Originally Posted By jonvn Yeah, I'd have to agree. Us buddying up to a mass murderer who indiscriminately killed infants is exactly the same as a man getting oral sex. It's the exact same thing.
Originally Posted By onlyme I don't know if anyone saw this, but as a sickening side note to all of this: <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0</a>,2933,241544,00.html HOUSTON — Police and family members said a 10-year-old boy who died by hanging himself from a bunk bed was apparently mimicking the execution of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. I won't be cold-hearted and call him a dumb kid, but c'mon. Maybe he's watched too many 'Jackass' movies.
Originally Posted By onlyme Reading through the previous few posts, I came across this one that I must have overlooked: >>Because what happens to unbaptized babies is not part of the Deposit of Faith (the teaching handed down from Christ through the Apostles), so it's a question that we cannot answer.<< Maybe you, or the pope can't, but I can. I don't think God gives a hoot about the 'deposit of faith'. Only a rigid-minded, rules-addicted quagmire of nonsense would not be able to determine whether a 6-month old baby, when dead, would be allowed to enter Heaven. C'mon. Get real. No wonder people are so turned-off. This rigidness seems straight from Hell. And yes, Satan loves all of these hierarchies, levels, rules, catechisms, etc... that have been created. It's turned a simple concept into what...I really don't know. I'll take the simple path, thank you. It's what Jesus taught.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Maybe he's watched too many 'Jackass' movies. << Maybe he watched the saddam 'snuff film' on the internet.
Originally Posted By onlyme As a matter of fact, he did. But, still, He's old enough to realize that it's not a game. But, I guess kids of that age are apt to mimic what they see on TV. "I don't think he thought it was real," Gustavo said of Saddam's hanging. "They showed them putting the noose around his neck and everything. Why show that on TV?"
Originally Posted By Mr X You mean the REAL video, Mele? I did. It's only about 10 seconds longer anyway, but I love how CNN has to "protect our sensibilities" by not showing the really GROSS part...and yet find it acceptible to air video of a hanging in the first place. One or the other, people! If you're gonna show it, SHOW it and call it news (I don't really think it's necessary or newsworthy, they could simply report what was said...but still it's pretty neat to watch a hanging). Jon, I agree. It's really amazing that the Bush admin is so bumblingly inept that Saddam Hussein could come off in a sympathetic light. Nice.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <AFTER saddam gassed the kurds, rumsfeld was dispatched as an emmisary of the reagan administration to shake his hand, pose for photos, and cozy up to the murderous dictator.> I think your timeline is a little off.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <AFTER saddam gassed the kurds, rumsfeld was dispatched as an emmisary of the reagan administration to shake his hand, pose for photos, and cozy up to the murderous dictator.> I think your timeline is a little off.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< <AFTER saddam gassed the kurds, rumsfeld was dispatched as an emmisary of the reagan administration to shake his hand, pose for photos, and cozy up to the murderous dictator.> I think your timeline is a little off. >>> You speak in half-truths. The famous incident of "Saddam gassing the Kurds" happened in 1998, whereas the Rumsfeld-Saddam handshake photo op was in December 1983. But, earlier in 1983, Iran had been complaining to the UN about Iraq's use of chemical weapons against them, and the US gov't was aware that Saddam had also used chemical weapons against Kurdish insurgents. So when Rumsfeld was shaking Saddam's hand in Dec 1983 in the now-infamous picture, he was doing so as a special envoy of the Reagan administration, who at least a month prior had knowledge that Saddam had used chemical weapons against both the Iranians and Kurdish insurgents. Spin it all you want from there. If you want to take someone's comments about Saddam gassing the Kurds to refer only to those incidents that happened after the Rumsfeld-Hussein meeting, and then use that to claim that the timeline has errors, well, I guess that's one way to do it.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Ironically, the crimes that saddam was actually "tried" for - the 1982 killings of the shiite villagers as repraisal for his assasination attempt, was also BEFORE rumsfeld went to iraq to make nice-nice with saddam. And we knew all about that too, and obviously weren't concerned at the time. This was under the watchful eye of the great american GOP hero - ronald reagan.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 I've always wondered how the top members of the Mafia could have been such devout Catholics. Were they planning on just praying really hard the second before their time came and they were killed in a spray of bullets, or an exploding birthday cake?
