🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <36631D76.D143F0AA@clark.net>,
  klaatu@clark.net wrote:
> a_jabberwock@hotmail.com wrote:
> >

>
> > And your proof that overpopulation is bad for the world?
>
> The oceans are dying,

snip

> _That_ is what overpopulaiton can do, and there is your proof.
>
> Either you don't pay any attention to the news or you're incapable of reading
> between the lines.

No, it sounds more like you can't put things in proper perspective. The Earth
has a long history of disasters and strains on local ecologies, even when
human population was much less than today. The ecosystem can, and will
recover from these little disasters, as it has for millinium. Populations,
human or otherwise, have a certain point where they will stop increasing, to
the detriment of that population. We have not reached that point yet, and
will not reach it here in Colorado for centuries, if ever. It is true that in
some countries, overpopulation has outgrown food sources, but the majority of
those populations are not Catholic, nor are they under my control, nor are
they adversly effecting my life in a physical sense. The ecological problems
that you cite as proof of the evils of overpopulation are instead the evils
of poor managment, many caused not by undeveloped overpopulated nations, but
instead by developed nations with much more managable populations. Get some
perspective.

> > Thats why India has no overpopulation or misery, no Catholics?
>
> Actually, the predominant religion of India also does not approve of birth
> control.

And in Asia and Africa, the fastest growing populations, how is the Catholic
Church causing that increase? Remember, that is the point of this thread, to
blame the Catholics for the world population growth.

> > Actually, it has been increasing at a rate that is lower than India, lower
> > than Africa, lower than Asia, so it must be doing some good, right?
>
> Quiet-possibly because, interestingly enough, in Europe at least the countries
> which are predominantly catholic have excellent education systems,

Ah, so maybe the Catholics are not the problem after all, maybe the
faith-haters just want to think they are.

> in
> other words it is not the Church which writes the secular laws. In the New
> World, this is not so much the case.

Really? In what countries does the Curch write the secular laws?

> > > Did it ever occur to you that just maybe, perhaps, you're acting as an
> > > apologist for a theocracy?
> >
> > Did it ever occur to you that you are acting as an knee-jerk reactionary for
> > an anti-religious liberal agenda?
>
> Bud, I'm liberal as hell (according to the right-wingers; to the liberals I'm
> a knee-jerk Republican)

So what, if you blame the Catholics instead of blaming the low level of
development, then you are a knee jerk reactionary, and a fool, since
overpopulation is tied across the board to developmental levels and not any
particular religion.

> - but the fact of the matter is that it's nearly
> impossible to discern between a bona-fide religious experience and a
> full-blown psychosis with hallucinatory episodes and persistent delusional
> ideation, poverty and coloring of thought, with occasional manic and
> megalomaniacal episodes. (to use the langauge of the emerging State Religion,
> "Infallible Scientism", as expressed by the emerging State Priest class,
> "psychiatrists".)

Not true, and off point, but you can call psycotics "religious" if you want,
it is not me you are deluding.

> Melissa here might or might not be knee-jerking, but _I_ try to not knee-jerk.
> but much of classical religion is all about maintenance of power and
> caste-structures.

Just like all social entities, governments, political parties, social clubs,
ect... Gather people togather with any common bond and they seek to advance
themselves, always at a cost to others. Some are worse than others, but to
single out one and blame it out of proportion to its impact is agenda driven
knee jerk reactionism, whether you want to admit it or not.

> One of hte best ways to keep your class in power is to make
> sure that the suppressed/governed classes cannot get ahead, the classic way to
> do that is to keep the barefoot, pregnant, and deluded.

The classical way is to kill or enslave them, as all almost all groups have
done. The Catholic church has its bad history, just like everyone else.
What is your agenda here?

> "Freedom can never be absolute until the last king has been strangled with the
> guts of the last priest."

Freedom can never be absolute, period.

> Real Christian, so rare though they be, return love for hatred. "Do good to
> those that despise you, thereby shall you heap coals of fire upon their
> conscience." Unfortunately, all too many of the Xtians I've encountered care
> more for their Church Organization than they care for the words of the Jesus.

"Judge others so that you are not judged", is that your creed?

> I have to take some issue here with your statement "The other fact is that you
> are so fanatically anti-Judaeo-Christian that you will never look at any
> religious issue without bias."... - you are aware aren't you that there are a
> large number of people for whom religion and Judaeo-Christianity (or Islam or
> even Hinduism) aren't even remotely related?

But Melissa is not one of them, is she? So keep your perspective, and my
context, intact, and you'll do better next time.

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