• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Taking over the world

haikuhamu

Student
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
35
I belong to a Catholic discussion forum and have to share an observation I have made.

I have read many posts in the Catholic forum about how skeptics and scientists etc are taking over the world and squelching the light of faith. This trend is viewed with fear, horror, and loathing.

I have seen the converse here. Scientists and self-acclaimed skeptics posting about how the horrors of faith and religion are taking over the world.

My personal interpretation is that both groups are overtaken by conspiracy theories and letting their fears rule their interpretations of world events.

We, as human beings, are wired to divide the world into "us" and "them"....and guess who's wearing the white hats and who's wearing the black ones!

I suppose that's why I enjoyed the fantasy novel "Wizard's First Rule" so much. One of the central themes was about how people are so willing and almost eager to believe what they fear is true.

So, if I told a group of Catholics that wicked scientists are prepared to do dangerous experimentation on newborn babies, they'd believe me. (Well, some of them, anyway) If I told you that Catholics or Christians or some religious nut group was ready to do human sacrifices at midnight, you'd believe me. (Well, some of you, anyway)
 
As a skeptic, I certainly don't have a conspiracy in mind about the religious fundamentalists taking over the world. It would be good if they didn't, of course.

~~ Paul
 
haikuhamu said:
I have seen the converse here. Scientists and self-acclaimed skeptics posting about how the horrors of faith and religion are taking over the world.

"Taking over" is wrong. The lies of religion and superstition and the attendant intellectual slavery has been poisoning the human mind since the very beginning of written human history, and perhaps since the beginning of human civilisation.

Self-delusion is firmly entrenched in the hearts and minds of the bulk of humanity. There is no conspiracy to "take over" anything, excepting an unspoken agreement to "respect my delusion and I'll respect yours." That's why religious groups that preach tolerance for other faiths do not also respect atheism.
 
haikuhamu said:
If I told you that Catholics or Christians or some religious nut group was ready to do human sacrifices at midnight, you'd believe me. (Well, some of you, anyway)
Strawman.

Now if you told us "Catholics or Christians or some religious nut group" was attempting to force a theological worldview on the USA or Canada, then we might well belive you. Why? Because there are plenty of powerful groups and people who would like to do just that. Witness (can I use that phrase?) Tom Delay (who is one of the most powerful people in Congress), Falwell, Roy Moore, etc., etc.

Conversely, I challenge you to find a powerful secular group and/or individual who is trying to remove religion from Canada or the USA. There are none. NONE. Every individual secular I have known, every secular group I have read about and every secular writing in this area that I have read simply advocates that the "wall" be maintained for the benefit of both sides.

Take that to your forum and see what they have to say.
 
I have read many posts in the Catholic forum about how skeptics and scientists etc are taking over the world and squelching the light of faith. This trend is viewed with fear, horror, and loathing.

LOL! Them's fightin words, tell 'em to come over here and say that!

What they'd need to prove of course, (among other things) is that there is a trend.

Now, I could point to the fact that an atheist (in the US) could not be elected to any public office greater than say, "dog catcher", and I'd have statistics to prove it. So what do they have to show a trend except a bunch of child abusing priests? Hard to blame that on science.

Of course, it is easier to blame the results of their own moral bankruptcy on science, rather than place the blame where it properly belongs. There is no greater attack on religion today than that from within. Just keep up the hate, the thinly disguised religious wars, preying upon those they should be serving...

...and watch how well you do when those who used to fight on your side take a stand against you.
 
Kopji said:
What they'd need to prove of course, (among other things) is that there is a trend.

Now, I could point to the fact that an atheist (in the US) could not be elected to any public office greater than say, "dog catcher", and I'd have statistics to prove it. So what do they have to show a trend except a bunch of child abusing priests?
I think perhaps you ought to explain why, and in what sense, a trend exists which is demonstrated by an ostensible "bunch of child abusing priests." A trend toward increasing incidence of clerical sexual abuse? A trend which clearly distinguishes priests from other professions or groups in their propensity for abusing children? Whatever the case, do you have "statistics to prove it"?
Kopji said:
Of course, it is easier to blame the results of their own moral bankruptcy on science, rather than place the blame where it properly belongs.
What results? Whose moral bankruptcy specifically? Where does the blame for whatever it is properly belong, and why?
 
Re: Re: Taking over the world

SezMe said:
Strawman.

