On YouTube, the user fsmdude has posted 43 videos desecrating the most Holy Eucharist. For those unfamiliar with Catholic practices, Catholics believe (we know, actually) that God takes the form of bread and we receive Him into ourselves. It’s odd and freaky and even sounds kinda cannibalistic, I know. It’s hard to understand unless you know more of the significance of everything else (if anyone has any questions, seriously feel free to PM me). So the basics of it is that to us, this guy is committing horrors onto God (including flushing one Eucharist down the toilet!).
Now, YouTube removed a video of a teen urinating on the Holocaust Memorial. They also removed a video called “Welcome to Saudi Britain”, which asked viewers to petition the British government not to accept Islam law into Britain. However, even after 29,000 people have petitioned YouTube to remove these videos, THEY REFUSE. They removed them once, and then placed them back up within a few hours.
I don’t believe this is right. Why is it that YouTube prevents hateful videos towards other religions (as they rightly should), but they refuse to acknowledge the tens of thousands of people who are outraged by fsmdude’s videos? The Eucharist is a sacred part of the Catholic faith and to desecrate the Eucharist is amongst the most hateful things someone can do towards Catholics.
Some of my information is from http://www.americaneedsfatima.org/
If you, too, are outraged by YouTube’s ignorance of Catholic principles (whether or not you are Catholic), there is a petition you can find on americaneedsfatima.org.
Respect Life
I'm not Catholic, but I used to be, and I have a hard time believing that this guy is desecrating what you're calling "eucharist." The wafer does not become Jesus' body until its blessed/ "transubstantiated" during mass. I doubt this guy got his wafers from inside the tabernacle of a church. Pretty good chance that they are just wafers.
On a side note, even when I was Catholic, I really couldn't see this mattering to me one bit. What does it have to do with your own spiritual practice? Why are you so irked?
Irregardless of whether or not what he is claiming is truly the Eucharist (although he does have videos of him stealing Eucharists from a Church, supposedly), the point of the matter is that he's indicating that they are the Eucharist. This is highly offensive to me, as a Catholic.
I don't know if I can articulate my feelings well enough, but this irks me because, as I believe that that is truly Jesus Christ, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, it hurts me to see Him being treated in such a shameless fashion. When you love someone, you hate to see them hurt, and you become frustrated with those who hurt the person whom you love. Similarly, as I love Christ deeply, it hurts me to see someone hurting Him.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
...REGARDLESS. Irregardless is a fake word that doesn't mean anything.
Thanks for the info. ;)
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
Well it means something to Gretchen Wieners.
Leave Canada, please - Canadian Dude
haha, you're right. that is SO fetch.
Wow. That is absolutely terrible. I understand the fact that they might not be blessed, as basho pointed out, but either way, he is making an incredibly strong statement. And this statement is hurtful I think not only to Catholics, but to all who respect the Eucharist (i.e. all Christians).
I am with you that I am disappointed that youtube has pulled other offensive videos but has failed to pull this one as well.
Thank you for your support. :) If you would like to, there's a petition on americaneedsfatima.org that you could sign. Thanks again and God Bless!
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
I am definitely checking out the petition! You should create a facebook group to get greater word out about the petition.
There is a Facebook group (although I'm not the one who started it)
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=92570270053&ref=nf#/group.php?g...
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
Although I can empathize with what you are saying, I think you might be a little mistaken but it could be just me since its been a long time since I have been Catholic (I have since switched to a nondenominational Christian church and we view it different including timing).
The words he said were "do this in remembrance of me" or something to that effect. Anyway the point is that its to symbolizes when it did become the Christ....My husband (grew up in a catholic school so I believe him) just told me it is not actually the body of Christ till after the blessing, so the videos pretending is not actually flushing Christ down the toilet.
My second point is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" (yes the 1st amendment). Basically states that we can have (or not) which ever religion we like and that we may express this anyway we so chose.
Constitutionally those videos can not be removed.
Love is like a box of chocolates; if you chose wisely you won’t be disappointed and have to spit it out. ~T
It's sad to see that you and basho are no longer Catholic. There is so much to the Faith that I cannot imagine being able to accept any other faith.
Yes, at consecration during the Mass is when the bread becomes Christ. However, it's probably really easy to steal from a Church. All someone would have to do is receive Communion in the hands and then not consume the host, so it is possible that he is using consecrated hosts.
Finally, whereas I understand the amendment, YouTube is a private organization. Also, if they are going to remove videos for offending other religions, I believe they should remove videos that offend Catholics. It should be all or nothing, not pick and choose according to their personal beliefs.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
Okay I can understand that and your concerns, maybe they are just comunicating their own beliefs too...who knows. The more people I meet and the more I hear, the more convinced I am that we are all crazy.
As for the reason for the move from Catholic, and I only speak for myself and not basho, has to do with reading the bible and having very obvious doctrinal inconsistencies. I read a verse that clearly stated something about not bowing to any other gods including wood engraven images of Christ and another about praying to anything other then God. When I went to church that very weekend, we had to kneel before the wooden cross, pray on some beads, and recite the Hail Mary... it was erie andI never went back. Basically I see myself as more faithful now than I was then. I guess it can be a discussion for another time but if you wish to know more just ask.
Love is like a box of chocolates; if you chose wisely you won’t be disappointed and have to spit it out. ~T
I'm definitely inclined to agree. LOL
I'd be interested in which verse that is. As for the cross, beads, and Hail Mary...the cross (or crucifix, if it has an image of Jesus on it) is a symbol of Christ's love in dying on the cross. It's like having a picture of your loved one. We do not pray to the cross, but rather, through seeing the cross, we can better meditate on Christ's love for us. As for the beads, when praying the rosary (which includes Hail Marys), it is easier to have a rosary (the beads) because it prevents you from the distraction of having to count each of the Hail Marys. The Hail Mary is a mainly Bibically based prayer that recognizes Mary as the mother of Jesus and asks her to intercede for us, similarly to how we would ask another human being to pray for us when we are undergoing a difficult time. Hoe this explanation helps a little. One question, though...as a non-denominational Christian (I believe is what you said you are), do you belive in Sola Scriptura? That everything comes from the Bible?
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
Basically we believe in the bible unabridged so sometimes finding an acurate church is hard ...As quoted from the church's website:
We believe that the Holy Bible was written by men supernaturally inspired; that it has truth without any admixture of error for its matter; and therefore is, and shall remain to the end of the age, the only complete and final revelation of the will of God to man; the true center of Christian union and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and opinions should be tried.
