 |
| |
|
|
Pekka
|
 |
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:20
|
|
**** you Ben, Finland wasn't allied with Nazis and if you don't care to read some history, then don't make such accusations. You know **** about the subject and as such, there is no other way to take this than an insult. An insult of being accused of being allied with Nazis no less. The blood is in our hands? What the **** are you saying? What blood? Whose blood? Get a clue.
As to other claims:
"However, it is not such that the persecution of the Muslims is done out of a preference for one kind of a religion, but in opposition to all religion in public life."
I said this already. So why should we think the Pope is any special, Vatican, Catholics or someone else? Do you not see the point, that Catholics as such have all the same individual rights as everyone else?
"I don't think they are asking this. There is a difference between a casino owner and a Christian. One, even if one owns a casino, is not always a casino owner."
No they are not asking it, and if they would, they would be shut down as well with their weird suggestions. I don't understand the rest of it. If someone owns a casino, then he is a casino owner. Yes?
"A Christian should not be elected to represent the Christian viewpoint, but rather, as a representative of the people, be allowed to follow his conscience, as any other member. He should not be required to remove his Christian principles, because they are just as much part of his conscience, as atheism may be for others."
And most do! The ones usually who have gotten so far however are quite moderate, like the most of the people, the people that person is representing. I don't see a problem in here. No one is stripping no one to believe something else.
"Either they have influence, or they do not. If they do not have the influence, then you need to ask yourself why."
They do. It doesn't mean they should have superhuman powers and be in the tables with EU decision making. They don't need THAT kind of power. They have all kinds of other powers though. This has many levels.
"The Vatican has influence far beyond population and territory, but more of a philiosophical influence, over the ideas and thoughts of vast swaths of the population."
Exactly, so why do they need to interfere with EU? Why don't Canada or US let Vatican come to the tables?
"The same can be said for the EU. The EU wants to replace the structure that once occupied Europe, but to remove all the religious references, all the references to religion of any kind."
This is an extremist view. And it's not true. No burning churches here yet.
"As such, they will always be diametrically opposed to Catholicism, and to the Vatican. There is no room for compromise."
Well Vatican better suck it up then. It can be said that Vatican has a problem with EU. Too bad.
"Yet, each must be allowed to follow their conscience. One who is a Christian, has an equal right to follow his conscience as a representative of the people, as atheists are allowed to pursue their agenda."
And they do. Most of everyone is already affiliated with a religion. You just don't think it as a factor because they are more moderate. And that moderate is in the center of the atheist and the far right religion people. Seems to be in balance, so what's the problem?
"You will not be able to avoid such questions. If you admit Turkey, then you have the problem, of how to work either to change Turkey to remove their influences of religion, or to allow Turkey to affect the EU."
No, we won't be having any problems. Turkey bends over.
"That is what is happening right now with the admission of Malta, of Ireland and Poland. The individual states have policies diametrically opposed to the EU constitution, that the EU has sought to stake as central to their secular authority."
So it's the EU's fault now? Hey, no one forced them to join. If they don't feel like getting on with the program, fine, it's only a Union so they shouldnt' have joined. I'm sure they knew the rules before joining in, plus their local politics should have jammed the whole thing if it was such a big deal to them. Other than that, it's just hot air. It IS a Union. You either get with the program and join, because it has rules. If you don't like the rules, then don't join. They can only blame themselves. EU won't bend over because of one or two new members. The members bend over. Because members WANT to join to the union.
"The Vatican is a state within the EU, and as such, should have representation due to any state."
Why should they? I don't see any reasons why they should.
"If the EU wishes to remove the presence of the Vatican, then they need a good reason to do so."
No one is removing anyone.
"Ironically, a religious government can tolerate other religions far more than a secular body."
Oh you mean like Iran? Or perhaps Saudi Arabia? This is just hot air and moot point, you have not proven it at all, and even if you did, it means nothing.
"The EU is asking religious people to submit to their policies even against their wishes, in order to become a member. As such, the EU is anti-Christian."
