BF2S Forums Ban The Catholic Church From America.

blah blah blah i say fuck all this religion stuff and people we dont like ship em out!
now.. since we cant do that:
dont feel like thinking about all you said. I have no problem with mexicans being here they just need to do it legally and LEARN FUCKING ENGLISH! The U.S. is a melting pot of nationalities but the reality is not all are liked..  We do need to do something though to ensure patriotism and the economy to not suffer.

All in all, I do commend you on your article, ATG.

As a catholic myself, I really don't find anything wrong with this.

Everyone, remember this:

1) The internet is the exchange of free ideas. We should welcome any and all input from all. Everyone diserves their two cents.

2) Everyone has their own beliefs, repect someone elses, and remind them to respect yours!

3) It all boils down to the person. I'm mexican as well. My family were illegals... My dad went thru and got his citizenship and my mom is a legal resident.  I was born and raised in the good USofA. I try to go to church when I can. My girl is gonna convert when we marry. We practice absitanince. We're set on two kids, maybe three(we'll see). We are both active in our community, or at least my girl is. I work at a Publix. I'm hard working, will suceed as a person, and will teach my children to work hard, respect others, and to do the best for everyone.

Surely I break the mold. We can only try to get others to follow our ideas.

Last edited by RicoAtPublix (2007-04-13 21:01:48)

yes

I too read the article, followed the sources in it entirety. And I came to one conclusion. The socialist ideals in both the sources and text flaw the argument.

Now don't get the torches yet, keep in mind I am certainly not a religious fellow.

Now Mr. ATG...

You should know very well that Communism is a very terrible form of government / way of life. Sure the U.S. has done a terrible job of trying to eradicate it, but you supporting it just makes you the enemy. Socialism is a terrible thing, few still get power and even more get hurt in the end. Blaming this with the backup of Immigrants hurts your rep even more. All too often they are used as scape goats, and you sir needed them to back up your terrible argument. If you get rid of these terrible "evil immigrants" then guess what, that American Economy you love and hold dear, it falls apart. Why? Because people like you are too "superior" or the idea of a job being "beneath you" to hold their jobs.

EDIT removed closing comment, posting late @ night == sometimes acting like a douche

Last edited by DarkZealot89 (2007-04-14 21:40:02)

Canin wrote:

ATG wrote:

If "Towards a Better Distribution of Land" has a failing, it is its emphasis on distribution at the expense of production (though it theorizes that "growth in agriculture leads to an expansion in the industrial service sectors, and hence to overall economic growth") - But land is an issue that lends itself to an overemphasis on distribution because, unlike labor and capital, there is only a fixed quantity of it available.

So, because there is a limited amount of land, it shouldn't be privately owned because that, of course wouldn't be equal now would it?

Are you out of your fucking mind?

The link is in regards to the left leaning of the Catholic church, (you do realize that the split in the Catholic Church is real and is widening, don't you?) and what they have to say about a supposed document from the Vatican, which reads "The document then criticizes "the imposition of import harriers" that protect "the produce of large landholdings from international competition." This is a direct condemnation of protectionism of the mercantile sort. It's hard to see how the left can squeeze an embrace of socialism out of these comments.

Against price control on grounds that it benefits some, hurts others and imposes artificial shortages? Against taxes on exports? Against "intervention" that alters "the market distribution mechanism"? So is this Vatican document. And it is remarkably explicit on a crucial economic question: "The social teaching of the Church condemns - - - state ownership of land as leading to the depersonalization of civil society." Instead the church embraces "family-owned and farmed enterprises," even as "it is not possible to determine a priori what the structure of farm life should be.' That, the document implies, is for the price system and the market to determine,"

  No where does it say the Catholic Church supports deprivatization of land.


  edit: You know what, I just read through the other links to your supporting documentation, and I decided I am not going to argue or comment on this anymore as every link you supplied was to a left leaning or even communist related site or article. Just goes to show you can make anything read the way you want it to with an internet search engine, eh?

Fine, and +1 to you for your careful analysis.

Ya know, it's not like I spend hours compiling a thread, reading every nuance of every link to make sure it fits 100% into my view. Fact is, my main concern is with:

A) pedophiles in the church.
B) the churches meddling into the internal affairs of the USA. Don't give me the shit about sanctuary; obey the laws.
C) as ancillary evidence of the churches misdeeds I cite links suggesting they are fomenting insurgencies, and that only leads to links where they openly say they are for socialism. What the fuss?

