New Civil Rights Movement: "Catholic Bishop: Vote For A Democrat And You’ll Probably Go To Hell"

"Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas John Paprocki says that any Catholic who votes for a Democrat very well may go to Hell, because a vote for any member of a party that supports sin makes the voter 'morally complicit.' Paprocki names the Log Cabin Republicans and  'pro-choice' (scare quotes his) Republicans as 'equally as wrong as their Democratic counterparts.'”

Then why are only Democratic voters going to hell?  Besides, the claim cannot be true: they will only go to Purgatory, a place invented so that Roman Catholic priests in Mexico from Cortez to Calles could unburden the serfs (indigenous people) of their hard-earned centavos.  Hitchens discusses indulgences in god is Not Great.  Why would a good and all-powerful god put your loved ones in a special cyberspace where they must remain until the guy in a black suit and a little white collar takes your money to download them into God's hard drive? 

And speaking of moral complicity, why do many thousands flock to the cathedrals each Sunday putting money in a plate so that child molesters would be given new parishes upon the discovery they have porked some acolyte or choir boy and, O.J.-like, forced civil litigation to redress grievances.  If the coffers are running on empty it is because of the pay-outs to hopelessly-damaged young men who, if they remember the obscenities at all, feel lost in some horror movie.  The current occupant of Castel Gondalfo knew all about the pedophile priests and did nothing to stop it.  He had a U.S.-Vatican treaty to hide behind and he covered up lies and secrets and is thus guilty of obstruction of justice. 

Since when is there an exception to laws making it a criminal act to not refer a matter to the Child Protective Services allowing priests a waiver?

Views: 313

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on September 29, 2012 at 2:57pm
I wonder what is in the definition of a god that satan is not regarded as a god? How is it that other religions can have gods with limited abilities but powerful satan is not a god? Is that just so christians can pretend to monotheism while still having duotheism? Then throw in the pantheon of saints plus mary and its starting to look like catholics are polytheists in everything but their marketing slogans.
Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on October 14, 2012 at 9:34am

Back from Mexico or would have responded sooner.  Catholicism and, to a greater or lesser extent, the Protestant religions, regard Satan as an angel cast out of Heaven for rebelling against God.  He is known as the "Deceiver" because he leads people astray from dogma.  You and I are obviously devotees of Satan in the minds of many of these people, as witness the Georgia politician who said that evolution is a doctrine from Hell.  The O.T. God said, "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me," thereby acknowledging the existence of other Gods.  But, hey, at the time the fictional Mosheh took down (actually authored) the Decalogue, there were many rival deities.  (Mosheh probably was Mohammed's greatest inspiration: man makes god to obtain the allegiance of the masses: if God said don't do it, it packs more punch than merely saying "I order you to do this or that and forbid you to do this and that.")  Baal, for example, many, many others.  If Satan were to be seen as a God, then surely his powers would equal those of Jehovah, so the Christians fine-tuned him, making him a rebellious angel.  Today, he is the bugaboo of the religion.  As we all know, if you are going to unite a people, you must have, or create, a common enemy.  Satan fills the bill.

Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on October 14, 2012 at 2:04pm

I love a saying of Aleister Crowley, that the Devil is the God of anyone you personally dislike.  Satan and Lucifer are merely the Egyptian Typhon and Set.  All religions have them, and monotheisms are absolutely dependent on them, as they inspire fear and anxiety.  They are necessary as  bugaboos, a common enemy so unsettling they become the focal point as a common enemy.

Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on October 14, 2012 at 4:31pm

Mainly, Satan is a crutch.  Remember the black comedian who crossdressed in makeup and said, "the Devil made me wear this dress."  If evil can be blamed on a boogeyman, he takes on extraordinary qualities, and as we all know, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.  Unfortunately, people go see little girls screw their heads counter-clockwise and come to a stop saying to a priest, "Your mother sucks cock in Hell," which only reinforces the either-or false dichotomy, what the late Aleister Crowley called the doings of Choronzon, Demon of Dispersion.  (And BTW, the Anderson movie doesn't go into the fact that Hubbard's enlightenment on the road to Damascus was Crowleyanity.)

Permalink Reply by Raving Hillbilly on September 30, 2012 at 10:23am
Aside from all the theft to protect a theocratic plutocracy, mind control and etc of the RC church, they have a priesthood living in an unnatural condition. I submit that this celibacy is in part responsible for the rampaging rape by priests, particularly of the young. Indeed this happens with non celibate clergy as well. That comes from a combination of thing including the clerical relations that amount to mind control and an exceptional power over others. But the RCs put it all together.
Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on October 14, 2012 at 2:56pm

How can the priesthood be both celibate and sexually active with minors?  I predict that the next Pope will issue a bull and make married clergy the norm.