Well if they don't like the policies, they shouldn't join!!!! It's nothing anti. EU has policies and it doesn't bend over because someone doesn't agree with those policies. Listen, EU has a LOT of more countries than few who feel this and this policy is not very good to our beliefs. We majority countries with these policies have already made them lke this and this is the way they are. Very simple. Majority rules. We don't change the policies to something we don't like to, just because a new member wants to.. that's just redicilous.
"If politics stayed out of religion, then religion and the Vatican would stay out of them. But politics has chosen to draw battlegrounds against religion, so religion now has justification to seek political representation in order to defend their rights."
You know honestly, this is one of the most ****ed up things I've ever ready on the internet and I'm not just saying it. I'd be a bit worried. You treat religion as some kind of uber entity. And that it has some kind of rights that no one else has. Politics interfered with religion.. what the hell is that? Not in here they didn't. So why should Vatican have a say in Union WE belong to, we didn't mess with religions. Oh, but that's like a collective punishment, and now Pope gets to say into policies that affects us too? NO WAY! I don't want that, and because they're not a member as such, and they present no political wisdom or entity, they should be where they belong, out of decision making in EU. So, since we haven't done anything, now religion is doing it to us, so can we go back in mess with religion now? No? Why not, we have justification to. It just doesn't make any sense and I'm surprised that intelligent lad like you would even make such pollution of letters and words.
Making religion such a super entity with no control enables the ****os of this world to ruin it even more, make new wars, new hostilities and be more corrupt and that's ALL it can do. Let's not forget religion is not super entity, ok?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The Vatican permits other opinions. |
Lots of wiggle room in the Vatican on abortions, is there? Pretty vocal bloc of cardinals supporting gay marriage? A good number of Protestants, Jews, Muslims and athiests in the Church's upper ranks?
Do you seriously think the EU is more dogmatic than the Vatican? 'Cause that's kind of my point.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
Which means,
that EU protects the Rights of the Individual in this way and which could also protect Catholics.
If for example there would be a country within the EU, which forbids Catholics by law to attend to service or to pray, they could easily travel to another EU Country, where those things aren´t forbidden and pray/attend to service there.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:20
|
|
The fact is, in EU and Europe, everyone who wants any kind of power or position has to go through democratic process and system to get there. Just because the person has some other things, doesn't make them any better in here, or worse. So religious candidates and everyone else has to go through democratic process and operate in that field, there's no if's but's or and's about it. We're not Iran after all.
And let me remind everyone, that if this is only about abortion, then it's really not seeing forest from the trees. All this for abortion? All this big talk? Uhh... fanatics.
Hey, if EU member state wants to have abortion legal, then they do, that' simple! It's no use to blame EU of any politics, or even further more to have Pope to come and screw things up more with things like don't use condoms stuff. Pope affects people who wants to listen to him and that's cool. But we shouldn't make them any kind of extra authrority in here  that just doesn't make any sense at all, not in the least bit.
Now, the abortion banners etc on religious side usually tend to be the FAR FAR right in Euro scale. The path is in the center, not FAR FAR wing. That's just how unions works, and democracy, because that moderate, abortion allowing people are majority in here. If someone beliefs abortion is wrong, then well I guess that person wouldn't be having any abortions. It's that simple, this is democracy and this is union. There's no place for other entitites or obstructions in that picture, if we want to stay that way.
So in these democracies and this union, the peoples opinion reflects the policies we have. We clearly do not want the pro-life stance to dominate the laws of getting abortion. THat's it. If religion people want to change that, they have to go through democratic process, get votes, and do what it takes. Just playing tough with rhetorics doesn't do it. And so far they have not been succesful at all, because they are not so popular in our democratic nations. The people decide, the votes decide. THis is not what some politicians have decided. This is what Europeans have decided all together and EU respects their wishes. If the day comes when we have anti-abortion protests adn all that, and people are really thinking pro-life side more than the other, hey, I guess it's different the, but since it's not like that, too bad.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-10-2004 06:09
Attachment: 
|