Now if you told us "Catholics or Christians or some religious nut group" was attempting to force a theological worldview on the USA or Canada, then we might well belive you. Why? Because there are plenty of powerful groups and people who would like to do just that. Witness (can I use that phrase?) Tom Delay (who is one of the most powerful people in Congress), Falwell, Roy Moore, etc., etc.
Whoop. You ended this statement too soon:

But, we would still ask for the source of your claim so that we could attempt to verify that its validity.
 
haikuhamu said:
I belong to a Catholic discussion forum and have to share an observation I have made.

I have read many posts in the Catholic forum about how skeptics and scientists etc are taking over the world and squelching the light of faith. This trend is viewed with fear, horror, and loathing.

I have seen the converse here. Scientists and self-acclaimed skeptics posting about how the horrors of faith and religion are taking over the world.

My personal interpretation is that both groups are overtaken by conspiracy theories and letting their fears rule their interpretations of world events.

We, as human beings, are wired to divide the world into "us" and "them"....and guess who's wearing the white hats and who's wearing the black ones!

I suppose that's why I enjoyed the fantasy novel "Wizard's First Rule" so much. One of the central themes was about how people are so willing and almost eager to believe what they fear is true.

So, if I told a group of Catholics that wicked scientists are prepared to do dangerous experimentation on newborn babies, they'd believe me. (Well, some of them, anyway) If I told you that Catholics or Christians or some religious nut group was ready to do human sacrifices at midnight, you'd believe me. (Well, some of you, anyway)

Perhaps you have fallen victim to the "black and white" mentality you suppose, or maybe you haven't spent enough time on the boards. Anyway, it doesn't matter, but I suppose it could look like both sides saying the same things about each other.

I doubt there are that many anti-religious conspiracy theories on this board, although I have seen a few theories that don't involve conspiracies. Most center around the idea of conversion, and certain intolerant streaks among fundamentalists of any religion. If you want to call taking over the world "imperialism," it has happened before, although I believe the motives were more political than religious, but I am slightly marxist when it comes to looking at history.

There is an apparent "us vs. them" mentality, but this is more of a reaction to things like conversion attempts, bizarre yet harmful myths about atheism, personal attacks, flawed arguments used to target atheism, and so on, where "us" is the attacked party, and "them" is the attackers. R&P in particular experiences occasional waves of "trolls," people who look like they are out to make the posters angry, but act like they believe what they say. This happens on the million dollar challenge forum too, but the R&P guys seem more active. We cannot know what these people believe, whether to properly assign the label of "troll," but they do look foolish, if not irritating. Naturally, after the troll is gone, those of us still itching for a rational response, or answers to the various questionable statements will seek out the source, and this often turns into an attack after years of searching and coming up with the same old responses that create more problems and don't answer the question. These like-minded individuals which all say the same exact thing become a "them," and the next thing you know the complaints pour in. Also, in R&P, people are easily bored by seeing the same arguments over and over again, instead of seeing their questions answered. If this goes on, the bored turn to ridicule attempting to provoke an answer. After all, this board is about rational discussion, not attacks and arguing one side.


But the way I see it, the target isn't so much the people involved as it is religion itself. The JREF boards are, after all, a forum for skeptical discussion, so in R&P, you should expect people to be skeptical of religion in a board devoted to it. Organized religion in particular is the target, primarily Christianity because it's everywhere in English speaking countries.

Fear rarely comes into play. Usually it's about some preacher using religion to justify hate speech, because he has other people who feel like they have to follow him and believe what he says. Religion may be the target of the criticism, but it is always people who generate what little fear there is. Some of us believe that if religion did everything it promised, these men would be an impossibility. I doubt anyone on this board is afraid of religion. I will say they are afraid of getting blown up, and there are a few people who say they would do that, all in the name of religion.

And if you said Catholics or Christians were ready to perfom human sacrifices at midnight, I'd be rather skeptical, because that contradicts everything I have learned about mainstream Western religions. Whereas I would be inclined to believe it if you said a small cult was responsible. In either case, I'd have to see the news article first. That's how the "look what the religious people are doing" threads are started on this board. I might even get lazy and not read the article, but that's a failure on my part, not the skeptical community.
 
haikuhamu said:
If I told you that Catholics... [were] ready to do human sacrifices at midnight, you'd believe me. (Well, some of you, anyway)
Well, which of us?

Did you think of posting a poll?

But we're not at home to whacky conspiracy theories round here.

Although you're a Christian, I don't assume that you share Jack Chick's views on science. (I know you don't from your earlier posts.)

