I have had personal friendships with a number of Protestants, some living admirably and others more on the edge of things, i.e. the human condition. I did notice one thing peculiar about Protestants.
A rule of life is that driving aggressively in a bad temper attracts bad tempered drivers like moths to a flame, while driving sweetly sends them far, far away. So maybe if you stopped labeling the friends as Protestants, that one peculiar thing would also go far away.
I understand that they are in this precarious position because of history, not choice, so I try not to take it personally when they start ranting about the evils of Catholicism. I mention this previous experience because I have noticed that most of your posts exhibit this schizophrenic approach.
Ahem. You’ll see from above that I too can be condescending.
Not sure how history put them in a precarious position, and your remote internet diagnosis of me having schizophrenia is also wrong.
When at first … let’s take it from the top. I was away from the thread for a week and coming back was struck by the “my religion can do no wrong” element. Philosophy is about reasoning things out, and dividing people up into abstract tribes like science and religion so as to say one bunch is perfect and the other not isn’t philosophy. All people are imperfect, all organisations make mistakes, and that applies to Christians in whatever guise - the Church, Baptists, whatever. The articles I linked show this, they’re the proof.
It is clear that you take your faith seriously, but it is also clear that in your historically based desire to malign the Church you often conflict yourself. This latest post is another example of your Jack Chick style of attack. Find something controversial that an individual or group affiliated with the Church did wrong, accentuate the faults of the actors, ignore the original intent and Church mandate, and then throw the whole mess into the lap of a Pope who most likely did not even know anything about the enterprise. VOILÀ, the Catholic Church is evil.
Ahem. We’re not in Northern Ireland during the Troubles, so Catholic vs. Protestant is a bit passé. Maybe it was more politically correct of you to stereotype me as a Protestant instead of Spanish or male
. From the above, you might detect that if I’m against drawing arbitrary battle lines between religionists and scientists, further divisions ain’t going to help. Did Jesus tell us to put stereotypes down in order to raise ourselves up? And who is Jack Chick? How did I accentuate anything by quoting articles from newspapers? Where did I throw anything in the lap of the Pope? Are you making this stuff up? Were you having a rant?
*From the information you provided (haven’t had the time or inclination to look it up yet) we have some hospitals and maybe an orphanage in Australia who are arranging adoptions for unwed mothers. Great, right? *
Ahem. El País, ABC, the BBC, etc. say 450,000 babies. Mothers shackled, drugged or told their babies had died. If you didn’t have the inclination to read then it explains why a lot of what you wrote didn’t make too much sense, and came across as just attacking the messenger.
But back on topic, I repeat that it’s lame to pretend that religion is spotless, and make the further point that it’s even more lame to say religious truth must conflict with scientific truth.
