🚀 go-pugleaf

a_jabberwock@hotmail.com wrote:
> 
> In article <366320CB.40DFDF18@clark.net>,
>   klaatu@clark.net wrote:
> > a_jabberwock@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >
> 
> > > My current enviroment seems great, so what is your proof?
> >
> > You evidently live in some blessed enclave which is removed not only from the
> > rest of the world, but from even news of the rest of the world.
> 
> I live in Denver, CO. We get world news here, if you failed to realize it.

Ah, the Mile High Madhouse. Do you people _still_ beat to death anyone who
walks away from the bus-station on foot?

> 
> > Please don't presume to sit in Eden and taunt the rest of us who have to live
> > in the Real World.
> 
> Where do you live, and why is it the "real world", and Colorado is not?

Washington DC. Which is a city, much like any other city, like even Denver,
with which it share many nastinesses. But our air at least is breathable; we
don't get inversions. Just lots and lots of cancers.

> 
> > In other words, "it's the world, the _whole world_, not your blessed little
> > half-acre of heaven or whatever.
> 
> 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.

> 
> > Hmmm. Africa.
> 
> Thats right, how have Catholics caused Africa's problems?

did _I_ say that Catholics caused Africa's problems?

> 
> > dogmas must change with the times or they get run over by karmas.
> 
> Cute, but karma is not a Catholic term, although your embracing of a religious
> Ideals is heartening.

I'm neither Catholic nor particularly christian, though I've read the Bible a
time or two, and try to understand it. 

> 
> > > Because the poor overpopulated non-Catholic countries are worse off than the
> > > poor overpopulated Catholic countries, if you blame Catholics without any
> > > statistical proof I can certainly praise them with some statistical proof.
> >
> > I think you are mixing attributions here?
> 
> I am only pointing out that Catholisism cannot be blamed for a problem that
> is more prevelant in other religions, it is the unreasoning attack on
> Catholisism that you are supporting that lacks attributions that can
> withstand any scrutiny.

I don't support unreasoning attacks on Catholicism; but even the most
unreasoned attack may have some points which have sound reasons. I'll support
what I believe are the sound reasons. 

Among the rest of the Judaeo-Christian panoply of religions, just about the
only one that makes _all_ birth control out to be anathematic is Catholicism. 

> 
> > > Actually, the only 100% sure method of birth control is OK with the Pope, is
> > > it not?
> >
> > Ah yes! And those who have the capability to remain chaste fail to breed to
> > pass on that trait! And in a few generations, the capability has utterly
> > vanished from the species! Just like the passenger pigeon, the chaste will
> > vanish and what will be left in their place will be stupid humans that can't
> > keep it in their pants, who will have been, while the chaste eliminated
> > themselves from the gene-pool, bred like freakin' rats.
> 
> This is nature at work, and not Catholic only trait. Also I am puzzled by your
> claim that breeding causes stupidity.

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).

> 
> > Oh, and don't forget, since the intelligentsia are always steered into a
> > celibate priesthood, the fastbreeding chasteness-incapables will also be a
> > little bit short on inherent intelligence.
> 
> 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.

> 
> > Is that what you _really_ want?
> 
> What I really want has little bearing on reality for the rest of the world,
> but to blame that reality on the Pope, is that what you really want?

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

> 
> > 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! I speak
of Byzantium, of the later Catholicism, of even many churches since the
Lutheran Reform. 

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 - 

Jer 7:11 "'Has this house, which bears MY Name, become a den of robbers to
you? But I have been watching!' declares YHWH."

> 
> > 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. 

> 
> 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?

> 
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

-- 
    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/