Catholic church wants to cancel the MTV awards

Oh I see your point now , "humour is the enemy" ?

Do you wanna bet?

@ topcat1

Acquitted (very very sadly) but point taken. Doesn't change the validity of the original argument however.

didn't the papists also terrorise people into following the rules of the church by threatening hell fires and damnation?

as Timmeh said, there was the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the War of the Holy League to name but a few.

If Rome hadn't coerced people into believing and following papal law, I doubt the church would be as powerful as it is today and I doubt very much that many of the laws we have now would exist.

Well,
if this thread has done nothing else, it has shown the uselessness of debating with Parnell. I have:

1) laid out specific posts he has made

2) directly asked whether he is purposefully ignoring the common usage of the word “tell�

3) ask if he always supports the logical conclusion of his statements: that the group passing a law is not responsible for it, but rather only those enforcing it

No reply yet. Instead he has shifted the debate now to the importance of word usage in political parties.

The noob abides.

Well, I dunno about you lot, but just this once I'm prepared to conceed a compromise solution: They don't do the bleedin' awful MTV awards and the churches stop ringing their fuckin' bells every bloody Sunday morning. Every fuckin' Sunday the viking blood in me wants to go down there with a bloody great axe and chop the bastard ringing the bells in two. If we're gonna have quiet on a Sunday, we're gonna have quiet. OK?

If you look at the Bavarian Feiertagsgesetz , you'll find that there are two specifically protestant holidays (Buß- und Bettag, Totensonntag) and one non-religious day of commemoration (Volkstrauertag) listed as "quiet days". And there are also Jewish holidays mentioned as protected holidays for the members of this community.

It's probably more about respect for followers of a certain religion (i. e. not disturbing them). The question would therefore be, what's the character of a certain event, is it "in the public eye" so that people could be disturbed? But then again, where does consideration for religious sensitivities stop?

That seems like a fair comromise Sin, I'm just writing a e mail to the kiddyf ordinariat now.
I wonder what their response will be.

Also, didn't the catholic church actually have control over German politics right up until Bismarc? I seem to remember learning about how he tried to curb their powers etc (which is why he introduced the Standesamt wedding prior to a church wedding). So if the churhc had control of politics and much of this stuff dates back to then, then it is fair to say that the church is responsible for the stupid laws we have (and also generations of catholics thereafter for not repealing them).

So far I've got your achievements here as this : You can count to 3.

3 is a big number , well done.

Fairy muff, so will they respect other's high days and holidays too?

Why then did the catholic church / Bavarian police get away in a dodgy fashion of removing an effigy of the Pope from the Munich CSD in 2006?
Why despite 23 hour licensing in Munich do we have to sit and wait from 0800 until 1100 on Gay Sunday in the Bräurosl to get a drink?

Personally, I tend to exclude myself from religious debates since I do not have enough religious knowledge to answer with any authority. However, I do find it interesting, (as Parnell points out) that the people who often start up these debates and are vociferously anti-religion feel the need to comment on things that they do not believe in anyway. As an earlier poster pointed out "live and let live", because lets be honest this does not really impact on our lives at all.

You two don't belong here. Beautiful , intelligent and have vaginas. How did you ever get here (ok ER has an excuse) ?

Buß- und Bettag hasn't been a holiday since 1995. In fact it was only a holiday in the whole of Bavaria between 1990 and 1995. prior to that it was only observed in communities that were mostly protestant.

Hiding you inability to debate behind belittling statements, bravo… did they teach you that in your ‘rhetoric and logic’ course?

P.S. I win, your statement was indefensible.

I gave you links to sites that confirmed that $50million were in a New York account alone. where a former nun told of how she opened cheque after cheque after cheque for large sums, but they still had to put on a front of poverty.

Obviously, it is impossible to say just how much money there is because she refused to be audited (and the order still refuses that today). It is an undisputable fact that she had dealing with convicted fraudster Charles Keating and refused to return money he had given her, which was fraudulently obtained to reimburse his victims the money.

And by taking donations and having that money disappear - or even just sit there, did hurt the poor in India, because she was drawing money away that would have been donated to other charities...

I'm not the only one who has raised this. It has been brought up by various media (including Stern) - but somehow, she's untouchable...

Oh and the offer was to join that charity - the very one I believe has misappropriated funds. Why would I help them?

As long as you stop dancing at midnight you should be ok.

Methinks this is a case for Alice Schwarzer

just saw this after Parnell quoted it. You are right and so is Parnell in a way. Except for the fact that the Catholic church basically ran German politics up until Bismark. There was no seperation of church and state back then and many of the ideals of enforcing the religion via the organs of the state came from this time. Bismark did his bit to make things better but couldn't repeal EVERYTHING done by the catholic church.

I would agree entirely with what you say the church always remained separate from politics. It wasn't the case and still insn't really today. OK, so today the church doesn't run the show directly but it is reprented by parties following its ideals, laws and archaic traditions.

My younger brother is just back from a year in Mexico and this particular "quiet holiday" is the biggest party of the year. All the familes go to the graveyards laden with drink and food and get plastered and dance around/on the graves of their dead rellies...
Seems like a far better deal than either MTV awards or a no-dance ban.

No. We are talking about Bavaria.

Parnell's MO appears to be that the church can do no wrong. I might suggest he read this.

Well it did impact my life. I owned a pub and was forbidden from playing music (threatened with big fines if I did) on certain days. People go home a lot earlier if there's no music...At least the Catholic church should send you a cheque for lost income and an apology for the inconvenience caused...

