Thank you for your open mind and true tolerance.First you accuse me me of propaganda and then you say this. Will you kindly make up your mind?
Dude I am being civil about your attacks on my religion. You have an odd idea of what is civil. And I am NOT attacking your (or anyone's) religion. If you think I am, you must have some kind of persecution complex. I have said nothing that could reasonably be understood as an attack on ANY religion; Catholic or otherwise. Your personal attacks on me - calling me a liar and anti-Catholic among other offensive things - are the only attacks that have appeared here.
I am a Catholic and proud to be one. No one said otherwise. I certainly would not. That doesn't give you the right to slam anything I say as propaganda however.
Your slurs what slurs? Be specific, and prove why what I said are slurs and not facts.
on the Church are one sided and therefore meet the criteria of propaganda.
One sided in what way? I said what I said in context. Anything else (like Puritansism) would have been irrelevant and off topic). Also slurs imply lies, and nothing I said was untrue. Progaganda implies a deliberate intent to defame; I had none except in your imagination.
If having that pointed out to you in open forum imbarresses and seems rude and disrespectful, then you need to really step back and consider just how rude and disrespectful you are being with your slurs about the Church.You keep calling what I say slurs but never cite any example nor point out WHY they are slurs and not the truth. Slurs imply lies. I never knowingly spoke a mistruth anywhere on this topic. Therefore what
you are saying are
slurs against me! Notice I have not stooped to saying slurs against you. So how about backing up what you say with some
relevant facts of your own rather than simply insult me further or go off on tangemts that have nothing to do with anything I said?
Look, this all started because you took exception to something I said about the Catholic Church. I am unsure just
what it is you took exception to or why, but I said nothing that I did not believe was
indisputable and which I hadn't known my entire adult life. AFAIK the part you found it hard to take was my statement that it was the Catholic Church in general and the Pope in particular that had a problem with Galileo... if this is incorrect you'll have to elaborate what your actual point of contention IS (it's hard to be sure because you go off on tangents an awful lot). Assuming this IS the point, it is incontrovertible that it was the Pope himself who ordered Galileo to Rome, forced him to recant his heliocentric views, and had him placed under house arrest. The Pope could do this because back then the Pope had considerable political power in that part of the world - far more than now of course if considerably less than he'd had in earlier centuries.
Galileo lived at a time of great political and intellectual change. Early in his life, the Church positively encouraged free and open discussion of all topics that did not outrageously contradict doctrine - and that certainly included celestial mechanics. But times changed and the Church became much more conservative taking the view that no view was acceptable that was contrary to scripture (however tenuous) unless that view could be proven which would in turn require scripture to be reinterpreted.
Galileo insisted on continuing to teach that the earth moved just as Copernicus had said. Trouble was, he really could not prove it. When he was ordered to keep quiet, he persisted in the promotion of his views. To make matters worse, in doing so he seemed to be insulting the intelligence of the Pope himself.
In troubled times, the Pope really just had to establish his authority and silence Galileo.
If Galileo did "grovel" in the end it was primarily because he was, when the chips were down, a good Catholic.
It was the Pope, and therefore by extension the Catholic Church, that did all this. If youi dispute this, kindly explain why and what your sources of historical information are. Here is just one of mine that I selected at random:
http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/ ... ode52.htmlWhy is it only a lovely and righteous thing to dengrate the Catholic Church for having Inquisitions and not find fault with Purtian witch trials? Why such one sided hate against the Catholic Church? Hate? I have no such hate. I mentioned nothing about the Puritans because the Purtians had nothing to do with Galileo and were therefore irrelevent. It was your initial attack on me that caused me to mention the Inquisition in the first place. That said, I never claimed (nor meant to imply because I never believed) the Catholic Church was unique when it came to religious persecution. They simply had more time than the Protestants had, but every religious denomination has its own skeletons in their closet. That's one reason why I gave up Church entirely eventually, and not just Catholicism; close-mindedness and a tendency of religious people to be thin skinned about their beliefs being two others. And yes I AM talking about people like
you.
