🚀 go-pugleaf

a_jabberwock@hotmail.com wrote:
> 
> In article <366495BA.8CF647FD@clark.net>,
>   klaatu@clark.net wrote:
> > a_jabberwock@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >
> 
> > Ah, the Mile High Madhouse. Do you people _still_ beat to death anyone who
> > walks away from the bus-station on foot?
> 
> What? You live where? Want to compare murder rates?

Ah, but what of the rest of the crime? Denver still leads the nation in
hospitalizations for beating, doesn't it? And as even Mayor Barry will tell
you about Washington, DC: "outside of the killings, crime in Washington is
actually waay down".


<trimmies>

> > >
> > > We'll, I've been all over Central and North America, and Asia, and have seen
> > > lots of poor people, but the overpopulation stems from being poor and
> > > undeveloped, not the other way around. Maybe you should open your eyes a
> > > little, yourself.
> >
> > Give it time. Being poor and undeveloped means that there's little knowledge
> > of, or access to, modern contraception. Birth control in many poor countries
> > consists of a pregnant woman paying someone to kick her in the stomach.
> >
> > Being poor, underdeveloped, and overpopulated - it's a recipe for disaster.
> > Thomans Malthus recognized this back in the late 1700s. Most literate
> > societies realize this.
> 
> Sure it is, but the overpopulation is a result, not a cause.


the final counterargument is couched as a question: "why then, when the entire
world was 'undeveloped', did the global populaton never exceed 500 million?"

> 
> > > > Hmmm. Africa.
> > >
> > > Thats right, how have Catholics caused Africa's problems?
> >
> > did _I_ say that Catholics caused Africa's problems?
> 
> That is the point of this thread, Catholic bashing.

Only in your mind.

<trimmies>

> > Actually, it's been rather endlessly hashed out in endless debates in
> > countless journals - the general consensus seems to be that while nobody can
> > tell where trrue genius will crop up, it's inarguable that stupidity breeds
> > true (except for the fluke genius rising from the herd of the dullards) and
> > it's also fairly evident that breeding will tell amongst the
> > slightly-better-endowed (in terms of intelligence, and of course there's also
> > the case of inbred upper-class twits). For the most part, it seems that the
> > majority of the human race is a mix of the slightly-smarter and the
> > slightly-dimmer and thus is average. But remember this: stupidity breeds true
> > as does intelligence. It's the ends of the "bell curve" that are the
> > statistical outliers, or flukes (excepting down's syndrome inbreedings, etc).
> 
> Actually, malnutrition during youth dumbs down the poor overpopulated people.

Actually, protein depriviation during the first five years causes mental
development problems even in the most-prosperous and developed of nations...
in slums, and occasionally in ruralia.

> 
> > > Not true at all, intelligence is not a factor in choosing priesthood, unless
> > > you are claiming it is obvious to you that priests are more intelligent than
> > > most?
> >
> > Better educated that are most, in developing countries! And in a place which
> > has such scarce resources for education, no administrator would ever send a
> > dunce to school while depriving brilliance of intellectual sustainance, all
> > things being equal in terms of the faith of the two individuals.
> >
> > See, the best, most brilliant of the priests, the skilled ones, in terms of
> > their sermons and studies and their ministries to their flocks, are those who
> > get the most-choice positions, unless they feel called to mission work.
> > (thankfully many do!) And a Church which is also an Empire needs people to
> > fill those choice positions, as they are administrative as well as
> > evangelistic/ministerial. And so a church which is also an empire must of
> > course steer whoever can be identified as gifted into their management.
> > Therefor bring forth the little children so that the governor/priest may
> > discover his replacement, to the greater glory of the church <cough cough>
> > ahem, God.
> 
> This proves nothing about the intelligence of the massively uneducated or the

If in good health, the massively uneducated are probably about as intelligent
as anyone else. They've just got no education.

> priests in such countries, the priests may be better educated, thats all.

