3 ms·

Be fair now, the Catholic Church hasn't always and consistently been a backward medieval deathcult - there have been periods of non Crusading, non Inquisition,

by defrost 4mo ago

Be fair now, the Catholic Church hasn't always and consistently been a backward medieval deathcult - there have been periods of non Crusading, non Inquisition, not slaughtering Cathars, not trading in babies, etc.

jsemrau 4mo ago
[flagged]
- defrost 4mo ago
  Again, Christians have been just as appalling as any other religion. They've killed, enslaved, done their best to eliminate cultures, railed against miscegenation, etc. Not sure why you're working so hard to pretend o/wise.
  - wqaatwt 4mo ago
    To be fair in addition to the uncountable horrible things it did or took part in the Catholic church did build the foundations that allowed the concepts of modern scientific thought to develop. No other religion did that.
    - ghostDancer 4mo ago
      And they burned quite people for defending the science that went against their beliefs. They only stopped when they thought it would be good for their economic profits. Exactly the same when they stopped protecting slavery, when they thought it would be good as they would get a lot of new followers and all the money and influence that would come with them.And all the fights that gave birth to the other Christian churches always for the same reasons power and money.
      - wqaatwt 4mo ago
        Well yes it’s relative. However the Church in the 1400s to 1600s or so was generally very permissive of scientific debate and not strictly dogmatic. See Galileo’s story, the issue is that when they rejected something (based on a reasonably valid scientific process albeit based on flawed evidence available at the time) that was kind of it and continued to challenging the consensus got you into some deep trouble (with a few exceptions). One interesting thing is that in the 1400s open debate and heterodoxy was generally tolerated or even accepted IF you did it in Latin and only inside the “international scholar network” that existed at the time and didn’t go around preaching your ideas to peasants and such. I’m certainly not implying that it was in any way good or let alone perfect in absolute terms, just that it. > same reasons power and money. That’s highly reductive
      - ekianjo 4mo ago
        > nd they burned quite people for defending the science that went against their beliefs much less than the alternatives. muslims killed anyone who did not convert in case you did not know
        ghostDancer 4mo ago
        Oh playing the old game of "you more" , we're not debating which belief is more savage than the other, all of them are, we're pointing out that the followers of the supposedly all loving version of a god killed,should we say assassinated, lots of people just because their discoveries did not fit in their stories books.
        wqaatwt 4mo ago
        That varied wildly. Generally more of an exception that the rule but in the worst cases like under the Almohad’s you did have Jewish or even less extremist Muslim refugees fleeing to the more tolerant (at the time) Christian kingdoms.
  - graemep 4mo ago
    Its been the most anti-slavery religion and was the main motivation for the abolition of slavery. There is no Christian objection to 'miscegenation' and its a weird concept only taken up in America and a few other places like South Africa during apartheid, and it owes more to race science than Christianity.
    - Hikikomori 4mo ago
      Yet Christians had no problems taking, owning an selling slaves on an industrial scale for 100s of years. Their book even includes an ownership guide. And then you want a gold star for stopping what you created? The theocratic mind is laughable.
      - jsemrau 4mo ago
        Like the rest of the world. Since there are many non-Western countries that still have slaves there is no original sin.
      - graemep 4mo ago
        > Their book even includes an ownership guide. You mean the books of the Bible containing rules explicitly rejected by Christians from the start? The rules that Jesus is recorded as saying was a moral compromise? You are also conveniently skipping over the declarations of equality (with regard to slavery, race and sex) in the New Testament.
        Hikikomori 4mo ago
        That's the thing, there's something about just about everything that can be interpreted in either direction. But christians are just humans, we do these things. The problem I have is when christians pretend they are better and always were because their new interpretation of some text. American slavery being a great example of this as the bible was just to both justify and in abolishment. And as usual, its all about what parts we currently like while ignoring the others.
    - KaiserPro 4mo ago
  - ekianjo 4mo ago
    > Again, Christians have been just as appalling as any other religion that is an opinion devoid of good arguments. humans under christianity have fared much better than any other kind of religion
    - defrost 4mo ago
      And they've been enslaved, killed, and had their cultures erased, in the name of Christianity and by Christians (many citations). Why pretend not? Nobody is, well at least I'm not, denying the good that has been done by Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindu's, etc.
- MomsAVoxell 4mo ago
  The reason is, those Christian countries tend only to bomb the Muslim ones, creating 34 million refugees from the Wests' illegal wars. They're not coming to America for the strip malls and endless commutes. They're coming to America because America demolished their civilization.