1. By "The Holy Bible" we mean that collection of sixty-six books, from Genesis to Revelation, which, as originally written does not only contain and convey the Word of God, but IS the very Word of God.
2. By "inspiration" we mean that the books of the Bible were written by holy men of old, as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, in such a definite way that their writings were supernaturally and verbally inspired and free from error, as no other writings have ever been or ever will be inspired.
Psalm 19:7-11; 119:89,105,130,160; Proverbs 30:5-6; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:31; 24:25-27,44-45; John 5:39,45-47; 12:48; 17:17; Acts 1:16; 28:25; Romans 3:4; 15:4; Ephesians 6:17; 2Timothy 3:16-17; 1Peter 1:23; 2Peter 1:19-21; Revelation 22:19
I am having trouble finding my verses for bowing to graven images of self since I have long since switched were my marker was....I will get back to you on them
Love is like a box of chocolates; if you chose wisely you won’t be disappointed and have to spit it out. ~T
This is what I found:
Lev 26:1 http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/versions.pl?book=Lev&chapter=26&v...
And a slew of others similars:
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=gra...
Love is like a box of chocolates; if you chose wisely you won’t be disappointed and have to spit it out. ~T
I'm going to look into it and get back with you :)
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
I think it is great that you brought the Bill of Rights into this discussion, but since youtube has the capability to filter what it puts on its website, as shown by its pulling of other videos that were offensive, why do you think they don't just take it off. I mean it is creating a lot of controversy. Is the bad publicity really good for youtube anyways?
"I mean it is creating a lot of controversy. Is the bad publicity really good for youtube anyways?" Heck yeah it is, Just in this conversation alone I am willing to bet YouTube and these videos got a lot more views. Its like free advertising, the word gets out and the curiosity over comes.
Love is like a box of chocolates; if you chose wisely you won’t be disappointed and have to spit it out. ~T
This episode was precipitated by an incident at the University of South Florida. A member of the student council objected to a policy of the University providing free space in the student center for an outside Catholic group to hold mass. He took a "consecrated host" from the mass. After having done this the student received DEATH THREATS. He eventually returned the cracker (that is what it really is) to the Catholics but he lost his position on the student council and an all out effort was launched by one Bill Donohue of some Catholic website to have him expelled from school. The argument was that what this student did was the worst thing in the world. Now, I don't think the student acted wisely. The taking of the cracker was designed to provoke and provoke it did. HOWEVER, the reaction it provoked is deserving of the utmost condemnation. There is no comparison between taking a fucking cracker, and death threats. There is no justification for claiming that taking the fucking cracker is the worst thing in the world possible.
An atheist science blogger by the name of PZ Myers, a biology professor at the University of Minnesota - Morris campus picked up on the story. Since he is a vocal atheist he made a rather unwise (IMHO) statement to the effect that if you want cracker dessecration then send him one and you'll see what dessecration can be.
Somewhere around 250,000 people regularly read his blog. So he got sent plenty of crackers. One person who sent him the cracker even had a YouTube video of his sneaking a cracker post-consecration out of a Catholic Mass.
Myers too got multiple death threats. In the end Myers posted a picture of his desecrated cracker. And although I didn't approve of his earlier comments, I was very pleased with the way he dessecrated the cracker. He used the cracker from the guy who had the YouTube video so Catholics could not claim that it was an unconsecrated "host" ... and he drove a rusty nail right through the middle of it. But that rusty nail also went through the middle of a Qu'ran and a copy of Richard Dawkins' THE GOD DELUSION. The point Myers was trying to make is that NO INANIMATE OBJECT IS SACRED. And that is a point I STRONGLY support.
The rash of YouTube videos are inspired and a continuation of Dr. Myers message that he is trying to get out.
When you say:
you say something that is not only of the UTMOST STUPIDITY ... that fucking cracker no more becomes the body of Jesus than does my shit ... you say something that is dangerous as evidenced by the surprisingly large number of Catholic assholes that say they are willing to KILL SOMEONE OVER IT.
Now if that offends you, then you are in SEVERE NEED OF BEING OFFENDED. Get some perspective ... it is a CRACKER. It doesn't matter in the real world. Human life does. You need to understand that others ... like myself, and those people who have posted dessecrations of other crackers on YouTube take SEVERE OFFENSE at your misplaced priority and irresponsible ignorance in not realizing that.
That is why I strongly support YouTube in maintaining the videos on their site.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
OK, point 1: Please refrain from harsh language on my blog. I don't appreciate it nor do I allow it.
Point 2: I in no way, shape, or form condone people who threaten to harm other people and even kill them. This is similar to people disregarding all pro-lifers as bombers. That's not true. REAL pro-lifers respect life and as such don't destroy more life, knowing that it serves no purpose.
Point 3: I don't care what you call me, but the consecrated host (the "cracker") IS the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. I can even give you some proof, if you'd like.
Point 4: The student did something hateful and was rightly punished. Whereas I do not agree with death threats and maybe not even expulsion, I do agree that if he was going to be that hateful, then he should be punished.
Point 5: As for the professor, he too did something hateful, not just to Catholics, but to an even larger group of people. And there ARE "inanimate objects" that are sacred. Christ comes under the form of bread, which is an inanimate object...and I don't think there's anything more sacred than God.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
Point 3: I don't care what you call me, but the consecrated host (the "cracker") IS the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. I can even give you some proof, if you'd like.
Okay...let's see your proof.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
"Vi Veri Vniversum Vivus Vici." ~ V.
Transubstantiation and the Real Presence
Transubstantiation is the teaching that during the Mass at the consecration in the Lord's Supper (Communion), the elements of the Eucharist, bread and wine, are transformed into the actual body and blood of Jesus and that they are no longer bread and wine, but only retain their appearance of bread and wine.
The "Real Presence" is the term referring to Christ's actual presence in the elements of the bread and the wine that have been transubstantiated.
Paragraph 1376 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) states,
"The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation." (CCC, 1376)
I figured you would give us something silly, and I was right. This isn't "proof," my friend. Proof is the "the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact." What you gave is a baseless assertion, not proof.
Thanks for giving us "proof" that religion teaches people not to think.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
The matter at hand concerns the reaction of CATHOLICS to desecration of the Eucharist, not the reaction of just ANYONE. It hardly matters whether you believe the wafer actually turns into Christ; Catholics DO- and I have provided "cogent evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact" that they do.