If there is not enough resources for education to reach all, probably only the
brightest are awarded those resources. Some at least will find their way into
the priesthoods or other such ivory-tower callings... in fact those
ivory-tower systems inevitably select the best and brightest to run their
organizations. And as it may often be the Church and mission work which doles
out the resources for such educations as are available, they might tend to
promote toweards the priesthood any who can be educated sufficiently. Thus,
education tends to favor the church's need for administrators.

> 
> > On _this_ Pope? No! Again, you seem to misattribute my own opinions to be in
> > complete solidarity with the statements of others.
> 
> No, just supportive of theirs.

On some but not necesarily all points.

> 
> >
> > >
> > > > what the hell does Chris' past have to do with
> > >
> > > Chris likes to blame people today for the acts of the long dead, I was just
> > > wondering what his heritage was that is so free of evil deeds? Or maybe he
> > > just suffers guilt by association with his past. Either way, I just want to
> > > know where he's comming from. Why does inquiring about someones heritage
> > > offend you so?
> >
> > See following quote paragraph, part of the original sentence, "as in, like,
> > duh!"
> >
> > >
> > > > the fact that religious
> > > > organizations (especially where linked to government) are essentially
> control
> > > > organizations, maintaining the place of the elite by keeping the poor
> > > > barefoot, pregnant, deluded and impoverished?
> > >
> > > This is only a small part of what a some religious or political or cultural
> > > groups do, even what ever ones you feel allegiance to. It is a natural rsult
> > > of any group seeking to better itself. The fact that you veiw the Catholic
> > > Church today through this very limited filter speaks volumes of your motives
> > > here.
> >
> > I speak of most of the Church-State alliances since the fall of Rome!
> 
> Why do you exclude all the others?

I _don't_. But most of our western systems of law are profoundly affected by
this history. In the Western World, and much of the rest of it, other
religions had very little influence, as (for instance) jews were often
confined to ghettoes and had little influence on the makers of laws, and Islam
was fought asa bitter enemy. that leaves only christianity, certainly all of
the pagans they butchered had nothing to do with making laws.

> 
> > You say "...it is a natural rsult [sic] of any group seeking to better
> > itself..." to suppress the masses by keeping them barefoot, pregnant, deluded
> > and impoverished, but I ask you: is this not a tad _hypocritical_ of a
> > religion which professes to enlighten, enrich, empower, and save? Over exactly
> > such abuses did Christ overthrow the tables of the vendors in the Temple
> > paraphrasing Jeremiah 7:11 -
> 
> Sure, the Catholic religion has its share of hypocrites, just like every
> other group, from the democratic party today to the first parent who did the
> do as I say, not as I do thing. You take a trait that is common to all humans
> and attack the Catholics with it. That is my point.

My point is that they make a big deal out of Jesus' turning over the tables of
the vendors, and then go right ahead and put the vendors back in the temples.
That is, BTW, hypocrisy.

> 
> > > > Obviously not, no Jesuit would have for a moment stood for any of your
> > > > argumentative ploys.
> > >
> > > So you are a Jesuit, or you just blowing smoke? Argumentative ploys are a
> part
> > > of every political group, especially those seeking to increase their power.
> >
> > And what power do I seek? I am no Jesuit. You may think of me as one who seeks
> > the truth, whatever that may be.
> 
> I never claimed you were seeking power, but the Jesuits did, and you claim to
> speak for them.
> 
> > > It takes a certain kind of person to single out one group for attack, you
> > > picked the Catholics. Why?
> >
> > I didn't pick the Catholics to attack. Why do you misattribute me so?
> 
> You just called them, and them alone hypocrites, did you not?

I'll continue to call them that so long as there is a vendor in the temple,
and while I am not Jesus and can't just walk in and oerturn those tables
again, I can certainly call for their overturning. It's long overdue.


-- 
    Be kind to your neighbors, even though they be transgenic chimerae.
          Re-transmission of this e-mail expressly prohibited. 
  Non-UseNet re-transmission of this article is a willful violation of US
 Copyright Law and the Berne Convention. Statutory damages are $250,000.00
Whom thou'st vex'd waxeth wroth: Meow.      http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/