Pope Francis is “pontificating” over the Paris
Massacres in Sri Lanka on a trip that focused on “inclusion” and “Harmony”
between religions.
Pontificating - That’s what Popes do you’ll be thinking, practically part of the job description.
Many Nazies apparently sincerely believed in racial superiority, a master race. Would anyone now suggest that belief should not be questioned, possibly made fun of?
Pontificating - That’s what Popes do you’ll be thinking, practically part of the job description.
No one is saying he is not a nice, well meaning man. That is
what he ought to be and history might have been less bloody if some of his predecessors
were more like him in that. On the other hand maybe not, who knows.
Specifically he has been commenting on the Charlie Hebdo
aspect of the apparently religiously motivated Paris murders/killings.
Presumably the massacre of Jews, simply because they are Jews does not quite fit within his homily. Those murdered French people – blameless Parisians who also happened to be of the Jewish faith - "move along, no insults to see here folks".
Presumably the massacre of Jews, simply because they are Jews does not quite fit within his homily. Those murdered French people – blameless Parisians who also happened to be of the Jewish faith - "move along, no insults to see here folks".
He seems to simply sign up without question to the Islamicist argument that
any depiction of Mohammed at all is an insult to Islam. If it is actually in
bad taste or an insult seems to be irrelevant.
Pope Francis suggests that some sort of physical and violent
action (a bloody nose) is actually somehow appropriate to a perceived insult as
long as it falls short of an actually fatal response
He goes on to say that; “One cannot provoke, one cannot insult
other people’s faith, one cannot make fun of faith.”
One question that immediately arises is - why? Why one can’t point out the inherent
illogicality and ridiculousness of some aspects of a faith or belief, or mutual contradictions, or two faced practitioners, or moral contradictions – Exactly?
What, dare I ask, makes belief based on some aspect of
religion - no matter how sincerely held so… for want of a better word.. sacred?
No one would
reasonably expect similar preference and deference to politically based beliefs
- except perhaps the apparent British devotion to it’s National Health Service :-)
Many Nazies apparently sincerely believed in racial superiority, a master race. Would anyone now suggest that belief should not be questioned, possibly made fun of?
It seems to me that Pope Francis is skating dangerously
close to saying that a physically violent response to a perceived insult -
intended or not - to a person’s religion is acceptable. He just feels that actually
killing people is too extreme. Conceding that, “To kill in the name of God is an
aberration.”.
It seems to me that an all powerful and omnipotent being who
created the cosmos would be able to take note of… and casually mention at some later accounting
if he/she felt any behaviour - was “inappropriate”, that they would not be even a tiny
bit insecure or thin skinned. Further that a person truly convinced of their own
faith ought to view any so-called insult as pathetically risible and beneath their
notice.
Maybe the Holy Father should Google “Yo Momma” before he
punches anyone out. An art form all on its own - Just sayin man…
Notice: this is in no way intended to the Pope's Mother, any parent of any senior religious figure, any person living or dead. Any resemblance is coincidental and it is intended simply as an example of the art form.
~
Yo mama so poor I saw her holding a penny and I asked "Whatcha
doing with that?" and she said "What’s it look like dummy? Taking my life savings to the bank!"
No comments:
Post a Comment