...but the claim made by respectlife was very specific...
Point 3: I don't care what you call me, but the consecrated host (the "cracker") IS the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. I can even give you some proof, if you'd like.
Now, I know how some people like to move the goal-post any time their opponents are about to score, but your comment doesn't "prove" respectlife's point. If you were trying to prove some OTHER point, then your comment was placed inappropriately.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Will do. I'll write a new blog post on it within the next few days and post here letting you know I have.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
Concerning your point 1: Harsh language
A. Words are words. They exist to convey a message. That includes "harsh language". I do not use words haphazardly. I use the words that I will convey the message I intend for them to. The message I wanted to convey to you was that there exist people who think the premise behind your Eucharist ceremony is so stupid as to be offensive. And I wanted to be as blunt about it as I can be. I think I succeeded.
B. This may be your blog, but you do not have the power to prevent it.
Concerning your points 2, 3, 4, and 5:
A. The YouTube videos are where they are because Catholics HAVE threatened people's lives because they don't give this incredibly stupid ceremony the respect they think it deserves. Not only have they threatened people's lives they have stated that desecrating the stupid cracker is the worst thing that someone could possibly do. That is another stupid and dangerous statement. So stupid and dangerous that it too deserves condemnation. How DARE they claim driving a nail through a cracker is worse than ... oh, I don't know ... how about the holocaust, murder, rape, incest, assault, burglary, fraud, parking illegally in a handicapped spot. Nobody was hurt when the nail was driven through the cracker, all the others people were. Get your priorities straight.
B. This cannot be said strongly enough ... YOUR BELIEF IS STUPID. The cracker is a cracker. The whole concept is stupid.
C. The student did not ask for the cracker. He was given it and decided not to eat it. He was told to give it back at church and threatened ... by a church group that was using his school's property. He got pissed off and left ... with the cracker. Nobody condemned the Church group who were using property that the student had more of a right to think of as his than they did to think of as theirs even though they were the ones who first threatened the student. While if I were the student I wouldn't have been there in the first place, he was there. To me his act is a free-speech issue.
So you got offended ... So what? You do not have the right to demand that your sensibilities NOT be offended. That is not what free speech is about. The student should not be punished in any way.
D. If what PZ did offended an even larger group than just Catholics then GREAT!!! They were in severe need of being offended. You can believe anything you want ... but if you believe something ridiculous, then expect ridicule.
E. You are wrong ... NOTHING inanimate is sacred ... abso-fucking-lutely NOTHING.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
1)
All your language tells me is that you have a poor vocabulary. By using such language, you are losing respect from others because it shows that you are poorly educated and overly emotional. That is why I ask you to refrain from that language.
2 A)
I would not kill someone over hurting the Eucharist. I would die in defense of the Eucharist, but I would not be the source of violence, because it bears no good fruit.
It is the worst thing someone could do against the Catholic Church. I don't know whether or not it is the worst thing someone could do period, but it is the worst thing someone could do with the aim of offending Catholics. Also, if everyone followed the 10 Commandments, we wouldn't have any of the other problems you mentioned. The Catholic Church encourages the 10 Commandments, hence, the Church is trying to prevent the things you mentioned.
2 B)
Just because YOU do not agree with it does NOT make it stupid. Hard to grasp, yes. Kinda weird, maybe. But NOT stupid.
2 C)
If he received it, it is because he was in line for Communion. Hence, no one forced it upon him. He chose to receive. Since he did not receive, he was probably asked to return the Host in order to prevent desecration of the Host. If it was just a cracker, then why did he have to make such a big deal out of it? Why couldn't he just roll his eyes, return the Host, and get on with his life? Instead, he committed hateful acts against God and against the Catholic Church. Kinda immature.
2 D)
Do you have ANY moral beliefs? It seems to me as if you're against all religion.
2 E)
In this case, YOU are the wrong one.
I wouldn't expect YouTube to remove the videos if they hadn't removed videos that offended other religions. There's a group on Facebook that's something along the lines of "Petition to remove the group f*** Jesus". I'm not a member of that group because Facebook hasn't catered to other religions. However, if they were to begin to do such, I would join that group. YouTube has catered to the beliefs of other groups, so why should they do it to all these other groups, but not to Catholics?
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
1)
All your language tells me is that you have a poor vocabulary. By using such language, you are losing respect from others because it shows that you are poorly educated and overly emotional. That is why I ask you to refrain from that language.
I am so touched that you worry about the respect I get from others. But the question we're addressing is what respect does YOUR belief deserve from others. My answer is none.
2 A)
I would not kill someone over hurting the Eucharist. I would die in defense of the Eucharist, but I would not be the source of violence, because it bears no good fruit.
It is the worst thing someone could do against the Catholic Church. I don't know whether or not it is the worst thing someone could do period, but it is the worst thing someone could do with the aim of offending Catholics. Also, if everyone followed the 10 Commandments, we wouldn't have any of the other problems you mentioned. The Catholic Church encourages the 10 Commandments, hence, the Church is trying to prevent the things you mentioned.
1. I seriously doubt if YOU were one of the wackaloons who made the death threats. But the fact is that EVERYONE of the wackaloons who did make the death threats were Catholics. And they were encouraged by Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League. What you STILL do not seem to understand is that it is the CATHOLICS here we consider to be the offenders and not the YouTube video guys.
2. You are a wackaloon when you say ... "but it is the worst thing someone could do with the aim of offending Catholics." Ridiculing the ridiculous is SHOULD never be as offensive as causing real harm.
2 B)
Just because YOU do not agree with it does NOT make it stupid. Hard to grasp, yes. Kinda weird, maybe. But NOT stupid.
You are 100% correct ... just because I don't agree with it does not make the Eucharist stupid. What makes it stupid is the belief that a cracker is going to change its "substance" into the body of Jesus Christ just because someone says a few silly words over it.
2 C)
If he received it, it is because he was in line for Communion. Hence, no one forced it upon him. He chose to receive. Since he did not receive, he was probably asked to return the Host in order to prevent desecration of the Host. If it was just a cracker, then why did he have to make such a big deal out of it? Why couldn't he just roll his eyes, return the Host, and get on with his life? Instead, he committed hateful acts against God and against the Catholic Church. Kinda immature.
I suspect it was immaturity on Webster Cook's part. However, the response from the Catholics in charge ... not just a few crazies on the outside ... is a WHOLE LOT WORSE than immaturity.