In the same way, I am a non-Catholic, but that's no reason for you to assume that I'll share Jack Chick's views on Catholicism. In fact, in the thread you started on Jack Chick, you'll notice that his funny anti-Catholic tracts are brought up there. I repeat: we're not at home to whacky conspiracy theories. We will help you to debunk them.
 
ceo esq
Hey, welcome back!
Sorry, don't mean to single Catholics out among the many other religious or otherwise religion inspired abusers.
The trend is not so much that they are any different, but in what the organizations do to protect them and create an environment where it flourishes. Sorry, that trend has not changed at all.

What did we finally agree on before, about 5% of priests?

As their most prominent public voice, Riley is articulating the fresh stance of many American Catholics energized by the child-abuse scandal to confront religious leaders: They are loyal -- but only to a point...

...He and thousands like him foretell greater strains as the hierarchy strives to impose its authority on policy over church closings, sex abuse, gays, priestly celibacy, and other divisive questions. "Rather than face Rome, face the parishioners," Riley advises church officials.

...When the Boston archdiocese announced plans this year to close 83 of its 357 parishes to rescue its finances --
hurt by the revelations of molestations and how they were handled --
http://www.detnews.com/2004/religion/0412/17/A07-31082.htm

As a teenager, he was forbidden from listening to music, playing sports, dancing, even yelling, by Mennonite authorities intent on protecting their people from the world. Instead, those good intentions left Jacobo vulnerable — unprotected — when the real world beckoned. As an adult, he became an alcoholic, then a crack cocaine addict. So did dozens of his Mennonite friends and acquaintances, he says — by the late 1990s, Jacobo could have his crack home-delivered.
http://www.detnews.com/2004/religion/0412/17/a10-323260.htm

From "Sexual Abuse in Christian Homes and Churches", by Carolyn Holderread Heggen, Herald Press, Scotdale, PA, 1993 p.

73:
"A disturbing fact continues to surface in sex abuse research. The first best predictor of abuse is alcohol or drug addiction in the father. But the second best predictor is conservative religiosity, accompanied by parental belief in traditional male-female roles. This means that if you want to know which children are most likely to be sexually abused by their father, the second most significant clue is *whether or not the parents belong to a conservative religious group with traditional role beliefs and rigid sexual attitudes*. (Brown and Bohn, 1989; Finkelhor, 1986;

Fortune, 1983; Goldstein et al, 1973; Van Leeuwen, 1990). (emphasis in original)
References:
Brown, J.C and C.R. Bohn (eds) 1989 "Christianity, Patriarchy, and Abuse" New York, Pilgrim Press.

Finkelhor, D. 1986. A Sourcebook on Child Sexual Abuse. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Fortune, M.M. 1983. Sexual Violence: The Unmentionable Sin. New York, Pilgrim Press.

Goldstein, M.J, et al 1973. Pornography and Sexual Deviance. Los Angeles, University of California Press.

Van Leeuwen, M.S. 1990. Gender and Grace: Love, Work, and Parenting in a Changing World. Downers Grove, Il.

InterVarsity Press.

Dozens of sex abuse lawsuits have been filed against the Roman Catholic Church in Oregon the past few years, mirroring a national trend. Of the nearly 30 Catholic clergy named in the Oregon litigation, most have died, returned to religious orders in other states or left the priesthood.
http://www.oregonlive.com/special/priest/index.ssf?/special/oregonian/priest/020628.html

PHOENIX, Arizona (AP) -- Bishop Thomas O'Brien was convicted of hit-and-run Tuesday for leaving the scene after killing a jaywalking pedestrian with his Buick, a crash that ended his career as head of the Roman Catholic diocese.

The resignation came after two weeks of turmoil following an announcement by prosecutors that they had reached an immunity deal with O'Brien that would spare him indictment on obstruction charges for protecting priests accused of child molestation.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/17/bishops.trial.ap/

Sorry, not to bore, but this seems like a trend.
 
Kopji said:
ceo esq
Hey, welcome back!
Thanks! Holiday leisure time is to blame for my return.
Kopji said:
The trend is not so much that they are any different, but in what the organizations do to protect them and create an environment where it flourishes. Sorry, that trend has not changed at all.
I would say that the trend - that is, the general direction in which those things are moving - is toward greater accountability, screening, detection and so forth. The public - as well as a fair number of outraged clergy - has pretty much demanded this. But even before the recent scandals broke, the fact that a large proportion of the allegations involve events that supposedly took place a long time ago suggests that such things actually flourish somewhat less than they used to.
Kopji said:
What did we finally agree on before, about 5% of priests?
5% of priests what? Sexually abuse children? Seems hard to believe.

