Page 2 of 3

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 6:58 pm
by planewaves
Ygern wrote:
planewaves wrote:
Well, from your previous comment you said "I'm a 'foreign' atheist". I wonder if you were born in Ireland or the UK, would you say the same???
Yes I would. What a strange thing to say.

To reiterate, Henry VIII opposed the Catholic Church only when it was politically expedient for him to do so. He supported all the nonsense and rituals that went along with Catholicism, he never rejected any of that part. He also had a nasty habit of crying 'treason' whenever anyone opposed him. (PS being accused of treason by him meant your head was separated from your torso in a terminal sort of way).

Please see the third sentence in my previous post for a non-English and non-Irish example where I point out that The enemy of my enemy is my friend logic that you seem to be employing here is unsound.
(And before you go there, no, I'm not Saudi Arabian either :P )

I really don’t mind where are from. All people are the same to me as an Atheist.

My point was, given you were born and raised in a catholic house were your parents/relatives/teachers were Catholics, and you have converted from Catholicism. Would you say the same?

It does not matter what were Henry’s motives to kick the Catholic Church arse. What is important is that he did it. He had the balls to do it at the time when the Catholic Church controlled everything in Europe.

Atheism as we know it is a NEW IDEA. Surely you can not expect people at that time to become atheists !!!! It would have been a political suicide for Henry, and the UK.

Imagine if Henry would say there is no God. This would have given the Catholic Church and all the religious nuts in the UK the weapon to throw out the King under the penalty of Blasphemy.

And No, it is not like in Saudi Arabia; and this is because the Catholic Church is a minority in there. I would really celebrate the Saudi regime if they were to throw away Islam. That would be an equivalent, don’t you think so???

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 11:08 pm
by inedifix
I think it's a huge mistake to assume that the Reformation was in some way a stepping stone to secularization or atheism.

The thought of celebrating a man who's efforts to dictate his own marriage terms sparked centuries of religious bloodshed, makes my skin crawl.

Mind you, the British Monarchy makes my skin crawl too.

I

P.S. I'm English.

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:37 am
by planewaves
sparked centuries of religious bloodshed

Unfortunately, the bloodshed was inevitable. You couldn’t expect the Catholic Church to leave by asking nicely, could you??

Freedom has a price, and only when brain, logic and reason are used that we can reach a civil accord. Religion is ANTI-REASON.

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:59 am
by inedifix
planewaves wrote:Unfortunately, the bloodshed was inevitable. You couldn’t expect the Catholic Church to leave by asking nicely, could you??
Yeah, it didn't really work like that. Check your history. First the new protestant crew chopped catholic heads off, then they swapped and the catholics chopped protestant heads off, then they swapped a couple times more, then the protestants went witch burning crazy... and then... and then... and then...
planewaves wrote:Freedom has a price
Henry VIII did not bring freedom. Just a new brand of repression.
planewaves wrote:and only when brain, logic and reason are used that we can reach a civil accord.
Henry VIII did not use them, and there was no civil accord.
planewaves wrote:Religion is ANTI-REASON.
And Protestantism is a religion.


QED: you original post does not make a very good point and the answer to your original question is: no.

I

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:09 am
by planewaves
inedifix wrote:
planewaves wrote:Unfortunately, the bloodshed was inevitable. You couldn’t expect the Catholic Church to leave by asking nicely, could you??
Yeah, it didn't really work like that. Check your history. First the new protestant crew chopped catholic heads off, then they swapped and the catholics chopped protestant heads off, then they swapped a couple times more, then the protestants went witch burning crazy... and then... and then... and then...
planewaves wrote:Freedom has a price
Henry VIII did not bring freedom. Just a new brand of repression.
planewaves wrote:and only when brain, logic and reason are used that we can reach a civil accord.
Henry VIII did not use them, and there was no civil accord.
planewaves wrote:Religion is ANTI-REASON.
And Protestantism is a religion.


QED: you original post does not make a very good point and the answer to your original question is: no.

I
Trust me, I know the history. But facts are still facts !!

Ofcourse protestantism is a religion. Did you really expect to replace Catholicism with Atheism at that time. :D :D

There were, and in fact still, and evolution of thoughts and convections. We area actually participating in such a human strugle. Now, Atheist must voice there opinions, otherwise, we will be IGNORED, as always !! :?

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:31 am
by inedifix
planewaves wrote:facts are still facts
Yes, and the fact that Henry VIII did nothing worthy of note by atheist standards is one of them.
planewaves wrote:Ofcourse protestantism is a religion. Did you really expect to replace Catholicism with Atheism at that time.
I expected nothing. And implying I did won't score you any points on this site. See here. And here.
planewaves wrote:We area actually participating in such a human strugle.
I'm not.
planewaves wrote:Now, Atheist must voice there opinions,
Atheists can and will, do what they want.
planewaves wrote:otherwise, we will be IGNORED, as always !! :
Atheists are voicing their opinions, and are not being ignored.

I

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 2:07 am
by planewaves
inedifix wrote: Yes, and the fact that Henry VIII did nothing worthy of note by atheist standards is one of them.I

Okay, but this is your opinion only.
inedifix wrote: I expected nothing. And implying I did won't score you any points on this site. See here. And here.

Actually, I was not implying, just wondering if you have such assumption?
planewaves wrote:We area actually participating in such a human strugle.
I'm not.