Given the criteria for what constitutes a threat, a massively funded organization actively working to shelter as many illegal aliens as possible and influence policy to favor them it seems to be this is a topic entirely worthy of debate.

Carry on.

Actually if we could tax those 12 million I personally would have no problem with them being here, as it is though they are taking unearned money from me through taxes & welfare programs & I have a problem with that.

I'm sorry ATG, I know you meant well with this post, but you must be joking me.  Do you really think you can blame an archaic belief for the lack of a decent government in Mexico?  I'm no Catholic, but this is just foolish.

Lets think why a true Catholic (the Pope) would dislike Capitalism.  Oh, that's right.  Jesus supposedly gave up all of his worldly possessions to spread the word of God.  Capitalism is a free economic belief where everyone supposedly has equal opportunity to become rich, powerful, etc.  It promotes the gaining of wealth.

New Testament, Matthew, about 70-80 C.E. wrote:

Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.  And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.

I don't think that could be more blunt.  Rich men don't go to heaven because they didn't follow the path of Jesus.  It's obvious that by naming his book Jesus of Nazareth that he promotes the following of the teachings of Jesus.

While I'm at it, lets provide another reason why the Pope would dislike the gaining of wealth.

Muslim Qur'an, about 620-650 C.E. wrote:

O ye believers! devour not each other's property among yourselves unlawfully save that be trading by mutual consent.

Woe to the cheaters! who, when they take measure of their dues from men, take it fully; and when they measure out to others or weigh out from them, they give less than is due.

And give full measure when you measure out and weight with true balance.  This is fair and better in the end.

If the two parties seek the truth and make it manifest, their transaction shall be blessed, and if they conceal and tell a lie, the blessings of their transaction shall be obliterated.

On the day of judgment, the honest, truthful Muslim merchant will take rank with the martyrs of the faith.

Allow me to summarize this for those who aren't fluent in an old English text.  During the creation of Islam in the 7th century, the Middle East was the center of trade between the rich regions of China/India and Egypt/Ethiopia/Europe.  Their geographic position made them the perfect choice for caravans, and because they had camels which could go for weeks without water, crossing the desert was a much simpler matter than it would be for a Chinese merchant.  Mohammad, the prophet of Islam, was a Bedouin merchant himself before he conquered Mecca and destroyed the idols in the Ka'ba, making it a holy Muslim city.  When he and his allies wrote the Qur'an, they incorporated their lifestyles into it because Islam started off as an Arabian religion because almost no other regions of the world could relate to the lifestyles of caravan merchants on the Arabian Peninsula.
This passage of the Qur'an states that he who is a good, honest merchant will make it rich on "the day of Judgment (death)" even if they do not make it rich while living.  This promotes peace and fairness in a region torn by clan based warfare.  This passage is in direct contrast with the previous quote from Matthew.  It might make you wonder, why did the Christians not want to have a wealth based lifestyle like the Muslims did?  It's quite simple.

Note that the quote from Matthew is in the New Testament.  This means that it was added after Constantine was ruling the Eastern Roman Empire, meaning that Christianity had entered Europe.  It just so happens that Western Europe was entering a dark age at that exact time period.  Therefore, trade was minimal and an inefficient way of making a living, unlike in the Arabian Peninsula.


Moving onto your next statement, the overpopulation.  I think this requires little explanation.  More followers is directly proportional to more power.  We all know how power is the one thing everyone desires, from Jesus (with all of his disciples and followers) to Mohammad (same scenario as Jesus) and even modern day people like the Pope (more followers means more control and more wealth).  Every political leader in existence became a leader through the search for power, so I need not explain Bush or Blair or Kim Jong Il, etc.  It is for the sheer lust of power that Christian officials 'ban' the use of birth control or condoms.  Power.



Catholics and Socialism...  Although I've never paired the two up before, I think Christianity may have been the first form of Socialism.  It's got the guy in power at the top, a constant flow of money coming in, and enough people believing whatever spews out of your holy ass to encircle the globe by holding hands at least twice over.

But I don't see how this supports your debate.  The article says that they want to create land reforms in Latin America, Mexico.  So isn't that a possible solution to the political and economic crisis in Mexico?  Your big fear is that socialism will make us enemies with Mexico (or so it seems), but socialism isn't really that bad.  It only poses a nuisance to the US because it's easier to exploit a weak capitalist government than it is a weak socialist one.