A thorough investigation carried out by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice (CUNY), which culminated in the report entitled The Nature and Scope of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States 1950-2002, indicated that during that period about 4% of Catholic priests and deacons had been the target of allegations of sexual misconduct involving minors.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/abuse/abuse12.htm

It's fair to assume that a certain number of guilty priests were never accused, but I think it's also fair to assume (as we would in any other context) that a nontrivial percentage of the accused were probably innocent.

Particularly since 75% of the alleged incidents dated back to 1984 or earlier (which itself suggests an important trend), I think it's not unreasonable to guess that less than two percent, and quite possibly less than one percent, of currently active priests have ever committed sexual misconduct with a minor. A rate probably below the one for public school teachers, I daresay. Perhaps, pending more comprehensive data and analysis, we could agree on something in the 1.5% range, for the sake of argument.

I would point out that the language you highlighted in the Oregon article about a "national trend" actually refers to a national trend in the number of lawsuits filed. As a lawyer, I can tell you that litigation trends of this sort don't necessarily reflect underlying trends in tortious behavior on the part of defendants.

The article you cited regarding the correlation between strict religious beliefs and the incidence of child abuse is very interesting to me. However, doesn't the observation seem directed at parental, rather than clerical, abuse of children? Not that it would be entirely unreasonable to speculate about a similar phenomenon among nonparents - but your source, at least, doesn't go there.
Kopji said:
Sorry, not to bore, but this seems like a trend.
It's very difficult to ascertain a trend without a baseline to refer to, and I don't think we've clearly established the baseline. It could well be that the real trend (if one even exists) is heading in the opposite direction from the one you have in mind.
 
ceo_esq
Well genuinely nice to see you back.
I actually hope the trend is downward too. I consider Catholic priests some of the very best, although that may sound like an underhanded compliment.

Blaming loss of faith on a few secular activities seems unfounded. The 83% number below, if anywhere close to being accurate, is far more likely to keep people away from church. As far as I can tell (at least in America) there seems to be about 14% I would call atheist, agnostic, or completely secular. The rest are highly religious when called to be, and it influences many decisions.

So if there is a lot of fear out there, maybe it more do to fear of what we don't understand. -shrug-

An article from the Boston Globe, 8 April, 2002 mentions Chile,
Ireland, Poland, Australia, Canada, Belgium, France, South Africa and Italy. It also says “A Providence College psychology professor, the Rev. Joseph J. Guido, conducted a survey of superiors of an unspecified Catholic religious order and found that 83 percent of the North Americans were aware of an accusation of abuse against one of their priests, compared with 43 percent in Central America and the Caribbean and one-third in Africa, Asia, Europe, and South America. ''Research suggests ... that the sexual abuse of children is a problem
for the church everywhere,'' Guido wrote in the current issue of
America magazine, a Jesuit weekly.” It then goes on to report:
“Academics and church officials familiar with the church in the Third
World say the problem of clergy sexual abuse is generally not talked about there, so it is difficult to determine whether it exists to the same extent as in the United States… …“In India you'd have gossip and rumors, but it never reaches the level of formal charges or controversies” … “Jayawardene said there is no question that clergy sexual abuse happens in Asia. ''I have known clergy who have complained that their seminary rectors abused them as minors in South Asia - I know that was prevalent in South Asia,” … “In Africa, by contrast, celibacy has been much less accepted, and most reported sexual problems have been between priests and adult women. There was a scandal last summer after the National Catholic Reporter reported that
priests had been raping nuns in parts of Africa.”
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=39277

Back to the topic, I don't really have any trouble finding examples of religion undermining itself. This has nothing to do with secularism or atheism. I think it is mostly due to simple exposure to more information than we have ever had in the past.

Weblog: Episcopal Church Officially Promotes Idol Worship
"Women's Eucharist" calls for worship of pagan deities specifically condemned in Scripture.
Compiled by Ted Olsen | posted 10/26/2004

Imagine for one moment that you're a leader in the Episcopal Church USA. You know that within the next few days, a global commission is going to release a report on how the global Anglican Communion should respond to your church, and is likely to be critical of the ordination of an actively homosexual man as bishop. You know, and have said yourself, that the debate isn't just about sexuality: It's about how one views the Bible. And you know that all eyes will be on your denomination over the next few weeks...

This is not a joke nor an overstatement. In all truth and seriousness, leaders of the Episcopal Church USA are promoting pagan rites to pagan deities. And not just any new pagan deities: The Episcopal Church USA, though its Office of Women's Ministries, is actually promoting the worship of idols specifically condemned in Scripture.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/143/21.0.html
 

Back
Top Bottom