no sh!t Sherlock ...

[pigro]

One of the news headlines currently on Italymag: "Pope’s 2nd Encyclical slams Atheism" ... D'Oh!!

The article itself states re. Atheism that "in modern times it had produced terrible cruelty and injustice". Apart from the hypocracy of the Catholic church lecturing anyone on historic cruelty & injustice, this presumes atheism to be an ideology in & of itself, applied by dictators whose personal atheism was debatable (Stalin) or untrue (Hitler). That's just not true.

OK, so repression of organised religion was practiced under communism, but that was as a means of total control over the thoughts & actions of the people, which ALL dictatorships do, regardless of supposed ideology. Their Anti-religion (NOT Atheism, which is a different thing) was a by-product of control, not an ideological position.

Yes, marx did say that "religion is the opium of the people" but his point was that religion was itself responsible for repression and control of the proletariat by the ruling classes. The fact that this political idea led to its warped application by Stalin in persecuting the church does not equate to communism=atheism.

Atheism is itself a "belief system" of sorts - seeking to understand our place in the world without resort to the unproven - and I no more blame atheism for Stalin's actions than I blame Christianity for George W. Bush's or the Muslim religion for Amadinejad's in Iran. They are all warped individuals who seek to justify their actions by way of organised religion, but who in practice act against the basic tenets of those religions.

[Marc]

Throwing a bit more fuel on the fire here Pigro..... is there anything in particular that Amadinejad has done - invade a foreign country? - commit genocide? - that puts him in the same company as Bush and Stalin?

[giovanni]

Originally Posted by Marc

Throwing a bit more fuel on the fire here Pigro..... is there anything in particular that Amadinejad has done - invade a foreign country? - commit genocide? - that puts him in the same company as Bush and Stalin?

Is this not the man who preaches the distruction of the jewish state?

Do we have to wait for definative action before classifying him ?

You know what they say.. Its the thought that counts................

[pigro]

well, wanting to wipe the state of Israel off the map was a good one for starters - though I think some people claim that he was misquoted on that one. I do also have lots of family living in Iran who are none too happy with him, his human rights record, or how he spends his oil revenues on funding hezbollah etc. while his people are kept in ignorance and poverty.

But no, he is not to be compared with Stalin or George W. Bush in absolute terms ... my point was only that he is a muslim fundamentalist & George W. is a Christian fundamentalist. I don't blame those religions directly for their respective actions (as I suspect both hide behind their holy books for expediency's sake, and follow a warped, extremist interpretation like all fundamentalists do). I just wanted to illustrate why we should not fall into the trap of blaming 'atheism' for Stalin's actions (as Il Papa is attempting to do)., any more than we can blame pure/true religion for other world leaders actions.

[iTALY BOUND]

All good points, but although Bush is full of crap and a national embarrassment here, i dont think it is fair to put him in the same catagory as Stalin or Hitler. To be fair about the situation if Italy experienced an event like 9/11 what would you all have your government do? Probably take vengence on those responsible. I am not defending how this vengence was carried out nor am i defending the war in Iraq, but something had to be done. Keep in mind that in the beginning the rest of the world agreed that Saddam had WMDs but didnt want to put themselves out there. So the Americans took a risk that went the wrong way. As the old saying goes "hindsight is a *****."

[tuscanhills]

Originally Posted by iTALY BOUND

....... Keep in mind that in the beginning the rest of the world agreed that Saddam had WMDs but didnt want to put themselves out there.

Not *quite* right; there was much debate & the consens was maybe, the question of how to deal with it was the killer, though

Originally Posted by iTALY BOUND

....... So the Americans took a risk that went the wrong way. As the old saying goes "hindsight is a *****."

I'd hate to take a patronising stance, but don't seem to recall it was *just* the Americans who invaded....

[NickZ]

Originally Posted by iTALY BOUND

To be fair about the situation if Italy experienced an event like 9/11 what would you all have your government do?

Turkey has lost over 30,000 people to Kurdish terrorists. Terrorists who for the last 15+ years have in part been funded,trained and armed by the US. What should Turkey do?

Italy has lost more people to terrorist actions then the US.

Wouldn't surprise me if the UK has also. Remember at various times the UK has been less then thrilled with the US funding of the IRA.

Some would argue that the west is promoting terrorism against Russia right now. Iran likely feels the same way. The current Iraqi president is widely believed to be tied to a market bombing during the 1990s.

Of course the big question is that with Iraq having lost more then 1 million to this war what should the people of Iraq do? Do they have the right of vengence?

[Nardini]

Originally Posted by NickZ

Of course the big question is that with Iraq having lost more then 1 million to this war what should the people of Iraq do? Do they have the right of vengence?

Would that be vengence along the lines of capital punishment (electric chair, lethal injection, firing squad...)? Or in the "Vengence is Mine", kind of way?

[pigro]

Originally Posted by iTALY BOUND

although Bush is full of crap and a national embarrassment here, i dont think it is fair to put him in the same catagory as Stalin or Hitler.

nor do I. And I didn't.

I appreciate that his thread has recently been resuscitated and has now developed a new direction - go for it. However, please don't continue to attribute views to me which are not present in what I originally posted, and which I've subsequently clarified in response to Marc's point.

I never equated Amadinejad's, nor George W's, actions with those of Stalin/hitler. The latter pair were clearly alluded to by the Pope (along, no doubt with Mao, Pol Pot etc.); I mentioned the former pair to add some topical context to the point I was trying to make - that atheism was not responsible for Stalin/Hitler's actions, just as Christian/Muslim fundamentalism wasn't responsible for those of Bush/Amadinejad. Mentioning the four of them in the same post does not in any way imply that their respective actions are at all comparable in terms of scale, scope or morality.

So, the only way that I'm attempting to "put Bush in the same class as Stalin or Hitler" is by refusing to take the lazy way out and attribute any of their respective actions to their religion (in Bush's case), or their supposed atheism (Stalin/Hitler).

The actions themselves are irrelevant (to my point) it's the Pope's assumption of the underlying motivation for peoples actions which I'm talking about.

Hope that clear up my original intent once & for all?