In response to the Peruvian murders of the 5 religious people, so what?  It's not uncommon for governments to kill those who stand to incite revolt and reform.  Take Malcolm X in the USA.  The FBI killed him because he was uncontrollable by the FBI (unlike MLKJ in which the FBI had records of scandalous behavior on part of the King, which was similar to blackmail), and the government doesn't want to deal with rebels.  The clergymen were supposedly starting socialist revolts, so they were killed.


I can't really argue with the molestation charges against the Catholic Churches of America, except that I think they are far less common than the media makes it sound.  Very few priests molest children, so I think it is unfair to knock the whole religion based on the actions of about a single percent of their priests.


Your post seems inconclusive.  You talk about Mexico and the part religion plays in disrupting order, but I have yet to see/hear the Vatican actually put forth effort to attack America because we disagree with Jesus' philosophy.  Of course it's possible, but it just sounds like a lousy conspiracy theory.  Your evidence shows that the Church can be considered a form of socialism, but how does that involve Mexico.  You did say that you were brought up to dislike socialism, but you were also brought up a Mormon and you found the truth to that.  Have you found the truth about socialism?  It seems kinda simple to me.  America got its power from exploiting others.  Believe it or not, it has been happening since we became a nation.  A socialist government is essentially self-sufficient, or at least they try to be.  They do not rely on other nations to 'support' them for this reason.  Capitalist nations on the other hand are about free trade, which allows us Americans to export our culture to it and take control through the economy.  Once we weaken their economy, we loan them money like a good neighbor but make a killing off it in interest.

So yes, Catholicism can be considered a socialist society, but so what?  Just because someone is a socialist doesn't make them a bad person.  You relate them to the Taliban, but with no support.  They're both dangerous, but so if every other society, nation, and group of people on earth.  Nobody is perfect, and the Catholic Church is far from it, but it doesn't make them the biggest evil on Earth.

I feel that concluding that all great accomplishments by the Church in America are undone by recent scandals and political meddling is incredibly exaggerated.  I'm sure people like Thomas Edison were Christians, and he and his inventions were incredibly important.  One man touching one young boy inappropriately does not undo the revolution that the light bulb caused.  Even if it was one-hundred men touching one-hundred boys, the effects are everlasting.

Allright ATG here is my opinion on your "Thoughts"

ATG wrote:

Growing up, I always thought that our beef with Cuba was because of their communist socialist ties. The French were bad because they are a socialist country. 58000 young Americans died in Vietnam to stop the spread of socialism and communism.

Flash forward to today. Americas main gripe besides exploding Islamic jihadist is the border with Mexico.

Mexico has a enormous problem with poverty and large families. Part of Catholic dogma is an anti-birth control stance. So you have reckless family planning combined with a corrupt  economy and what do you get?
12 million illegal aliens from Mexico in the United States.

First point. Catholic dogma about birth control.

Part 1: it's true that the catholic church is against birth control products but not because they want a huge populace nope infact its the other way around. The catholic church sees birth control as a means for people to have "you know what" before they're married with birth control products they can have it all they want with as many partners as possible and you know what happen then? Yep H.I.V. and AIDS then when the people finally do get married and have kids they will most likely be born with aids. Reason #1 Disease.

Part 2: Children born to mothers unsure about there fathers. Ever since The pill was introduced in the 60's women with children born outta wedlock has increased dramatically(Last i heard it was 50%)  Why do you think hundred's of years ago people who we're married could only have sex? So everyone would know who the father was. Reason #2 Paternity.

Part 3: When you say family planning issues are you even taking into account the states role? You cant just blame the church you have to blame greedy politicians(which exist everywhere not just mexico) Who will use ties with a religion to get re-elected. See in mexico and many catholic or christian states abortions are illegal why? Because the church is all about the preservation of life. It all goes back to what jesus said about peace and not war, Love and not anger, Life and not death. I dont agree with abortions unless it would kill the mother. I do think abortion is murder but i dont think that the pill and condoms is murder. If people dont want babies they can just give them up for adoption. Do you know what some women who have had abortions said? It is more painful then birth. Reason #3 Life.(Which kinda perplexes me when atheists say that, If they believe they only live once should'nt they help the next generation? I mean what's more important to an atheist the preservation of their own life or the creation of a new one?)