:boom: Yeah that is so much more of a hate crime than lynching black people or killing gays. If Susan Fani REALLY thinks that taking a wafer to protest a her ridiculous ceremony then she has no clue what a hate crime is.
If someone was kidnapped then SOMEONE with feelings would be in harm's way. And that IS a bad thing. Don't demean it by equating a person to a wafer.
Bill Donohue is an idiot. Taking a tasteless cracker is NOT the equivalent of hate speech. Hate speech is making threats against people you don't like for no REAL reason ... and in case you don't see the irony here, let me spell it out for you. THAT IS WHAT BILL DONOHUE HAS JUST DONE.
Webster Cook went to the mass with a friend. He took the uneaten wafer back to his seat to show it to his friend and it was there that members of the church physically grabbed him trying to get the wafer back. That is when he left.
You don't even have the right to grab a person because they stole a wafer you gave him of your own free will. ... and by the way ... Webster Cook's friend was brought up on charges and had to go through an expulsion hearing as well. And he didn't do anything. For what it is worth, neither student was expelled.
The point here is that you are demanding respect for a blatantly stupid act and if you don't get it then you are trying to punish the people who didn't give it to you. Nobody has a right to be free from offense, nobody. You guys need to learn that.
2 D)
Do you have ANY moral beliefs? It seems to me as if you're against all religion.
1. I will certainly put my morals up against any one who thinks that stealing a cracker is the worst hate crime ever.
2. I think all religion is inherently irrational, as you are showing. I am certainly against irrationality, so I am against all religion. I would love for it to die. But I don't want for it to die because society outlaws it. I want it to die because society realizes that they don't need it.
2 E)
In this case, YOU are the wrong one.
Yeah, sure ... so how many of the "consecrated" crackers been given out? Billions and billions? Don't you think you should be running short on the body of Christ by now?
I wouldn't expect YouTube to remove the videos if they hadn't removed videos that offended other religions. There's a group on Facebook that's something along the lines of "Petition to remove the group f*** Jesus". I'm not a member of that group because Facebook hasn't catered to other religions. However, if they were to begin to do such, I would join that group. YouTube has catered to the beliefs of other groups, so why should they do it to all these other groups, but not to Catholics?
I will agree that YouTube would be wrong to remove videos for the sole reason that they are offensive to other religions, ESPECIALLY if there is an underlying protest for them to be there. But I think that proscription against removing videos should apply to Catholics as well. ESPECIALLY since this episode shows that they need it.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
I don't have time for this...here we go...:
2 A 1)
OK, I agree to an extent. Whoever the people were that made death threats were in the wrong and are inexcusable. HOWEVER, just because they are wrong does not make desecration of the Eucharist right. Desecration of the Eucharist is always wrong.
2 A 2)
It IS the worst way to offend a Catholic on the matter of faith. The Eucharist is the CENTER of everything we believe and hold dear. To mock or desecrate the Eucharist in any way is a grave offense.
2 B)
Why is it stupid? What about that belief is stupid?
2 C)
1. Just because being hateful to blacks or gays is hateful, that does not make being hateful to Catholics, Jews, Hispanics, or any other group not hateful.
2. But it is...the "wafer" is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.
3. As I've already said...yes, it is hateful to Catholics. Regardless of whether or not you believe the Host to be Christ, we do. And since we do, to desecrate the Eucharist is hateful to us.
4. I agree again, with you that certain people in that situation did not act in love. However, again, that does not make Webster Cook or fsmdude's actions in any way, shape, or form ok.
2 E)
All part of the miracle. ;)
3.
YouTube's policy states:
We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity).
As I've already said, desecration of the Eucharist is hateful to Catholics. Therefore, YouTube should remove it.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
I don't have time for this...here we go...:
2 A 1)
OK, I agree to an extent. Whoever the people were that made death threats were in the wrong and are inexcusable. HOWEVER, just because they are wrong does not make desecration of the Eucharist right. Desecration of the Eucharist is always wrong.
Actually it does. Desecration of the Eucharist after their unconsciousable actions says to them that we do not have to take their ridiculous superstition seriously. If they are going to use their superstition as an excuse for unacceptable behavior then we have a right to offend their superstition.
2 A 2)
It IS the worst way to offend a Catholic on the matter of faith. The Eucharist is the CENTER of everything we believe and hold dear. To mock or desecrate the Eucharist in any way is a grave offense.
If you feel it is a grave offense, then don't do it. But don't think that ANYONE else has to hold onto your sense of right and wrong. I personally think that a cracker is a cracker, and a death threat is a death threat. The first I would have a hard time caring less about; the second is infinitely more serious. I can think of no better way to communicate that to you Catholics than "desecrating" the silly thing.
2 B)
Why is it stupid? What about that belief is stupid?
Oh, I don't know ... how about the idea that you think the damn cracker actually turns into the body of a 2000 year old dead man. Especially when you can see with your own eyes ... the cracker hasn't changed. Saying that the substance has but the appearance hasn't (and actually believing it to be the case) is .... STUPID.
2 C)
1. Just because being hateful to blacks or gays is hateful, that does not make being hateful to Catholics, Jews, Hispanics, or any other group not hateful.
You're right. However, if blacks thought that eating a cracker would endow themselves with the actual substance of Martin Luther King and were willing to threaten people's lives who thought the belief was stupid, then it would be fine to desecrate their cracker too.
Similarly if gays thought that Harvey Milk's essence could be magically transferred to a cracker and were willing to threaten people's lives over the belief, I would have no problem desecrating their cracker either.
But strangely ... it is only Catholics who seem to be willing to do this.
2. But it is...the "wafer" is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.
No ... it is a fucking cracker, and that is all it is.
3. As I've already said...yes, it is hateful to Catholics. Regardless of whether or not you believe the Host to be Christ, we do. And since we do, to desecrate the Eucharist is hateful to us.
So ... threatening people's lives and making stupid statements are hateful to others. How else are you going to fully understand that?
4. I agree again, with you that certain people in that situation did not act in love. However, again, that does not make Webster Cook or fsmdude's actions in any way, shape, or form ok.
My personal opinion is that Webster Cook was probably being a twit. But I applaud fmsdude's actions fully.
2 E)
All part of the miracle. ;)
No ... just stupid.
3.
YouTube's policy states:
We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity).