If it was not for the Catholic faith western civilization would not have survived the Dark ages. I find that highly debatable at best. In fact, I could cite much evidence for the reverse... that, in fact, the Church
delayed scientific inquiry for many centuries. But again, this is not as firmly grounded in indisputable fact plus that has nothing to do with the original subject (who inspires me and why), would add nothing to this conversation, would probably not convince you, would be misconstrued as more anti-Catholic propaganda (a concept I still find as bewildering as I do offensive as I do NOT think that way nor ever have), and would take this increasingly off topic. We (you for starting me and me for trying to reason with you this long) have already spoiled this topic with this discussion; if you like, we can take it up in a fresh topic specifically for this purpose. Then, as long as you remain civil, we can debate the matter all you like. But not as long as you continue to equate unequivocal and historic fact with propaganda, and to imply to me motives completely foreign to my nature.
Copernicus may have been blacklisted or on a list of banned books, but was he prevented from proving his science? He was on his deathbed when he published, and this was no coincidence. He knew he'd be put through a bad time if he published sooner. Right after he finally published, he was dead and so had
no chance to prove his science. Since his books were banned - as you yourself admitted - he actually
was effectively prevented from proving his science.
Have you ever really looked at real history of the Inquisitions or only concern yourself with propagandis whose only agenda is hatred toward anything Catholic? I have looked at the real history of
all religions. I never cited Catholicism as a special case. However, you seem to be seeing only what you want to see. You cite an intolerance for Catholicism specifically within me that does not in fact exist.
Which shows a more tolerant Church position on his scientific understanding than you wish people reading here to comprehend? I have
no such agenda as you seem to imply, and find your insistence that I must have such an agenda both puzzling and annoying.
If pointing out these points insult you and make you feel attacked, too bad. Your proaganda is attacking and insulting to me.And such close minded accusations without really trying to understand what I actually believe are an insult to ME. Have I attacked you or your beliefs anywhere so far? No... although now I'll say your spelling really stinks in places. But concerning me you have done nothing else but call me a bigot - someone no one who knows me would seriously consider likely for a single moment. Cite anything I said that you think was inaccurate in context and if you can prove me wrong I will admit it and say so; otherwise I challenge you to do the apologizing... something I notice NO religious person (Catholic or otherwise) is very good at despite what the Bible teaches.
Galileo was left under house arrest for his attack on the Church not his scientific views. Period. Look at the facts, not some Protestant propaganda of hatred for Catholics.His attack on the Church was no more real in actuality than mine has been. The Pope chose to interpret Galileo's views as one, just as you have apparently chosen to interpret my defense of Galileo as the same. Galileo was blunt, and expressed himself badly at times. I can relate to this; it happens to me a lot too (this set-to with you is hardly the first time). When I wrote about Galileo, I meant nothing by it whatso-freaking-ever. I sure as Hell was
not talking about modern Catholicism;
you're the one who brought all
that up! But, like Galileo, I refuse to apologize for something that exists only in the other person's interpretation or imagination. I expressed my admiration for Galileo and for standing up for the truth against the religion authorities of his day. Simple historical fact; nothing more. If you can't accept that with the simple spirit with which it was meant, then, as you said, TOO BAD. Luckily for me I don't live in Galileo's time and thus am not at the mercy of the good-will of religious bigots like you.
You've already completely spoiled this thread with this nonsense. Sarobah's objection was one thing; she was not entirely accurate but at least she didn't launch any personal attacks, and that was fine by me. But all
you have done with my attempts at simple explanation is to continue to vilify me like you were just another religious troll and go off on wild tangents about Russian tsars and so on which have had nothing whatsoever to do with what I originally said. I've tried to be patient and understanding and polite(unlike you, it seems to me), but I've had enough of this. We can either take this somewhere else more private or at elast more appropriate (namely a new topic) or you can simply stuff it; personally, I don't care which you do. In any case, I am not going to reply any further to you on this subject at
this topic. If you have more to say, then start a new thread. Otherwise, nuts to you.
White surpremist do not undo the United States and such in the Catholic Faith do not undermind the reality of faith inherit within her.And who the Hell are you calling a white supremist?! ME?! That is not only irrelevant to anything discussed but in MY case a total, outright, stinking LIE! Either back up such offensive crap with facts or shut your lying mouth!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...