised the wonder).

So a Catholic church is attracting converts and I'm supposed to believe that this fellow is 'just doing his job?' I'm suspicious. I've seen many folks in India claim that persecution against the Catholic church is just fine. Smells to me like someone who is getting paid by Hindu people to go harass Catholics.

Well, I don´t know about the apparitions of Mary

There's some articles about them, and each one. If you're interested in the official apparitions, the full list has 15 approved by the Vatican. This one is not one of the approved ones.

http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/approved_apparitions/vatican.html

The miracle Sanal exposed (i.e. a weeping cross) seems to be a miracle that was independent of any apparitions of Mary.

No, it's not. It's associated with the Shrine to the Virgin there. Look up that specific Church. This article doesn't do a very good job of explaining the whole 'where' part of this - bad journalism. Yes, it's an apparition, and yes, it's unapproved by the Church at present.

The only thing which lets me scratch my head is the reaction of the church upon his deposal of the miracle (i.e. that he was accused of blasphemy according to the law cited and pressure put upon authorities to arrest him)

It's the response by the parish, and it puzzles me too. That law was put in place by the Hindus to prevent conversions to Catholicism. Why use it? Bad law, is bad law.

Which I didn´t claim with a single word.

Proteus, I'm actually required to say that specifically whenever anyone brings up Marian apparitions, or something associated with them. No one is required to believe in any of them in order to be a faithful Catholic.

[Flubber]

You asked me what *exactly* my question was, and I answered honestly. If it bothers you, don't answer it. Simple as that.


Thank you for your honest answer. I am sorry you found the question uncomfortable, but you did ask what precisely my question was, so I thought it best to ask honestly.

Ben. I called it " the question everyone finds creepy" as a simple identifier.... Nothing more



As for you friends strong opinions

1. My point was the decision to do without contraception is usually part of a bigger life decision and re
Relationship change.... That can alter feelings and perceptions.......". Is the sex so much better because they ditched the contraception or is it because they feel closer because the relationship has changed somehow.

2. I find this an incredibly odd discussion for someone to generally have with a virgin but suspect its because you attract friends that share your views...... Put another way, 100 percent of real estate agents believe that using a real estate agent to sell your house is the best . The group of people that would discuss such things with you is a self selecting group. The many people that seem to enjoy random hookups are not likely to get in a detailed or any discussion with you on the topic

[Ben Kenobi]

2. I find this an incredibly odd discussion for someone to generally have with a virgin but suspect its because you attract friends that share your views...... Put another way, 100 percent of real estate agents believe that using a real estate agent to sell your house is the best . The group of people that would discuss such things with you is a self selecting group. The many people that seem to enjoy random hookups are not likely to get in a detailed or any discussion with you on the topic

Uh, I used to live with Floyd.

Actually, I get way more questions about this from non-Catholic friends than I do Catholics. Most non-Catholic folks have been very surprised when I told them what I beleived in, and have asked me why, etc. It's really not that difficult a conversation. "Why don't you believe in sex before marriage", and it goes from there.

With my Catholic friends, we never discuss this.

Is the sex so much better because they ditched the contraception or is it because they feel closer because the relationship has changed somehow.

They would argue that they are closer to their husband after ditching contraception than before. They feel that ditching it has made their relationship stronger. That came as a surprise to them (remember, they aren't Catholic).

[Proteus_MST]

Got any reliable evidence to support this contention? Newspaper articles from India documenting his work?

So a Catholic church is attracting converts and I'm supposed to believe that this fellow is 'just doing his job?' I'm suspicious. I've seen many folks in India claim that persecution against the Catholic church is just fine. Smells to me like someone who is getting paid by Hindu people to go harass Catholics.

Well, as he does much of his "work" on TV (which makes sense ... after all, there are probably more indians who have access to an TV, than there are indians who regularly read newspapers ) and is a rather prominent figure in the fight against indian superstition, I can give you even more than that ...
Youtube-Clips (as well as, for the Tantric challenge, even an english transcript .... the Tantric challenge is very fun to read and watch, indeed )
(clips usually are in indian, but most of the time have english comments added to them)

Tantric challenge:
Transcript: http://www.rationalistinternational....0310/en_1.html
Clips:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bmo1a-bimAM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpwCuv_izn4&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9taL2vcOJ0&feature=relmfu

Clips of other shows in which he worked against indian superstitions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6IMPDnXBS0&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9On0X3nBaY&feature=fvwrel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZZg5gsfqgE&feature=relmfu

This one is in english ... an australian reportage on the work of Sanal and his colleagues in exposing the tricks of indian Gurus:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2Sv6C7I0_E

(and these are only a few of the example I can find if I search for Sanals work)
As you see, Sanal doesn´t fight a crusade against the catholic church but fights against superstition in indian society, no matter where it comes from

There's some articles about them, and each one. If you're isnterested in the official apparitions, the full list has 15 approved by the Vatican. This one is not one of the approved ones.

http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/approved_apparitions/vatican.html

No, it's not. It's associated with the Shrine to the Virgin there. Look up that specific Church. This article doesn't do a very good job of explaining the whole 'where' part of this - bad journalism. Yes, it's an apparition, and yes, it's unapproved by the Church at present.

Ah, O.K.

It's the response by the parish, and it puzzles me too. That law was put in place by the Hindus to prevent conversions to Catholicism. Why use it? Bad law, is bad law.

One would assume that it would be in the best interest of the Vatican to intervene.

Proteus, I'm actually required to say that specifically whenever anyone brings up Marian apparitions, or something associated with them. No one is required to believe in any of them in order to be a faithful Catholic.

Yep, I know that the catholic church has its problems with Mariolatry ... and that it is rather just tolerated than actively supported.

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, as he does much of his "work" on TV (which makes sense ... after all, there are probably more indians who have access to an TV, than there are indians who regularly read newspapers ) and is a rather prominent figure in the fight against indian superstition, I can give you even more than that ...
Youtube-Clips (as well as, for the Tantric challenge, even an english transcript .... the Tantric challenge is very fun to read and watch, indeed )
(clips usually are in indian, but most of the time have english comments added to them)

Thanks. I don't consider myself partcularly well informed on Indian secularists.

[molly bloom]

Honor killings are permitted in Canada. There have been examples where a family has killed a girl for marrying someone who isn't a muslim, and they've gotten away scott free.

Really ? So if a Muslim or a Hindu or a Sikh Canadian, or say a strict Catholic from a southern Italian background wanted to kill their daughter for a perceived slight to their family's honour, it would, in your words, be 'permitted' in Canada.


Which particular case established this legal precedent ?


Date and place would be helpful.

[molly bloom]

One, we have a disagreement on what constitutes Canadian culture. You believe that Canadian culture is secular only, and I disagree, vehemently. I believe that Canadian culture is English and Protestant, French and Catholic. Thistle, Shamrock, Rose, Entwined.

So out of the English and French cultures you have the symbols of the shamrock- Irish and Catholic, and the thistle- Scottish, and the Tudor Rose.

No fleur de lys for the Frogs, nowt for the Chinese, nothing for the Metis, the Native Bands or Inuit, and no mention of the Jooze.

You remember them ben ? People like Mordechai Richler and William Shatner.

And what about people like Oscar Peterson ?

What an oddly limited view of Canada's cultures and ethnicities you have. I have a cookery book from Canada that lists more than you have...

[Tupac Shakur]

Here's a bright one.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1091240

Jesus, are you really complaining about the completely inconsequential internet radio ramblings of a teenage West Virginian?