As I've already said, desecration of the Eucharist is hateful to Catholics. Therefore, YouTube should remove it.
I don't view this as demeaning on the basis of religion. I view it as demeaning on the basis of ridiculousness. The Eucharist is simply ridiculous made holy. And that in and of itself may well deserve demeaning ... it DEFINITELY deserves demeaning when people use it as an excuse to issue death threats.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
OK, I don't think you're getting my point...It doesn't MATTER whether or not you do or do not believe that the Eucharist becomes Christ (after all, we believe Christ to be God and you won't hear anyone claiming Martin Luther King Jr. or Harvey Milk is God.). The POINT of the matter is is that this kid is attacking the central of one of the largest religions in the world. Therefore, he is acting hatefully towards said religion. Regardless of whether or not the "cracker" is a cracker, an elephant, or the Real Presence, Catholics believe it to be the Real Presence of Christ. Personally, I don't find it so ridiculous, considering how God made the world out of nothing, Mary had a virgin birth, and God became Man and dwelt among us. All things considering, believing that God comes under the form of bread and wine without changing the accidents is not all that out there. But that's beside the point and I don't want to start arguing any of those in this topic...I'm more than happy to blog about anything further to discuss.
If you believe that all religion should be mocked, then there's no point in further arguing you and I applaud you for taking an all or nothing stance. If you don't believe that all religions should be mocked, and only some, then there's still no point in arguing with you. Obviously, you don't believe that no religion should be mocked, so therefore, I refuse to waste my time arguing with you further.
Finally, the Catholics who made the death threats are not the only people who've ever made death threats and I seriously doubt that they're people with the "stupidest" reason for making death threats. So stop trying to defend your position by grasping on a couple of extremists.
Oh, and BTW...I think you not believing in the Eucharist is stupid, but since that's not going to get us anywhere, I refrain from stating it. Similarly, telling me my belief is stupid isn't going to get you anywhere in this debate. Therefore, I suggest you refrain from calling people's beliefs stupid in debates in the future, should you want to be respected in any way as a debater.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
OK, I don't think you're getting my point...It doesn't MATTER whether or not you do or do not believe that the Eucharist becomes Christ (after all, we believe Christ to be God and you won't hear anyone claiming Martin Luther King Jr. or Harvey Milk is God.). The POINT of the matter is is that this kid is attacking the central of one of the largest religions in the world.
In a sense you are right. The point is that these videos are attacking one of the central beliefs of the LARGEST RELIGION IN THE WORLD. And that religion thinks simply because it is so large it can demand respect by for a stupid belief by THREATENING people who don't respect it. They can't. And these videos demonstrate that. And that is what is important. And that is what makes these videos worthwhile.
Therefore, he is acting hatefully towards said religion.
No ... the videos are disdain for a stupid belief. Since Catholicism is the largest religion in the world, and I happen to know a few reasonable Catholics, it would not surprise me a bit to find out that some of these videos were made by Catholics.
Regardless of whether or not the "cracker" is a cracker, an elephant, or the Real Presence, Catholics believe it to be the Real Presence of Christ.
I always sign off with a quote from Anatole France. Read it.
Personally, I don't find it so ridiculous, considering how God made the world out of nothing, Mary had a virgin birth, and God became Man and dwelt among us. All things considering, believing that God comes under the form of bread and wine without changing the accidents is not all that out there.
That is a sad indictment of yourself
But that's beside the point and I don't want to start arguing any of those in this topic...I'm more than happy to blog about anything further to discuss.
If you believe that all religion should be mocked, then there's no point in further arguing you and I applaud you for taking an all or nothing stance.
I believe anything ridiculous is a potential target of ridicule. But usually I do not go out of my way to ridicule them. It isn't my forte. I believe that the foundation of all religion lies on irrational beliefs, and my own personal blogs signify my reasoning behind that. I focus on Christianity because that is the religion I know the most about.
If you don't believe that all religions should be mocked, and only some, then there's still no point in arguing with you. Obviously, you don't believe that no religion should be mocked, so therefore, I refuse to waste my time arguing with you further.
The logic of your statement doesn't follow, but whatever.
Finally, the Catholics who made the death threats are not the only people who've ever made death threats and I seriously doubt that they're people with the "stupidest" reason for making death threats. So stop trying to defend your position by grasping on a couple of extremists.
If it were only a couple then it would not be quite so bad. Dr. Myers has received over a thousand threatening emails from the incident. Only a few dozen have advocated his death. The others range from demanding him to be fired from his position as biologist, to calling him petty names, to just threatening to beat him up if they ever see him. The fact that I haven't seen a single Catholic formally come out as a Catholic and condemn these responses is telling.
You still don't realize. You are acting like you are the only injured party here. Your stupid belief and your stupid threatening defense of it is OFFENSIVE to a whole lot of people ... me included. So your prissy, "you're being mean to me" act seems to be missing the point.
Oh, and BTW...I think you not believing in the Eucharist is stupid, ...
That is another sad indictment of yourself
... but since that's not going to get us anywhere, I refrain from stating it.
Er ... actually you didn't refrain from stating it, but I have no problems with you doing so. I think your belief is OBVIOUSLY stupid. I think your saying that NOT believing a cracker turns into a 2000 year old dead man is stupid shows the brain damaging effect that religion can have on some people. So I do think that is getting me (at least) somewhere.
Similarly, telling me my belief is stupid isn't going to get you anywhere in this debate. Therefore, I suggest you refrain from calling people's beliefs stupid in debates in the future, should you want to be respected in any way as a debater.
While I am again touched by your desire to see me get respect as a debater, I'll take your advice in this respect. I'll only call obviously stupid beliefs "stupid beliefs". How about that? ... Guess what? You're belief in the Eucharist ... that a wafer that has been blessed by a priest ACTUALLY PHYSICALLY turns into the substance of the body of Jesus Christ ... Is STILL a stupid belief.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
1. I don't think that just because Catholicism is one of the biggest religions in the world means that we should be catered to no matter what. In fact, we often have to deal with persecution and the "deal with it" attitude while all these other religions get petted and respected. I believe that Catholicism should be catered to for the very reason that it is a religion. As YouTube has made a point to cater to religions, they should only logically cater to Catholicism, as Catholicism is a religion.
