This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

chinadoll's Profile

chinadoll's Avatar Joined almost 3 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by chinadoll

More Discussions by chinadoll

Latest Comments by chinadoll

Go to: Marriage - two viewpoints

chinadoll's Avatar Jump to comment 16 by chinadoll

I managed to get to the end of the Millbank article, and I have to say I found it amazing how magisterially he presented prejudice (gay people are such wonderful carers and so artistic), half-truth ("homosexuals are neither in a relation of solidarity with nor attraction to the opposite sex, but may well sometimes be in a relationship of rivalry") and outright lie (research shows that children are best brought up by heterosexual couples) with such learning and gravitas, in order to prove what he first thought of. This is as fine a demonstration of the validity of theology as an academic discipline as I have ever seen.

My favorite passage, though was this: "Christians are likely to frame the debate over gay marriage in terms of the true human good, the proper goals that human beings should aim for. Secular people, on the other hand, are likely to reject the idea that such goals can be objectively shared in common, and to frame the debate in terms of rights and private utility".

If I look at the evidence from environmental concerns, I would say that it is to secular people I would rather look for acceptance of the idea that there are objective common goals that human beings should aim for. Many Christians, on the other hand, appear happily to assert their individual rights to consume as much fossil fuel and to have as large families as possible, and hang the true human goood.

Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:50:19 UTC | #926982

Go to: Bishop Magee lied and deliberately misled, says Cloyne Report

chinadoll's Avatar Jump to comment 43 by chinadoll

Sorry, I can’t understand all this outrage at the Catholic Church having sought to cover up abuse. This is “objectively”* exactly what it should do. The church exists to promote the word of God. This is the highest calling on the planet. It “objectively” trumps any duty to truth, common compassion etc. The continued capacity to promote the word of God is way more important than a few (thousand) individual damaged lives. Anything which undermines the church’s authority risks its capacity to do God’s work. Therefore it is “objectively” right to seek to suppress any information that might lead people to question the church’s authority, and to engage in damage limitation and blame shifting when such information does emerge.

“Objectively”, it is in fact incredibly selfish of abused individuals to seek redress against their abusers. By so doing, these people are trying to undermine the church’s capacity to do God’s work. Indeed such actions are “objectively” sinful, and these individuals probably deserve to burn in hell – hence the church blaming them for being abused, not the other way round.

So we have absolutely nothing to criticise!

*”Objectively” adj: “From the point of view of the Church” see “Homosexuals are objectively disordered”

Thu, 21 Jul 2011 19:38:32 UTC | #852314

More Comments by chinadoll