Turn on thread page Beta

Pat Condell on multi-cultural liberals watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4FpTvp0tgs

    Going off against:
    - Liberals
    - The BNP
    - Islam

    ...all in one videoblog...

    Comments on a postcard please.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    that guy is hilarious
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    the R3NDI3R of religion
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    In fairness, he is not having a go at Liberals, only those who call themselves Liberal while in fact supporting fascistic theocracies.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Octopus)
    In fairness, he is not having a go at Liberals, only those who call themselves Liberal while in fact supporting fascistic theocracies.
    Good point - I remember on Question Time Dr David Starkey making an impassioned defence of Liberalism against fascists and religious theocrats, which may go some way to explaining his comments on http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-2861.html
    Offline

    15
    As soon as he said the term "Liberal left intelligesta" I had to shut him up. I can't be arsed to listen to him spout drivvel.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince Rhyus)
    Good point - I remember on Question Time Dr David Starkey making an impassioned defence of Liberalism against fascists and religious theocrats, which may go some way to explaining his comments on http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-2861.html
    Yes I quite like Starkey and he makes a great point there. Although we shouldn't forget the Pope and Catholic leadership in general are not exactly at the height of liberalism themselves, though clearly they are not even in the same league as Islam when it comes to oppression.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/3...e-darling.html is another Starkey link
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Norfolkadam)
    As soon as he said the term "Liberal left intelligesta" I had to shut him up. I can't be arsed to listen to him spout drivvel.
    Why?
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    Why?
    Because it's a term only used by people who spout drivvel.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Norfolkadam)
    Because it's a term only used by people who spout drivvel.
    This ^^^


    People who believe that there is an intelligensia that runs the world like clockwork assume the competency of too many people...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Octopus)
    Yes I quite like Starkey and he makes a great point there. Although we shouldn't forget the Pope and Catholic leadership in general are not exactly at the height of liberalism themselves, though clearly they are not even in the same league as Islam when it comes to oppression.
    I think the last thing Europe needs is a more submissive vatican. People seem to think compromise will indirectly save the day
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince Rhyus)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4FpTvp0tgs

    Going off against:
    - Liberals
    - The BNP
    - Islam

    ...all in one videoblog...

    Comments on a postcard please.
    I've worshipped this guy forever!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by indigoblue)
    I think the last thing Europe needs is a more submissive vatican. People seem to think compromise will indirectly save the day
    The Vatican has the millstone of its involvement in lots of historical events over the centuries - something which can, and is used by its opponents to hammer it. If anyone wants to have a go at Catholicism, the Pope is the number one target and is easy to identify. The list of things people can have a go at the Catholic church over is extensive (Contraception, homophobia, marriage of priests, concordats with Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, role in the Holocaust, Anti-semitism, barriers to the development of democracy pre-Cold War, the Inquisition, the Crusades...) which may explain why the Church has to be on the defensive for a lot of the time.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince Rhyus)
    The Vatican has the millstone of its involvement in lots of historical events over the centuries - something which can, and is used by its opponents to hammer it. If anyone wants to have a go at Catholicism, the Pope is the number one target and is easy to identify. The list of things people can have a go at the Catholic church over is extensive (Contraception, homophobia, marriage of priests, concordats with Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, role in the Holocaust, Anti-semitism, barriers to the development of democracy pre-Cold War, the Inquisition, the Crusades...) which may explain why the Church has to be on the defensive for a lot of the time.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mit_brennender_Sorge
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_Abbiamo_Bisogno
    http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/ind...481&Itemid=48,
    http://catholiceducation.org/article...ld/wh0055.html

    Educate yourself.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    "The medicine has become the disease" Exactly. Pat Condell is a legend; he basically puts all my beliefs and views, and says them in a way I never could.

    Well, maybe that's not exactly true, he is reading off a script, but still...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I dislike his demeanor but he makes many salient points.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince Rhyus)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4FpTvp0tgs

    Going off against:
    - Liberals
    - The BNP
    - Islam

    ...all in one videoblog...

    Comments on a postcard please.
    He's saying he's an (internationalist) socialist who doesn't like Islamic theocrats. Given that Islamic theocrats are essentially an even more crazy version of the Westboro Baptists, this seems fairly consistent to me.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    His points are very predictable, much like the shirts that he wears.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Your links pertain to, respectivly

    Papal relations with Nazi Germany
    Papal relations with Fascist Italy
    The Spanish Inquisition
    The Crusades

    Firstly it should yuo noted your reply only touches on half the objections to the Catholic Church that were originally raised, but to look at the ones you have claimed are erronous-

    Papal relations with Nazi Germany.

    To quote from the Wikipedia article you quoted-

    "Catholic holocaust scholar Michael Phayer concludes that the encyclical "condemned racism (but not Hitler or National Socialism, as some have erroneously asserted)"."

    We can see that even at it;s most critical of Nazism, the Catholic Church still decided that only the racist parts of Nazism deserved condemnation, and the rest of it was seemingly fine.

    But lest we forget the Papacy had in 1933 signed the famous Reichskonkordat, which was far more important than the encyclical you gave.

    As while, in 1937 the Papacy did criticise racism, at had already, among other things, got bishops to swear allegiance to the government (ie. the Nazi Party) and the Concordat gave Hitler's government a great deal of international recognition, especially among other Catholic nations.
    Overall the Papacy was still supportive of hitler's government, even in 1933 when it did not have to be, and gave Nazism a lot of help and recognition, making it appear much more reasonable to Germany's Catholics than it otherwise would have been. Not to mention, morally the Papacy should have been condemning the Nazi government, even if it could be seen as being neutral overall.

    Almost exactly the same could be said of Mussolini's fascist government, although, since that is of much less significance (without supporting Hitler too at least) I will move on.


    The article on the Spanish Inquisition only really compares it in its barbarity to other practices at that time. And while it could be said to be no worse than other authoirities at this time, in its use of murder and torture, this is still something the Chruch should be ashamed of, as it is still, obviously morally wrong.

    As for the Crusades, the article merely claims what is already known. That the Crusades were at least partly about defending the Byzantine Empire, and about political and sometimes financial gain rather than a Holy War. Personally I think Catholicism has a lot more to be ashamed of than the Crusades, such as the countless millions it has killed by condemning the use of condoms.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 11, 2009
The home of Results and Clearing

2,888

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.