by defrost 4mo ago

jsemrau 4mo ago

[flagged]

defrost 4mo ago
Again, Christians have been just as appalling as any other religion. They've killed, enslaved, done their best to eliminate cultures, railed against miscegenation, etc. Not sure why you're working so hard to pretend o/wise.
- wqaatwt 4mo ago
  To be fair in addition to the uncountable horrible things it did or took part in the Catholic church did build the foundations that allowed the concepts of modern scientific thought to develop. No other religion did that.
  - ghostDancer 4mo ago
    And they burned quite people for defending the science that went against their beliefs. They only stopped when they thought it would be good for their economic profits. Exactly the same when they stopped protecting slavery, when they thought it would be good as they would get a lot of new followers and all the money and influence that would come with them.And all the fights that gave birth to the other Christian churches always for the same reasons power and money.
    - wqaatwt 4mo ago
      Well yes it’s relative. However the Church in the 1400s to 1600s or so was generally very permissive of scientific debate and not strictly dogmatic. See Galileo’s story, the issue is that when they rejected something (based on a reasonably valid scientific process albeit based on flawed evidence available at the time) that was kind of it and continued to challenging the consensus got you into some deep trouble (with a few exceptions). One interesting thing is that in the 1400s open debate and heterodoxy was generally tolerated or even accepted IF you did it in Latin and only inside the “international scholar network” that existed at the time and didn’t go around preaching your ideas to peasants and such. I’m certainly not implying that it was in any way good or let alone perfect in absolute terms, just that it. > same reasons power and money. That’s highly reductive
    - ekianjo 4mo ago
      > nd they burned quite people for defending the science that went against their beliefs much less than the alternatives. muslims killed anyone who did not convert in case you did not know
      - ghostDancer 4mo ago
        Oh playing the old game of "you more" , we're not debating which belief is more savage than the other, all of them are, we're pointing out that the followers of the supposedly all loving version of a god killed,should we say assassinated, lots of people just because their discoveries did not fit in their stories books.
      - wqaatwt 4mo ago
        That varied wildly. Generally more of an exception that the rule but in the worst cases like under the Almohad’s you did have Jewish or even less extremist Muslim refugees fleeing to the more tolerant (at the time) Christian kingdoms.
- graemep 4mo ago
  Its been the most anti-slavery religion and was the main motivation for the abolition of slavery. There is no Christian objection to 'miscegenation' and its a weird concept only taken up in America and a few other places like South Africa during apartheid, and it owes more to race science than Christianity.
  - Hikikomori 4mo ago
    Yet Christians had no problems taking, owning an selling slaves on an industrial scale for 100s of years. Their book even includes an ownership guide. And then you want a gold star for stopping what you created? The theocratic mind is laughable.
    - jsemrau 4mo ago
      Like the rest of the world. Since there are many non-Western countries that still have slaves there is no original sin.
    - graemep 4mo ago
      > Their book even includes an ownership guide. You mean the books of the Bible containing rules explicitly rejected by Christians from the start? The rules that Jesus is recorded as saying was a moral compromise? You are also conveniently skipping over the declarations of equality (with regard to slavery, race and sex) in the New Testament.
      - Hikikomori 4mo ago
        That's the thing, there's something about just about everything that can be interpreted in either direction. But christians are just humans, we do these things. The problem I have is when christians pretend they are better and always were because their new interpretation of some text. American slavery being a great example of this as the bible was just to both justify and in abolishment. And as usual, its all about what parts we currently like while ignoring the others.
  - KaiserPro 4mo ago
- ekianjo 4mo ago
  > Again, Christians have been just as appalling as any other religion that is an opinion devoid of good arguments. humans under christianity have fared much better than any other kind of religion
  - defrost 4mo ago
    And they've been enslaved, killed, and had their cultures erased, in the name of Christianity and by Christians (many citations). Why pretend not? Nobody is, well at least I'm not, denying the good that has been done by Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindu's, etc.
MomsAVoxell 4mo ago
The reason is, those Christian countries tend only to bomb the Muslim ones, creating 34 million refugees from the Wests' illegal wars. They're not coming to America for the strip malls and endless commutes. They're coming to America because America demolished their civilization.