2. I have not threatened the life of anyone. I am offended by fsmdude's videos. I do not fall into the extremist category that you won't stop obsessing over. Therefore, that category is irrelevant in the way you're bringing it up. ALSO, I do not believe that Catholics are the only party being injured. However, the Catholic Church officially teaches on when killing another person is ok (such as self-defense, if necessary). They do not teach that making death threats to people when other options can be used is ok (such as in these cases). Therefore, whoever is making the death threats is going against Church teaching and is therefore not acting for the Church.
I refrained in former discussion when it would have been relevant. I'm a nice person...I care. ;) Also, I think you are a good debater (if nothing else, you're persistent), even if you're wrong.
Also, there are a billion (if not more) stupid beliefs out there to me. I'm sorry you don't understand the Eucharist. I'll be coming out with a blog on it shortly and I hope you read it and I hope it helps you understand my reasoning more. However, whether or not the "cracker" is really Jesus is irrelevant because Catholics believe it to be Jesus, fsmdude knows Catholics believe this, fsmdude is attacking the Eucharist is mockery of the Catholic faith and for the Catholics to remain silent on this issue would be stupid because it would indicate that we really don't believe in the Eucharist. However, since we do, we're talking about it. I'm not making death threats, I'm not telling him he's going to go to hell, I'm not even calling him names. I'm just saying that I'm offended and I think YouTube is being biased because they are catering to other religions and not to Catholics and I simply would like to know why. That's all.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
1. I don't think that just because Catholicism is one of the biggest religions in the world means that we should be catered to no matter what. In fact, we often have to deal with persecution and the "deal with it" attitude while all these other religions get petted and respected. I believe that Catholicism should be catered to for the very reason that it is a religion. As YouTube has made a point to cater to religions, they should only logically cater to Catholicism, as Catholicism is a religion.
YouTube can do what it wants. It is part of a private company. While you may think that they handled other religions right and your religion wrong, I would argue if anything they handled yours right and the others wrong. However, I am not as familiar with the background of the other case you mentioned.
2. I have not threatened the life of anyone. I am offended by fsmdude's videos. I do not fall into the extremist category that you won't stop obsessing over. Therefore, that category is irrelevant in the way you're bringing it up. ALSO, I do not believe that Catholics are the only party being injured. However, the Catholic Church officially teaches on when killing another person is ok (such as self-defense, if necessary). They do not teach that making death threats to people when other options can be used is ok (such as in these cases). Therefore, whoever is making the death threats is going against Church teaching and is therefore not acting for the Church.
I'll bet none of those videos mention you at all. But it is Catholics who have been making these extreme statements. Also it has been members of the Catholic Church itself who have equated the abuse of a cracker to the abuse of a person and even claimed it was worse. Hateful demagoguery has been promoted by Bill Donohue who does seem to represent a rather large group of Catholics. And you have made statements to the effect that we need to be sensitive to your feelings simply because they are religious beliefs. These cracker desecrations are legitimate protests against all of that.
I refrained in former discussion when it would have been relevant. I'm a nice person...I care. ;) Also, I think you are a good debater (if nothing else, you're persistent), even if you're wrong.
I assume this pertains to your saying in the previous post that my NOT believing the cracker turns into Jesus is stupid. I have not been offended by anything you have said, or are likely to say.
Also, there are a billion (if not more) stupid beliefs out there to me. I'm sorry you don't understand the Eucharist. I'll be coming out with a blog on it shortly and I hope you read it and I hope it helps you understand my reasoning more.
What is there to understand? You believe it because you think the scriptures say it and you think the scriptures must be true. Unfortunately that is simply ridiculous. At some level even the Catholic Church knows it is ridiculous. That is why they have never tried to do density measurements, spectroscopic readings, Schlieren readings on the wine, or any other non-destructive scientific test that could conceivably validate their belief.
However, whether or not the "cracker" is really Jesus is irrelevant because Catholics believe it to be Jesus, fsmdude knows Catholics believe this, fsmdude is attacking the Eucharist is mockery of the Catholic faith and for the Catholics to remain silent on this issue would be stupid because it would indicate that we really don't believe in the Eucharist. However, since we do, we're talking about it. I'm not making death threats, I'm not telling him he's going to go to hell, I'm not even calling him names. I'm just saying that I'm offended and I think YouTube is being biased because they are catering to other religions and not to Catholics and I simply would like to know why. That's all.
(1) fsmdude is mocking the seriousness with which some Catholics take. The seriousness that they threaten death over a cracker.
(2) The fact that you don't make death threats does not lessen the fact that other Catholics have. It does not lessen the fact that Catholics who represent the Church itself have made ridiculous statements concerning it. It does not lessen the fact that people who represent large Catholic contingencies have threatened people with loss of means to make a living and loss of status in secular institutions because of it.
(3) The fact that you are offended is too bad; but no one is entitled to life free from ridicule no matter what they believe.
(4) My guess is that YouTube views the videos as a legitimate protest for all the reasons described above. I suspect they know the reasons behind the video. Many people wrote to them to encourage them to keep the videos on their site ... I was one of them.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
My gosh, there's no point in arguing with you. You're too stubborn to understand my point. Also, if you want scientific proof, wait for my Eucharist post I'll be coming out with soon. There's scientific proof if there ever was any.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"it [the Catholic view on the Eucharist] DEFINITELY deserves demeaning when people use it as an excuse to issue death threats."
... Let's assume the death threats from "believers of the Eucharist" were completely sincere. So one life was threatened. Okay, now, let's see how many lives "believers of the Eucharist" have saved (and are still saving today) from poverty, injustice, and DEATH. Once you think you've got a pretty good hold on the ratio between those two statistics, go ahead and tell me once more that we should "demean" those those that believe the wafer turns into Jesus.
... not a single life has been saved from poverty, injustice, or DEATH because someone believed a cracker turned into a 2000 year old dead man.
So, with absolutely no problems whatsoever I will tell ... a stupid BELIEF especially a stupid belief that engenders death threats by some of its proponents SHOULD be demeaned.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
Did you know that when Catholics partake in the sacrament of the Eucharist they believe that Jesus Christ and his spirit are entering into their own bodies/ spirits? That out of this Christ-like spirit which is in this manner actualized in Catholics, countless organizations have been created which fight every type of social injustice imaginable, including poverty, hunger, violence, genocide, etc. etc. etc.?
"Stupid" or not, The Eucharist is one of the most important of many practices that cultivate and strengthen in Catholics a sense of communion with Christ's loving spirit. If you demean the practice of the Eucharist, you demean an institution that has done more for protecting life than any other institution in the history of humanity PERIOD
(1) I know that it is Catholic doctrine that Christ's substance enters their body. That is what makes it stupid. I doubt seriously if all Catholics actually believe that tripe. I would hope that only a deluded minority does.