ATG wrote:

Lets examine a few others issues with regards to the catholics, forgetting, of course  crimes or allegations thereof prior to the 1980's.

Pope's New Book Criticizes Capitalism

"Confronted with the abuse of economic power, with the cruelty of capitalism that degrades man into merchandise, we have begun to see more clearly the dangers of wealth and we understand in a new way what Jesus intended in warning us about wealth."

Well, excuse the fuck outta me. I guess owning my own home and making payments on my wifes car is wealth. I'm all for mexicans having a decent quality of life, I'd just prefer that they largely do it in Mexico.

Point Two capitolism.

Ok have you even read the book? Or even read a few parts of it? It talks about the greedy mulitnational corporations that are making life hell for the poor around the world.(That title is wrong it should be the pope condemns extreme capitolism) This is just like in germany the pope tried to make a point about people hijacking islam and he got called a racist. If a muslim called jesus a bad word what would happen? Riots in rome against muslims? Bombings of islamic school's in turkey? No i dont think not. Everytime the pope make's a statement about the extreme's in society it will always backfire on him. Even if he is 100% right people will always pull out some bs and make him seem wrong.

ATG wrote:

The more illegal aliens are exported to America, the more the quality of life here is diminished, wages are repressed and law and order breaks down.


"You cannot claim to worship Jesus in the Tabernacle, if you do not pity Jesus in the slums.

But instead of teaching responsible family planning you advocate filling the slums with with these needy, largely illiterate people who then go forth to be fruitful and multiply. Teaching responsibility is charity.

If "Towards a Better Distribution of Land" has a failing, it is its emphasis on distribution at the expense of production (though it theorizes that "growth in agriculture leads to an expansion in the industrial service sectors, and hence to overall economic growth") - But land is an issue that lends itself to an overemphasis on distribution because, unlike labor and capital, there is only a fixed quantity of it available.

So, because there is a limited amount of land, it shouldn't be privately owned because that, of course wouldn't be equal now would it?

Are you out of your fucking mind?

Point Two Capitalism continued.

Part 1: It's not the churches fault of the situation in mexico, Oh no it's the politicians who would rather line their pockets with money use the church as an excuse, Cause the rise of communism in their own countries, And when things get bad they flee, the the U.S. has to step in to prevent it. Reason #1 Corruption.

Part 2: Family planning. They do teach family planning but they are not well funded thats why the programs fail. In mexico the kids are told to abstain from their preachers which they only see once a week. But in tv they watch their role models promote the exact opposite which they might see everyday.(The human brain is attracted to negativity and the easy way out which results in more pleasure) Reason #2 Funding.

Part 3:Land distribution. Here's the thing it advocates it for poor countries where the lower class outnumbers the middle and upper by 3-1 sometimes. And it's talking about giving it back to the poor whose ancestors originally owned it, They where enslaved by the conquitadors(who used religion as an excudse to commit their crimes). So the people themselves can make a living and make the situation better in their own country's without resorting to bloodshed. Reason #3 Preventing violence.

ATG wrote:

In the Jesuit' America, Miguel Esperanza give the following figures: "Between September 1990 and the present moment (June 1992), the Shining Path has assassinated five pastoral agents, two religious women and three priests. The number may seem small, but politically and socially their deaths clearly signified an important new step in the violent career of the Shining Path." 17 Klaiber's writings refer to the same five.

The allegation here is that certain Catholic clergy and nuns have been killed in South America because they are helping foment radical socialist regimes and insurgencies.

We all shook our heads when the nuns were murdered in Peru, now it appears there is more to the story.


Oh, let's not forget the hundreds of millions in sex crimes settlements.

Last I checked, people who went around dorking little boys went to prison, they didn't write a check and get sent on to the next parish.


So in conclusion, the Catholic Church has become a cartoonish vision of evil, and a forceful proponent of socialism. I think it's time the entity be put on a list of vile organizations, like the Taliban.

Whatever good that it has done as been undone by recent scandles and political meddling.

Point Three.  Politics.