Permalink Reply by Raving Hillbilly on October 27, 2012 at 8:45pm
Celibacy and pediphilia certainly are not compatible in any moral sense. However homosexual boys, having been taught that they are an abomination, would naturally be attracted to an institution that allows them to renounce all sexuality to escape their "abomination." Humans, being what we are, cannot escape sexuality. So,, it gets expressed in perverse ways.

Nor are heterosexuals in a celibate priesthood free of their sexuality. So, it is most likely to be expressed with those over whom they have power. More specifically, the power of "moral authority." Celiibacy increases the likelihood of pediphilia.

This is more pronounce with victimizing the young but it happens with adults as well.
Permalink Reply by Dr. Allan H. Clark on September 30, 2012 at 8:17pm

Whatever moral authority the Roman Catholic Church may have exercised in the past was sacrificed to protect the church in the child molestation scandals of the last decade or so. So many priests (4000+) were involved with so many victims (10,000+) that no justification or excuse can be made. The church is an unquestionably evil institution and any good it may have done is far offset by the evil it has condoned.

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on September 30, 2012 at 8:57pm

I'm only a little surprised the RICO laws haven't been invoked.  Seems like racketeering to me.

Permalink Reply by Pat on September 30, 2012 at 9:15pm

They certainly sacrificed whatever moral authority they had. But, I submit, that "moral authority" was, at best, a chimera. Over a millenium of bloodthirsty anti-semitism culminating in the Concordat with the Third Reich, the gleeful participation in the genocidal imperialism in the New World for fun and profit (including the slave trade), the intentional suppression of women and promotion of dysfunctional families with insane pronouncements on sex and reproduction, and now child torture and rape. The old Inquisition still exists. It's just been renamed as the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith. And with this blood splattered past, when can you expect the "mea culpas" coming from the church? Here's a hint. The church did apologize about the wrongful conviction of Galileo for stating the earth was not the center of the unvierse. It was in the year 2000; 358 years after his death and 28 years after the last man walked on the moon.  I'm not holding my breath.

Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on October 14, 2012 at 12:01pm

I cannot believe (and must know) that you and I agree so completely on this issue, I think I shall refrain from discussing it.  You already say precisely what I would say.

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on October 14, 2012 at 1:25pm

ditto

RSS

Members

Blog Posts

Death of a family member

Posted by Larry Taylor on May 20, 2013 at 8:15pm 3 Comments

OK. I am venting. My mother died two weeks ago. She was a “god fearing christian.” Before her death she refused all medical treatment. She wanted to be left alone. She even refused to speak with my brother who is a methodist minister. He is a pip, let me tell you! I suspect she did not believe, but a woman born in her time could not and did not state her actual beliefs. This is the opening salvo to all christians; FUCK YOU! I had so many people come and tell…

Continue

Unbelievable!!!!!!!!

Posted by Christy Stewart on May 20, 2013 at 2:17pm 6 Comments

This probably should not have shocked me as much as it did (especially since I am in Texas). I actually thought my coworkers were playing a joke on me because they know I am an atheist. Sadly, this was no joke. This actually happened.

I work in a psychiatric hospital. The doctors who admit patients are general MDs. (Psychiatrists see patients after admission) Yesterday evening we received several calls from irate parents. A new doctor who was doing admissions yesterday actually…

Continue

anti-atheist rant from an Orthodox Mormon part 2

Posted by Debra Stevenson on May 20, 2013 at 1:09pm 0 Comments

What do you think of this,

 

Nathan Young,

 

No Jason Torpy it is you that should be banned for promoting atheism, a belief that has no foundation in reality and zero proof behind it.  The letter was a mockery of your atheist beliefs.  I request to the board here that they remove Jason for his unverifiable beliefs in atheism for which he has no proof other than his arrogance.  The letter was a mockery of atheism.  Atheism is stupid and it should be mocked and it…

Continue

Anti-atheist post from an Orthdox Mormon

Posted by Debra Stevenson on May 20, 2013 at 12:42pm 2 Comments

 

What do you think of this Facebook comment?

 

 

Nathan Young to Jason Torpy,

 

for once you and I can agree on something.  We should disrespect beliefs that are untenable such as the belief that there is no God.  Indeed for me to respect you Jason, I cannot respect your belief in non-belief in atheism.  Your atheism comes across as arrogrance, smugness, and self righteous.  Indeed after reading "An Open Letter to My Religious Friends" I penned one…

Continue

Events

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2013   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service