@Rajk999 saidOn my side, I consider myself to be post-Catholic, but I'm still interested in the related phenomena.
Has Christianity changed you? Did you become a homosexual after you converted? Do you think a homosexual lifestyle is acceptable to God? Or are just interested in pleasing the Catholic priests?
One obvious surmise is that because of the Catholic Church's prohibition of gay sexuality (and suicide), a lot of people might have been shunted into joining the holy orders, whether or not they had the self-discipline to remain chaste.
As a clever thinker like you must be aware, in this life we can't play things two different ways for the sake of comparison (that I know of). Sure, Catholicism and Christianity have had their influence on me, but as for having changed me: how could I know, since I was born into and brought up in that faith and whatever other crap American "Christians" spread about?
As for conversion: please see above. I left the Church at about age 16 -- and it might surprise you to know that my decision had nothing to do with their teachings about sexuality. However, at this stage I don't respect you enough to share my reasons.
RE: "Do you think a homosexual lifestyle is acceptable to God?" That really just comes across as trollish.
What next? More remarks that insult my family and provenance?
Also, why is my sexuality of such interest to you, why are you sticking your nose in my pants, and why do you reduce me to being "homosexual" instead of being "homoromantic" or "homoappreciative"?
Also, you don't really seem to be presenting yourself as Christian of any sort in your ways and manners. If you have a grudge or some resentments against the Catholics or the Christians based on your own experience, why not just say so, instead of just playing probably solely self-gratifying games?
@Arkturos saidDid not read all that garbage. In a nutshell if you cannot handle insults, then dont start it. Got it?
On my side, I consider myself to be post-Catholic, but I'm still interested in the related phenomena.
One obvious surmise is that because of the Catholic Church's prohibition of gay sexuality (and suicide), a lot of people might have been shunted into joining the holy orders, whether or not they had the self-discipline to remain chaste.
As a clever thinker like you mus ...[text shortened]... own experience, why not just say so, instead of just playing probably solely self-gratifying games?
2 edits
@Rajk999 saidYou come across as chronically angry and mad at the world despite living in relative isolation from the countries and people you like to take pot-shots at.
Did not read all that garbage. In a nutshell if you cannot handle insults, then dont start it. Got it?
You don't need to thank me for that observation, but I hope it might help. It's probably not good for your health.
@Rajk999 saidI'll add this: if the Kingdom of God is omnipresent or at least extends to all reaches of the manifest Cosmos, then why choose to chronically lash out in habitual anger instead of being an agent of the Peace of Christ, if you really are a believer?
Did not read all that garbage. In a nutshell if you cannot handle insults, then dont start it. Got it?
@Of-Ants-and-Imps saidDarwin was part of the Fabian Society whose motto is "Move slow bite hard"; their sigil is a Wolf in Sheep's clothing. I believe that every Labour prime minister has been a member. If you accept the right/left paradigm that would put in a socialist camp.
I started looking up more about eugenics, and the early proponents also appear part of or related to the Darwinian movement. Wasn't the elite hierarchy stymied by the leading scientific experts, not mainly from political motivations?
Among the early members was George Bernard-Shaw who is known for advocating that people should go before panels to justify their existence and therefore the right to live. That philosophy would seem to sit well with nazi thinking, again bearing in mind that the Nazis were socialists.
When talk about the elite being stymied, that certainly doesn't appear to be the case with the leading American industrialists who ran with Eugenics and supported the Nazis, though I'd be happy look deeper if you have have examples of this happening?
@medullah saidMany believe in might makes right, that there are the royals who should rule over the peasants. The ruling class has a mighty high opinion of themselves and a very low opinion of others. So much so that most arguments are not made through reasoning; typically, it all comes down to trying to lower the status of the one they are arguing with, making them less than. Spoil them by attacking something about them instead of reasoning with the points being made. So it isn’t just the royals who take this mindset; it is all of us. We can be both the aggressor, the victim, and an uncaring bystander; a human being can be more horrific or honorable, and then later change sides.
Darwin was part of the Fabian Society whose motto is "Move slow bite hard"; their sigil is a Wolf in Sheep's clothing. I believe that every Labour prime minister has been a member. If you accept the right/left paradigm that would put in a socialist camp.
Among the early members was George Bernard-Shaw who is known for advocating that people should go before panels to just ...[text shortened]... nd supported the Nazis, though I'd be happy look deeper if you have have examples of this happening?
@medullah saidSorry, I cannot believe anything out of the mouths of people who claim the Nazis were socialist. These are people who are best served by letting other people decide things for them, because they cannot figure anything out on their own.
Darwin was part of the Fabian Society whose motto is "Move slow bite hard"; their sigil is a Wolf in Sheep's clothing. I believe that every Labour prime minister has been a member. If you accept the right/left paradigm that would put in a socialist camp.
Among the early members was George Bernard-Shaw who is known for advocating that people should go before panels to just ...[text shortened]... nd supported the Nazis, though I'd be happy look deeper if you have have examples of this happening?
The Nazis were fascists, on the other end of the political spectrum from socialists.
End of discussion.
@Suzianne saidYou need to do a bit more research and stop beleiving everything that you see on US television.
Sorry, I cannot believe anything out of the mouths of people who claim the Nazis were socialist. These are people who are best served by letting other people decide things for them, because they cannot figure anything out on their own.
The Nazis were fascists, on the other end of the political spectrum from socialists.
End of discussion.
The term "Nazi" is an abreviation of "National Socialist" - so there is a bit of a clue there in the expanded name.
Bristish Socialist George Galloway (once seen as being on the left of the British Labour Party) recently made reference to this very point.
Facism is not really part of the left/right paradigm. It is possible to have left leaning facists
An example of left wing facism sometimes cited is that of the British Union of Facists that drew from Socialists for it's support. It's also worth mentioning that it was Socialist Dennis Healy that linked up with former Nazi SS Officer Prince Bertrand of the Netherlands to instigate an annual meeting behind closed doors - VIPs only, which has been in place every since 1954.
Calling facism "right Wing" is about as misplaced as a communist criticising Capitalism as a political system, as in both cases there are economic systems.