(2) You are going to have to substantiate that the Catholic church has fought social injustice more so than any other organization "PERIOD". Arguably with the Catholic church's opposition to safe sex practices in places like Africa they have contributed to genocide with the AIDS epidemic there. With their opposition to birth control they have contributed to the problem of poverty ... and made the abortion problem worse.
So I don't agree with your assessment.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
I don't have to substantiate anything. The strength of the counter-evidence you gave (or lack thereof) speaks for itself.
1) Respectlife is a hundred percent correct as far as the wafer literally (not symbolically) "becoming" the body of Jesus Christ according to Catholic doctrine/ belief. It's called transubstantiation.
2) How the particular group of Catholics at one mass reacted (and how some readers of Dr. Meyers' blog reacted) has absolutely no relation to respectlife's blog. Suppose a man robs another man and in turn that man kills the robber. I can still quite fairly point out how wrong that robbery in itself was (the way the particular victim reacted has no relevance to how wrong/ right the original act of robbery was).
3) All that being said, I still disagree with the notion of taking offense to this act if you are a Catholic. The God of Catholicism is so divine, so overflowing with love, so overflowing with strength, that this "desecration" would probably not affect him in the least (If it did "hurt" him, then that would be a sign of weakness on his part, which Catholics simply don't believe in). Not only the God that Catholics worship but also the Catholics themselves - in emulation of their God- are so overflowing with unstinting love and strength that this "desecration" should have no ill effect whatsoever (assuming their genuine in their practice)... If you do take offense, then I believe you are not a genuine Catholic
If you believe a tail to be a leg, how many legs does a dog have? The answer is 4, believing a tail to be a leg doesn't make it a leg.
I am very familiar with the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. Since you didn't seem to get it from my original reply, let me repeat myself ... The fucking cracker no more turns into the body of Jesus than does my shit.
So you are wrong ... respectlife is NOT "a hundred percent correct as far as the wafer literally (not symbolically) "becoming" the body of Jesus Christ ..." She is 100% wrong. As are the millions of Catholics who believe as she does.
You are again wrong when you say, "How the particular group of Catholics at one mass reacted (and how some readers of Dr. Meyers' blog reacted) has absolutely no relation to respectlife's blog." The WHOLE REASON those videos are on YouTube stems from those incidents.
What she is asking for is respect for a completely stupid belief. Normally, I don't care if people believe stupid things. However, since there seems to be quite few Catholics who are say they are willing to KILL someone over this stupid belief, I think it is a GOOD thing to let them know in no uncertain terms that a stupid belief does not deserve respect ... and a stupid belief that people are willing to kill over deserves condemnation. That is why I STRONGLY support YouTube keeping those videos available for people to see. That was the whole point of my post.
Do you understand now?
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
"The fucking cracker no more turns into the body of Jesus than does my shit."
... Did you think that proposition was a "fact" you could "prove"? No, you can't, because a a "fact" is nothing but a commonly shared belief. The idea that the wafer IS NOT Jesus Christ is no more a fact to you than the idea that it IS Christ is a fact to a Catholic.
_____________________
"However, since there seems to be quite few Catholics who are say they are willing to KILL someone over this stupid belief, I think it is a GOOD thing to let them know in no uncertain terms that a stupid belief does not deserve respect ... and a stupid belief that people are willing to kill over deserves condemnation. That is why I STRONGLY support YouTube keeping those videos available for people to see."
... Assuming you didn't mistype your first sentence, if there are a mere "few Catholics" who are willing to kill over this "belief", then why would you desecrate something that ALL Catholics hold sacred (disrespect a HUGE group of people because of the actions of a mere "few")? Since you hold your reason above all else, can you please explain the rationality behind that?
... If you had rather meant to type, "quite a few Catholics," then you would be flat out wrong (seeing as there are NOT a lot of Catholics who would kill over this matter).
Either way, the desecrations do not "let them know" that that the Catholic belief "does not deserve respect." There is no intention to teach a lesson of what "qualifies" as deserving of respect- there is simply the act of disrespect. The only thing the videos accomplish is to escalate the matter and ensure that problems will continue.
"The fucking cracker no more turns into the body of Jesus than does my shit."
... Did you think that proposition was a "fact" you could "prove"? No, you can't, because a a "fact" is nothing but a commonly shared belief. The idea that the wafer IS NOT Jesus Christ is no more a fact to you than the idea that it IS Christ is a fact to a Catholic.
You can't prove my shit doesn't turn into the body of Jesus either. But it is STUPID to believe it actually does.
_____________________
"However, since there seems to be quite few Catholics who are say they are willing to KILL someone over this stupid belief, I think it is a GOOD thing to let them know in no uncertain terms that a stupid belief does not deserve respect ... and a stupid belief that people are willing to kill over deserves condemnation. That is why I STRONGLY support YouTube keeping those videos available for people to see."
... Assuming you didn't mistype your first sentence, if there are a mere "few Catholics" who are willing to kill over this "belief", then why would you desecrate something that ALL Catholics hold sacred (disrespect a HUGE group of people because of the actions of a mere "few")? Since you hold your reason above all else, can you please explain the rationality behind that?
I left out the word "a". so it should have said "quite a few". But no matter ... even if it were only one Catholic and no one realized that threatening a person's life is infinitely more heinous than stealing a cracker then the act is still worthwhile.
... If you had rather meant to type, "quite a few Catholics," then you would be flat out wrong (seeing as there are NOT a lot of Catholics who would kill over this matter).
What I said was that there was quite [a] few who SAID they were willing to kill over it. And that is true. I would hope you are correct and these people were just blowing off steam. However, Webster Cook was physically roughed around by Catholics trying to get the cracker back, so they were willing to use force. Furthermore, through the efforts of Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, Webster Cook and the friend who went with him (and did nothing more than sit quietly in his seat) faced expulsion hearings.
I am totally in favor of a protest that does NO REAL HARM but lets these Catholics know that their sensitivities with regard to the Eucharist need not have ANY standing with other people. In short, there is no reason to respect a stupid belief.
Either way, the desecrations do not "let them know" that that the Catholic belief "does not deserve respect." There is no intention to teach a lesson of what "qualifies" as deserving of respect- there is simply the act of disrespect. The only thing the videos accomplish is to escalate the matter and ensure that problems will continue.