How many days did it impact Hazza ? How does it impact now? As Parnell says maybe your rage on the subject is something deeper

Wrong on two counts - let's see if you can admit your wrongness:

1. The site with the $50m deposited - it was I who actually provided that link - it's on Wiki - check your link on the thread , you'll see no mention of $50m

2. There was no such offer to join the charity , merely to volunteer for a day. Here it is , reproduced for your selective memory.

Let's hear that retraction.

There are more than 2 million muslim Turks living in this country and their population is increasing fast. What will happen if they get the majority in one region and elect a muslim party that declares muslim holidays you can not drink alcohol or something like that giving the example of Christian holidays?

See - once again you miss the big points.

Like why has the order never accepted an independent audit?

Other charities all get audited...

EDIT: And you've never addressed the Charles Keating association.

which part of my post didn't you like? i was merely pointin out that we need more smart chics on this forum .

@ Hazza

Well , I guess intellectual honesty and sincerity aren't gonna be your strong points after all huh?

What difference does it make that how many days - or if it doesn't impact me now? You said:


Well it does impact people - and it impacted me and over the time that I owned the business, all of the "quiet" days cost me a not insignificant amount of money.

That's one of the reasons the C parties do their damndest to stop them becoming German Citizens or Turkey joining the EU.
Not that plenty of ethnic Turks like drinking and dancing and shizzle.

Pot, Kettle, Parnell

And that refers to Charles Keatin how? See - completely ignoring the post and skipping straight to personal insults...

If you two lads get a room, can we pay to watch?

[adminhide]
hehehe... who's admin on this site???
[/adminhide...]
EDIT: Come back admin , all is forgiven!

anyhoo MT's position on Keating's donations is clear - and you can find it on the wiki piece on her and Keating:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Keating

"In the 1980s, Keating had donated some $1,250,000 to Mother Teresa; during his state trial, she wrote a letter on his behalf to presiding Judge Lance Ito, saying that she was not informed about his business but she knew him as a man who was generous toward the poor."

Now that I have responded to your question on Keating , kindly respond to mine : you were wrong and refuse to admit such

although how entertaining this is to watch, do you not think you guys have gone off on a slight tangent to the original news post?

Indeed, that is the MO of truely great trolls...

1. Make inflamitory incorrect statement
2. Belittle replies
3. Make lame attempt at propping up #1
4. ignore any direct replies using logic
5. change tangent, goto #1

you forgot #6:

shit spelling

I consider it optamized

You know that stealing from the rich and giving to the poor is still a crime. You also know that receiving stolen money or goods is also a crime. It might be a little less of a crime if the money was actually used for the poor (as is claimed without any evidence whatsoever - like from that money, we opened a school in Calcutta, for example). Of course, she may not have known of his dealings previously - but once you know that money you have received is stolen, you are legally required to return it. Keeping it makes you a criminal.

Which question? The one about volunteering to help work in a charity I consider a fraud? You should be able to figure that one out for yourself...

Why should I work for free - even if it is for a good cause, if the organisation has the money to pay people to do a proper job, donated by good-meaning people and the organisation lets that money stagnate in the bank?

I will work for free for Mother Teresa's charity if I can see an income and expenditure table showing all income from donations and am satisfied that the money donated has been spent on the poor...

Here's one from the British Red Cross as an example. If you can find this for Mother Teresa's charities, I will work at the Munich branch for a month for free. You have my word on that.

EDIT: must be a total of the entire charity - individual small entities don't count as it's easy to never have added the money to that entity in the first place.

I would agree...but that is one common problem with discussion boards: Flame wars


The jury is out on why this occurs, but the link indicates it is due to self-control issues. I would classify it as 'Forum Rage'. But anyway I digress from the OP's main point, so will shutup now.

Getting that weird sense of deja-vu here. Didn't I wade through a bunch of these same posts in the Church of Scientology thread already? How about putting the whole Mother Teresa argument into its own thread so I can avoid it more easily, eh?

lol
I asked that you have enough honesty to respond to the fact that I had shown you to have made up two facets of your post which you can see clearly posted above. No surprise you have failed to do such.

What evidence did she have to convince her that the money was stolen?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3138772.stm
"Mother Teresa's view was that if someone offers charity for the poor it should be accepted for their sake regardless of the merits or otherwise of the giver. "

2 facets.

1. I responded to your ridiculous challenge of why I wouldn't go and volunteer for a day with a fraudulant charity

2. Sister Virgin was there and you weren't, so in this case, I'll believe her over you:


Plus...no matter what her views, keeping money that has been stolen, when you know it has been stolen is illegal. Are her views somehow above the law??

She committed a crime by not returning the money. But at the very least, she should have actually used it for the poor.

Still waiting on an audit report...remember, a whole month of charity work

From the same article:


Not even the business of the people who donated?

Anyway - this is getting boring and repetitive.

the Catholic church is not the greatest, bestest organisation in the world. In fact, there is more wrong with the way it's run, than right with it.

The arrogance associated with wanting to stop the MTV music awards or the fact that they don't believe they are above the law all adds up the same...

So believe what you want to believe - I don't really give a shit anymore.

Charles Keating's convictions for fraud, racketeering, and conspiracy might have been a tip-off. And when confronted with this after submitting her letter to Judge Ito asking the court to let him off, she ignored those asking why she wouldn't give the money back to the victims of Lincoln S&L.

woof.

Uh a couple posts ago you claimed it was a challenge (it was not my challenge however) to become a member. what happened to that?

hardly , ull be back on Monday hating on the church again.

Oh and I withdraw the challenge to find an audit report.

I know you're not going to find it anyway - because it doesn't exist...

People in the real world can make of that what they want. It's quite obvious that not everything is above board when an organisation refuses to be audited...

Oh yeah, and Mother Teresa should have been tipped off that Charles Keating was a fraud when he was convicted of fraud and sentenced to several years in gaol.