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>>>Because what happens to unbaptized babies is not part of the Deposit of Faith (the teaching handed down from Christ through the Apostles), so it's a question that we cannot answer.<< Maybe you, or the pope can't, but I can. I don't think God gives a hoot about the 'deposit of faith'. Only a rigid-minded, rules-addicted quagmire of nonsense would not be able to determine whether a 6-month old baby, when dead, would be allowed to enter Heaven. C'mon. Get real. No wonder people are so turned-off. This rigidness seems straight from Hell. And yes, Satan loves all of these hierarchies, levels, rules, catechisms, etc... that have been created. It's turned a simple concept into what...I really don't know. I'll take the simple path, thank you. It's what Jesus taught.<< So, are you saying that the Catholic Church is satanic? That's like saying that LORD in the Old Testament is not the same God as the one Jesus preached. I could go on for days about the similarities between the Old Testament and the New. St. Jerome had an interesting saying, "The New Testament is concealed in the Old and the Old Testament is revealed in the New." Consider: A sinner who brought a sin offering to the Temple had to go through rituals to be cleansed of his sins, including the sacrifice of an animal (which he slaughtered himself) after confessing his particular sin. Catholics and Orthodox today go to confession where the perfect sacrifice of Calvary is applied to the penitent after confessing his sins. The Passover is commemorated every year by the Jews. There are certain ceremonies that accompany the ceder meal, including the praying of certain prayers (Psalm), invoking certain blessings and eating of certain foods (including the Lamb and the cup of Blessing) in a certain way. Today, Catholics and (some) Orthodox partake of this meal every day by eating the Lamb (Christ, our Passover) and drinking the Cup of Blessing. In the temple, there was a certain kind of holy food maintained in the inner sanctum (the Holy Place) that was reserved for the priests. It was called the Bread of the Presence. In every single Catholic Church, throughout the world, you will find a little locked box with a candle next to it. Inside that box, you will find the Christian form of the Bread of the Presence, known as the Blessed Sacrament, God Himself under the appearance of simple bread (the reason that the box is locked is to protect the Sacrament from desecration, not to keep it from the people). The Tabernacle and Temple had a hierarchy: chief priest and the priests. Hmmm...sounds like Bishops and priests. The New Testament Church also had a hierarchy. The Apostles (succeeded by Bishops, St. Timothy and St. Titus were successors of St. Paul, St. Linus succeeded St. Peter) ordained presbyters (who we call priests today) and deacons. The Catholic Church preserved Sacred Scripture, whole and entire, since it was entrusted to, and finished by, the Apostles and their successors. The Church has also maintained the entire TEACHING of Jesus (which Sacred Scripture specifically states was not all written down!) through the ages. We call this teaching the Deposit of Faith. This is all preserved and protected by the Church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. By the way, isn't calling the operation of the Holy Spirit in the Church satanic a pretty grave thing? I seem to recall the Pharisees doing such to Jesus and He didn't have kind words to say about that. Finally, what is a Catechism but a document that explains the teachings of the Church? Yes, we can say that the Message of the Gospel is simple. Considering God only spoke one Word (that is Jesus), it sure would seem simple. Then again, considering it is God's Word, it's also infinitely complex. That's why we need it explained to us and that's why God left us a Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, to ensure that we would follow His will. Since the Church is about 2000 years old, things are developed as needed. That's why the Catholic Church today doesn't look exactly like the infant Church, but the infant Church certainly looks like a mustard seed compared to what we have now in the Catholic Church.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>I've always wondered how the top members of the Mafia could have been such devout Catholics. Were they planning on just praying really hard the second before their time came and they were killed in a spray of bullets, or an exploding birthday cake?<< Um...I wouldn't say that they were devout Catholics. I would say that they were culturally Catholic...sort of like many latino gangbangers today. Sure, they baptize their kids, send them in for First Holy Communion and Confirmation and all that, but they don't live the faith they profess with their lips. Some even get religious tattoos believing that they'll act as charms to protect them from danger. It doesn't work like that. No fair judging the entire Church by the behavior of her bad children.
Originally Posted By jonvn "So, are you saying that the Catholic Church is satanic?" Makes as much sense as anything. "That's like saying that LORD in the Old Testament is not the same God as the one Jesus preached." Funny, but lots of people who aren't caught up in your belief system would say that. The LORD in the old testament behaves quite differently than the one in the new testament. Of course there are 2000 years of rationalizations as to why, but basically, if you consider them as what they are--works of fiction--then they could very easily be construed as utterly separate beings. Not very well written, perhaps, to cause such a shift in character development. "Finally, what is a Catechism but a document that explains the teachings of the Church?" It's an indoctrination program. "they don't live the faith they profess with their lips." What difference does it make? They're sins are forgiven. It's what makes your religion so useless. You can do whatever you choose, and it means absolutely nothing in the end. Live a life in whatever venal and horrific manner you want, and it's all ok. Just sign this waver form right here, and you're in heaven. I guess it works.
