3 ms·
You're going to have serious trouble showing me that the crimes of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot (a disciple of Sartre's existentialism), and other expli
by geye1234 3y ago
You're going to have serious trouble showing me that the crimes of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot (a disciple of Sartre's existentialism), and other explicitly and deliberately atheist regimes, is incidental to their ideology. Even if I were to grant, for argument's sake, that their atheist beliefs were incidental to their crimes, it's pretty trivial to show that such beliefs present no obstacle to said crimes.
You will also have serious trouble showing me that the crimes of Catholics are not incidental to their ideology. On the contrary: Catholicism explicitly condemns murder, pillage, rape and all the rest of it, under any and all circumstances and for any and all motives.
- ImJamal 3y agoI put a /s at the end of my comment. That means sarcasm. I should have been more clear, sorry about that.
- geye1234 3y agoFair enough. I assume sarcasm is easier than presenting a coherent argument. I've heard thousands of people attack the Church for rape, murder, theft, etc; but the moment you ask them to demonstrate that Catholicism as such is the cause of such crimes, rather than people who happen to be Catholics, they have nothing to say. Which isn't surprising, because their position is hopeless.