The fact that you are on this forum makes you participating. :D
planewaves wrote:Now, Atheist must voice there opinions,
Atheists can and will, do what they want.

Wow, hold on your horses. Who appointed you the speaker for Atheists??
I am also a strong atheist, and don't remember asking you. I was only giving my opinion.
planewaves wrote:otherwise, we will be IGNORED, as always !! :
Atheists are voicing their opinions, and are not being ignored.

Again, this is just your own opinion

I

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:28 am
by inedifix
planewaves wrote:Okay, but this is your opinion only.
It is my opinion, yes. But it's also, to my knowledge, fact. I will of course revise my opinion, if you can put forward some credible evidence to support your opinion. The one you began this thread with, but haven't actually backed up yet.
planewaves wrote:Actually, I was not implying, just wondering if you have such assumption?
I think if you look more closely at your question: "Did you really expect to replace Catholicism with Atheism at that time?" ...you'll see that it implies an expectation I didn't express. It's generally not a good idea to put words in other people's mouths.
planewaves wrote:The fact that you are on this forum makes you participating.
Yes, in a web forum... not a "human struggle." :roll:
planewaves wrote:Wow, hold on your horses. Who appointed you the speaker for Atheists??
Yeah, I think you're getting that backwards.

I said that atheists "can and will do what they want". That means that each of us is capable of making up our own minds what we should and shouldn't do.

You, on the other hand, assumed the role of speaker by saying: "Atheists must voice their opinions."

I don't like it when people tell me what I "must" do. My experience of other atheists is that they don't like it either.
planewaves wrote:
inedifix wrote:Atheists are voicing their opinions, and are not being ignored.
planewaves wrote:Again, this is just your own opinion
Yes, again it is. It's based on the observable fact that atheism has never enjoyed such popularity, media time, headlines, and public attention as it has over the last 3 years or so. Last year, Pope Benedict's book on Jesus came 3rd in Amazon's best seller list of books in their religion and spirituality section. What came in at No. 1? Christopher Hitchens' God is not great. I think that's one good indication among many that atheists are both vocal and being listened to.

Of course, if you disagree, that fine. That would be, just your opinion, and I'd be delighted if you post evidence to support it.

I

P.S. Shame you suddenly forgot how to use the quote function properly, that was quite a hard post to follow.

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:42 am
by Ygern
planewaves wrote:
I really don’t mind where are from. All people are the same to me as an Atheist.
Phew! Lucky me :D
My point was, given you were born and raised in a catholic house were your parents/relatives/teachers were Catholics, and you have converted from Catholicism. Would you say the same?
I was raised a Catholic. Just not an Irish Catholic. I'm a non-Irish ex-Catholic atheist.
It does not matter what were Henry’s motives to kick the Catholic Church arse.
Ye aulde End Justifies the Means Argument ... I couldn't disagree more. Motives do matter. And yes, his self-serving and ruthless motives rather sully his actions for me.
Atheism as we know it is a NEW IDEA. Surely you can not expect people at that time to become atheists !!!!
*coughs politely* Educate thyself
It would have been a political suicide for Henry, and the UK.
I agree, but so what? That doesn't make his methods or motives any purer or worthy.
it is not like in Saudi Arabia; and this is because the Catholic Church is a minority in there. I would really celebrate the Saudi regime if they were to throw away Islam.
It seems like you're arguing here that the Catholic Church is good if its a minority power, bad if its a majority power. While religious diversity in Saudi Arabia might be considered progress, I'm not convinced that supplementing one system of superstitious woo with another is really the way forward.

In any case, I made the Saudi analogy to point out that your initial statement saying that atheists 'should celebrate' Henry based on your reasoning (he opposed the Pope) is flawed. If you follow your reasoning, atheists 'should celebrate' the Vatican for trying to get a Catholic Church built in Saudi Arabia. Or how about celebrating the Thirty Years War because it resulted in the first tentative steps towards secular states in Europe?

The end goal and the means employed to get there are inextricably woven. I refuse to celebrate self-serving power-mongers just because they make a move that happens to co-incide with my desires.

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:28 pm
by FXR
Ygern wrote:
Ye aulde End Justifies the Means Argument ... I couldn't disagree more. Motives do matter. And yes, his self-serving and ruthless motives rather sully his actions for me.
The conditions and circumstances dictate the means nescessary. And sometimes the the end justifies the means and sometimes it does'nt. (You could'nt have talked the Wehmacht out of leaving Poland.)
Ygern wrote: I agree, but so what? That doesn't make his methods or motives any purer or worthy.
The fact is were it not for Henry VIII and that mad monk Martin Luther, no matter why or how, they did what they did I'm still glad they did it. Life is just not that perfect and there are no perfect humans. Had Luther not nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Chruch in Wittenburg we might not have many of the scientific advances we have today. Who knows? Had Henry VIII not clipped the power of Rome and been followed by Elizabeth Tudor (after Mad Mary) Herr Ratzinger would probably have even more power than he has now. On top of all this who is celebrated in this country? That dipstick Patrick. It's a shame we did not have a handy Henry around to lop off his head as soon as he landed.
Ygern wrote: The end goal and the means employed to get there are inextricably woven. I refuse to celebrate self-serving power-mongers just because they make a move that happens to co-incide with my desires.
That's all very well till it comes to being faced with how to actually change things. The earth is littered with the unmarked graves of forgotten idealists who would have changed things by means you might have approved of. Unfortunately they never got anywhere nor changed anything.