Fine ... let it continue until they DO get the message.
it is NOT a "GOOD thing to let them know in no uncertain terms that a stupid belief does not deserve respect"
Sure it is. See how easy it is to refute unsubstantiated assertion.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
For all your cherishing of reason, of acting rational, and your criticizing of the irrational (the Catholics and the Eucharist), I'm afraid your own activity on this very forum fails to meet your standards. What I mean is, I fail to see any "reason" behind your posting on this forum. Surely you don't think you can affect a major change in other people's beliefs about the Eucharist (there's not that many people likely to be reading your post, and even of those that are, the Catholics among them would likely be unwilling to change their ways). It wouldn't be "reasonable" to think that your actions would cause any sort of significant movement against those beliefs by fellow atheists- for the same reason. It wouldn't reasonable to write your posts just to change the minds of one or two people; that would be an irrational, excessive waste of effort. So if you're not writing to affect others, what's your rational reasoning behind writing?
The kind of mind that is attracted to dogma finds it easier to believe that a cracker can be changed into human flesh than it is to believe a mind can be changed?
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I'm not so sure why you're asking me that. I was asking a personal question of DarwinsBeagle because I'm not sure that his own activity on this forum is any more grounded in reason than is a Catholic's activity of practicing the sacrament of the Eucharist.
(I already admitted that A mind might possibly be changed by his efforts... I also pointed out that to simply change A (emphasis on the singular) mind or two with all the effort DB put forth would overall be an irrational effort... Rationally, there are other activities DB could be putting the same amount of effort into that would yield greater results as far as changing minds on this matter. So to pursue the same goal by blogging on this forum would be irrational. I gave DB the benefit of the doubt that there was in fact a rational reason behind the postings and ended by questioning just what that reason was (since it wasn't to change minds).)
The cracker is not Jesus.
Leave Canada, please - Canadian Dude
i dont think that this should be a religious debate about what anyone believes the host really symbolizes. Rather I think it should be about respect for others. This video is really offending some people. Should we not all support respectlife in the fact that she is saying that it is not right that youtube will take off videos that offend some groups and not others?
She has no more right to expect YouTube to take those videos off their site simply because they offend her, than I have a right to expect all Catholics to quit practicing the Eucharist because the stupidity of the transubstantiation doctrine offends me.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
That's my point! Thank you! :) (I hate these similies)
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
When you place a colon [:]and a parenthesis [)] next to each other, it is going to produce a smiley. If you hate them, don't make the emoticon faces.
"What a crazy random happenstance!"
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Read my Blog!
Well, I know what things make the similies...I still don't like them...they're obnoxious...any way to turn them off from the posts?
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
I totally understand. I can't use my favorite emoticon because it automatically turns into this huge yellow drooling face. I don't know if there's a way to turn it off (my guess, unfortunately, is no), but I'll flag your comment for the other faculty to take a look at. Maybe one of them has all the answers... ;-)
"What a crazy random happenstance!"
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Read my Blog!
Thanks! I appreciate it!
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
Because so many users have requested them over the years; we're not going to turn them off... but I have changed the majority of the prompts so they don't automatically insert when you do things like :( or :)
Happy medium?
-----
~Fallon~
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.- Russell
-----
Awesome, thank you! : )
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
I think this one was my favorite...
Eucharist desecration #6: Venus Flytrap
I have to say, this FSMDude really has a fair for this stuff.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Part 1 is up:
http://progressiveu.org/blog/49404-eucharist-real-presence-1-science
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
First off I would just like to say that you can learn a lot about a person by the contents of their post. Certain people here (I don’t think it is necessary to mention names because I’m quite certain it is obvious) seem determined only to prove their ignorance and immaturity, and to do whatever it takes to rile up every person of faith on the board (by the way, it appears you are failing). I just wish to let you know from an outsider’s point of view that you are only making you and your views seem foolish. You made me roll my eyes with almost every post…but it’s going to take more than the annoying buzzing of an ill-mannered mosquito to get me very upset. Not that I’m calling you an ill-mannered mosquito, just a figure of speech dontcha know?;-)
Also I will point out the fact that the original reason for free speech and freedom of religion was so that people could practice their beliefs without fear of consequence or ridicule. Those certain people I previously mentioned as well as this “fsmdude” are not /using/ their right to free speech, they’re abusing it. Fsmdude is practicing hate speech and whether or not a person believes in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist, one can at least recognize the lack of respect being shown to his fellow man, and acknowledge it. It’s childish to reprove others because you think their beliefs are dumb, it is noble to stand up for someone whether or not you agree with them. YouTube’s picking and choosing who they are going to ‘cater to’ as RL put it, is unfair and I think it is our duty to let them know we won’t tolerate it. The story of the Good Samaritan might be biblical, but I for one don’t think it stupid or something just for Christians…I think it is an example we should all be following.
I signed the petition and encourage all of you to do the same!
They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic
Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
God bless all of you!
They also came for the gays and no one spoke up.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
...the original poem (attributed with some controversy to Martin Niemöller) doesn't mention gay people.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Yes, gays face their share of unfair persecution, and though I do not support the homosexual lifestyle, I do support them as people and do not ridicule them.
However if that is all you got from my post I think you're kind of missing the point.
There's a link at the bottom of every comment box that reads, "reply." If you click it, your reply to my reply will show up in a nice line, and the flow of the conversation will be preserved.
I wasn't commenting on the point of your post. I was just commenting on one group that was left out of that quote. I know it isn't a part of the original, but every time I read it, I think that the gays who were killed in the holocaust need representation too. Just speaking up in the memory of my people.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I think I am going to switch my signature quote to what you said "There's a link at the bottom of every comment box that reads, "reply." If you click it, your reply to my reply will show up in a nice line, and the flow of the conversation will be preserved." but I would like your permission first.
Of course I really like the ones I have, so I will have to think about it.
Love is like a box of chocolates; if you chose wisely you won’t be disappointed and have to spit it out. ~T
A nation of well informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins. ~Benjamin Franklin
But I think you'd have to give up your others, which are great! If you use all of the signatures together, it might be a little much. Then again...That phrase as a signature might save us a lot of work! :phew:
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Guess what! I was just texted that they took the eucharist guy off youtube.
Love is like a box of chocolates; if you chose wisely you won’t be disappointed and have to spit it out. ~T