Well done, and you're right: sanctioning Jihad. Idiot
Thanks. Those who give him a pass feel the same
What happened to "turn the other cheek"? Isn't that a tenet of Christianity? But given the history of the Catholic Church, I guess it's okay if the victims happen to be Jews.
Coming from the man who is fine with forcibly taking wealth from creators and giving it to the "poor unfortunate souls" it is not surprising he would defend the institution that provides the moral sanction for inititiatory force.
As a Catholic myself, I can't help feeling this is taken out of context. During the same speech, the Pope also said - "One cannot hide a truth: everyone has the right to practice his religion, his own religion without giving offense. That's how we do it, we all want to do that. Second: One cannot offend, make war, kill in the name of one's own religion, that is, in the name of God,"I don't believe he is sanctioning Jihad - in fact, of course he is not sanctioning jihad. He is probably just urging people to practice moderation in what they say. I am all for free speech, but it is also worth pointing out that the founder of Charlie Hebdo the other day thought that the current editor had gone too far for no good reason and "dragged" staff to their deaths with the cartoons.--- snip---A founder of the satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo has accused its editor of "dragging the team" to death by publishing provocative cartoons of the Prophet Mohamed.Henri Roussel, 80, who contributed to the first issue in 1970 when the magazine was known as Hara-Kiri Hebdo, had written to editor Stéphane Charbonnier - who goes by the name "Charb" - to say of the divisive drawings: "I really hold it against you."Referring to the editor's decision to print a drawing of Prophet Mohamed on the front cover in 2011, Mr Roussel - who publishes under the pen name Delfeil de Ton - wrote in this week's French magazine Nouvel Obs: "What made him feel the need to drag the team into overdoing it?".Delfeil adds: "I believe that we are fools who took an unnecessary risk. That's it. We think we are invulnerable. For years, decades even, it was a provocation and then one day the provocation turns against us."He shouldn't have done it, but Charb did it again a year later, in September 2012."http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11387296--- snip ---Now, as far as the Pope and capitalism, I believe he has been misunderstood in that as well. I don't believe in forcible wealth distribution, and I don't believe the Pope does either. Even the Bible talks about sharing wealth voluntarily. --- snip ---All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet. ~Acts 4:32-35--- snip ---Some might call this a kind of socialism, but I do not believe that is what is meant.
"I am all for free speech, but" is not all for free speech. The crucial Context here is that human beings were Murdered over cartoons and the Pope was defending religion against insults, and that disgusting co-founder of Charlie Hebdo went too far in saying that the editor, and not the murderers went too far. The murderers- and those who give them sanction- should be the Only ones condemned here. You don't understand free speech and you don't understand sanction of evil when you see it.
Hmm, I'm pretty sure I understand free speech, and being a fan of this site and yourself etc, I am open to any person or religion (even my own) being criticized by anyone. What I don't understand is anyone deliberately provoking just for the sake of provoking. Are you opposed to laws that prohibit libel, slander, treasonous speech, harassing phone calls, copyright infringements, false advertising, etc? Bill Donohue makes the point that freedom of speech in the Constitution isn't guaranteed so we can deliberately insult people - "Freedom of speech is not an end—it is a means to an end. For Americans, the end is nicely spelled out in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution: the goal is to “form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."No fair-minded reading of the Preamble suggests that it was written to facilitate the right to intentionally and persistently insult people of faith with scatological commentary. Moreover, the purpose of free speech is political discourse: it exists to protect the right of men and women to agree and disagree about the makings of the good society."He also pointed out that the Pope was being humourous about punching Dr. Gasparri because of an insult to his mother (the crowd and the Dr. Gasparri were laughing) and that the media reported it as a serious quote. Again, I totally believe in free speech, but like anything, it can be abused.
I can say Anything I want, Anything, (outside of incitiment to violence) and Free Speech was Built to protect unpopular speech, "hateful" speech, not agreeable speech. As for Donohue, that thug who threatens to punch people, said that Charlie Hebdo had it coming, Just like Muslims believe. The pope, Donahue and their ilk are enemies of free speech.
Post a Comment