I am doing my bit to show how terrible the monotheistic organized cults religions are. Richard Dawkins answers the question “Should the pope resign?” with a definite “No.” He writes in yesterday’s Washington Post:
“Should the pope resign?” No. As the College of Cardinals must have recognized when they elected him, he is perfectly – ideally – qualified to lead the Roman Catholic Church. A leering old villain in a frock, who spent decades conspiring behind closed doors for the position he now holds; a man who believes he is infallible and acts the part; a man whose preaching of scientific falsehood is responsible for the deaths of countless AIDS victims in Africa; a man whose first instinct when his priests are caught with their pants down is to cover up the scandal and damn the young victims to silence: in short, exactly the right man for the job. He should not resign, moreover, because he is perfectly positioned to accelerate the downfall of the evil, corrupt organization whose character he fits like a glove, and of which he is the absolute and historically appropriate monarch.
No, Pope Ratzinger should not resign. He should remain in charge of the whole rotten edifice – the whole profiteering, woman-fearing, guilt-gorging, truth-hating, child-raping institution – while it tumbles, amid a stench of incense and a rain of tourist-kitsch sacred hearts and preposterously crowned virgins, about his ears.
A leering old villain. An evil corrupt organization. A profiteering, woman-fearing, guilt-gorging, truth-hating, child-raping institution.
Wow! And wow again!!
Atanu Dey : Life is a Random Draw 
True. It’s could be any religion and similar organisations, not just monotheistic.
LikeLike
Not even a single Indian network, print or otherwise carried this story. Either the Indian media is too India centric or ………..
Let each one figure his own conclusions, I have mine figured out already! 🙂
LikeLike
I think what we need is exponentially more cases of child abuse by the Church, not less. Maybe then there is some hope of parents getting sick of watching their kids get raped by these “representatives of god”, will stand up and grab their pitchforks, and hopefully bring down that 2000 year old brainwashing cult.
The church was always about controlling the masses in the guise of religion, in case we haven’t noticed.
LikeLike
It doesn’t matter if there
isone or many – god is a terrible idea. For every Ratzinger there are many Babas and Anandas (not necessarily a one::many relation, but just attempting to keep up with the monotheistic-polytheistic rhetoric :).LikeLike
First of all, I did not enjoy this. Dawkins should stick to being evolutionary biologist. I am startled by how be blames the persecution of Jews solely on the Catholic Church. They were a minority in many countries and never had a homeland until Israel was created after World War 2. However, I recently read of how the Christians in the Holy Land are leaving in droves as well, as are Christians in Lebanon and countries such as Syria and Iraq. So its seems to me that its a quarrel between intolerant Abrahamics– Christians, Jews and Muslims— so HIndus better not take any sides. In terms of ideology Judiasm is no better than Christianity–its just that the Jews never had a nation of their own and always preserved their identity as minorities everywhere. So who are they going to persecute on the basis of their religion? If you just read the Old Testament it seems a very tribal religion of wretched people who are delivered out of slavery in Egypt due to their faith in their “God”. There is nothing universal in it–at least the New Testament provides the basis for something universal although its roots are in the Abrahamic ideology.
These three religions are the same to me in terms of mentality and its foolish to favor one side over the other, as Dawkins seems to do. Although he is Anglican. One has to take everyone with a critical mind–
There are two homes of religion–one is India and the other the Middle East–The two are entirely different and incompatible in outlook–Thats the problem. The Abrahamics have more in common with each other than they do with the Dharmic religions…
LikeLike
First of all, I did not enjoy this. Dawkins should stick to being an evolutionary biologist. I am startled by how be blames the persecution of Jews solely on the Catholic Church. They were a minority in many countries and never had a homeland until Israel was created after World War 2. However, I recently read of how the Christians in the Holy Land are leaving in droves as well as conditions in the Holy Land have become intolerable, as are Christians in Lebanon and countries such as Syria and Iraq. So it seems to me that its a quarrel between intolerant Abrahamics– Christians, Jews and Muslims— so HIndus better not take any sides. In terms of ideology, Judiasm is no better than Christianity–its just that the Jews never had a nation of their own after they were defeated by the Romans and always preserved their identity as minorities everywhere. So who are they going to persecute on the basis of their religion? If you just read the Old Testament it seems a tribal religion of wretched people who are delivered out of slavery in Egypt due to their faith in their “God”. There is nothing universal in it to apply to man globally–at least the New Testament provides the basis for something universal although its roots are in the Abrahamic ideology.
These three religions are the same to me in terms of mentality and its foolish to favor one over the other, as Dawkins seems to do. One has to take everyone with a critical mind–
There are two homes of religion–one is India and the other the Middle East–The two are entirely different and incompatible in outlook–Thats the problem. The Abrahamics have far more in common with each other than they do with the Dharmic religions…
LikeLike
well said, Larissa
LikeLike
haha religion is stupid all of them. All of them should be opposed youth and nail. we need a atheist world for a bright and happy future.
LikeLike