Part 1: Why do you think that the Catholics did'nt want intervention in peru? It's not because they want communism it's because they want the people to hold power and make their own choices for their own country not be influenced by an outside force. I know that they we're killed in the early 90's. But the accusations are wrong on both sides. First off Mao says kill all those with a god or a belief in a higher power(I think it may have been stalin or lenin? I gotta catch up on my history) And working for the government? Maybe they were doing missionary work? And the maoist's did'nt like that they had affiliations with the government. I know that they use terrorist methods to get their point across but do honestly think that the church would support such groups if they knew in advance their methods?

Part 2: How about the Imam's or rabbi's that do the same thing? Did you watch 20/20 today about the protestant minister who confessed to touching 40 boys? You cant define an entirity by the acts of a minority unless the majority support the acts or refuse to acknowledge them.

Part 3: The church is neither liberal,social or ,conservative. The church is like a government the leader may have different idea's on how to lead then the people who work for him, The idea's change from time to time. Remember from the 1700's with the pope who hated democracy? Because the idea of letting people who we're uneducated vote?


ATG the same can be applied to any group on this planet. I can make a thread about why Atheism should be banned or why Communism is evil Maybe a thread about how Islam encourages terrorism? You have some points but there are always counter points. Don't forget man no group has spotless record(Not even buddhism, Japanese version where warriors are praised and so is materialism and honor) I could write alot more but i gotta go to sleep night all.

I sometimes agree with ATG posts(however confusing),
but this time,

I will say as others have before me.....

ATg, GET A LIFE!

.......any life,

Your wish-washy opinions are the rantings of a lonely,isolated,pathetic individual. Seek help from councellors or psychiatrists.

You obviously feel personally affected by the mexican immigration to the US.....GET OVER IT FOOL.

Land of opportunity doesnt mean JUST YOU....arrogant piece of shite...

As for your religious attack.....your brainwashed.....your opinions are invalid.

Superglueman wrote:

I sometimes agree with ATG posts(however confusing),
but this time,

I will say as others have before me.....

ATg, GET A LIFE!

.......any life,

Your wish-washy opinions are the rantings of a lonely,isolated,pathetic individual. Seek help from councellors or psychiatrists.

You obviously feel personally affected by the mexican immigration to the US.....GET OVER IT FOOL.

Land of opportunity doesnt mean JUST YOU....arrogant piece of shite...

As for your religious attack.....your brainwashed.....your opinions are invalid.

Because your obviously a person of rather lacking intelligence I shall not bother with you, good day!

Havok wrote:

Moving onto your next statement, the overpopulation.  I think this requires little explanation.  More followers is directly proportional to more power.  We all know how power is the one thing everyone desires, from Jesus (with all of his disciples and followers) to Mohammad (same scenario as Jesus) and even modern day people like the Pope (more followers means more control and more wealth).  Every political leader in existence became a leader through the search for power, so I need not explain Bush or Blair or Kim Jong Il, etc.  It is for the sheer lust of power that Christian officials 'ban' the use of birth control or condoms.  Power.

Yeah thats right....pharmaceutical companies are not after sheer lust of power..by selling contraception.

The medical industry is not after money and power gained form treating(ongoing) STD's(promoted by random"you know what") ,which came about due to of wide availability of contraceptions and the manufactured"sex" revolution(1960's)

And the church gains power and money from advocating birth control how.....?...f***en goose..

All posts from America are anti religious....not surprised with all the violent,lustful,hatefilled media you all absorb constantly, you are such a self righteous country and selfish in your aims, that any selfish measures you take are seen as"good"(from your point of view).

Heads of US corporations beat the pope to hands down to title of the devil reincarnate...


Americans are so insular, that i dont think they are worldy enough to debate religion...their opinions always mirror some Tv show line...pretty narrow minded.
No offense to religious Americans(high five!)

ATG wrote:

neon_flux601 wrote:

you're not protestant by chance?

just kidding!

can't get that theme song out of my head for 'the catholic boat' from south park - remember? when father mackey had to defeat the water lizards... and the giant spider... oh the times spent at uni...

No, but I am a long suffering American who lives 93 miles from the Mexican border.

rolf Mexicans lol but yeah not a big fan of Catholic religion, they burned and killed a lot of peeps. 

Also considering that Catholics killed anyone who did not believe in God the same way they did, they killed many great scientists because the scientists stated earth was not at the center of our galaxy. Also they killed Martin Luther and 30,000 (approx) burned by the Inquisition . Also they killed a lot of people who were not Catholic such as: Jews, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Protestants and other people.

One word--UNCONSTITUTIONAL