Apparently they’re both so ignorant that they think Germany was a Catholic country.
That said I’m glad that Dio has made it clear that he doesn’t understand why people got so hot and bothered when the Taliban blew up the giant Bhuddas.
He deserves to be congratulated for that.
The giant Buddhas were valuable historical artifacts. If the Taliban had wanted to buy or make its own Buddhas and blow them up, it wouldn’t have been an issue. What was wrong with blowing up those Buddhas was not athat it was offensive to Buddhists (who cares?), but that it was a wanton destruction of historically precious artifacts.
So Buddhists can take a long walk off a short pier, but archaeologists have the right to be offended?
Hitler was, and Germany was certainly Christian. Most signicantly to Myers’ point is that the antisemitism exploited by Hitler was the result of centuries of anti-Jewish polemic being preached by thge Catholic church and other Christians. Pogroms were a proud Christian tradition in Europe long before Hitler ever got there. the Holocause was just the ultimate pogrom. It could not have happened without without that historical base of antisemitic preaching by Christian churches.
Who said anything about “offended?” Or archaeologists, for that matter?
It’s rational for anyone to be upset or angry about the wanton destruction of precious historical artifacts. Everybody also ahs the right to be “offended” if they want. That’s their choice. But that’s got nothing to do with what was wrong with the Taliban destroying those Buddhas.
What’s your opinion regarding the SDMB’s policy on trolling?
After all, trolling does nothing to anybody and insults nobody. Nonetheless it’s banned here, because it’s shit disturbance, and people don’t like that. So do you think it’s a bad policy that the SDMB prohibits trolling?
The example in the OP is simply real life trolling. The guy wants to shit-disturb. He wanted to piss people off and, had this stunt failed to piss people off, he would have tried another stunt.
A message board is somebody else’s property and requires a user agreement not to troll.
Myers wasn’t trolling anyway. He didn’t “disturb” anybody. Nobody has to look at his blog.
Um, no.
The fact that Abraham, various saints, etc. once disrespected others does not mean that others have a carte blanche to disrespect Catholics, and that Catholics are simply being hypocrites if they don’t like it - any more than Jews have no ‘right’ to be horrified by the Holocaust even though Israelites allegedly committed genocide upon Caananites in the Book of Judges.
Most Catholics these days do not go around pissing on statues of Ganesh or whatever.
Not literally, no.
That’s like calling you a Packer fan because they’re both part of the NFL. :rolleyes:
And even beyond that, confuses a secular government and nation with a Catholic one, dumps a nonreligious genocide into a religious one (and a dislike which predates Christianity even in western Europe).
That a rather clumsy and inept attempt at shifting the goal posts. Myers didn’t refer to Germany as a “Christian” nation but as a “Catholic” nation. Either Myers was lying or Myers was ignorant.
You said that Myers made a “true” statement so either A) you didn’t actually read what Myers wrote, B) realized it was wrong but didn’t care about the truth and decided to play along with Myers mistake/lie because the mistake/lie helped your argument or C) you were ignorant as to Germany’s religious composition prior to WWII.
It is a deliberate distortion of history to describe Hitler’s Germany as “the last time a Catholic nation rose up to slaughter its non-Christian citizenry”. The natural read of that sentence is that the Holocaust was a Catholic pogrom directed against “non-Christians” - which it wasn’t.
If he had just posted on his blog “Hey, what’s the big deal about some silly crackers?”, or the like, nobody would have cared. If he thought that there was no significance at all to the host, then there’d be no problem. But that’s not the case: He clearly does think there’s some significance to the host, or he wouldn’t have bothered to get one: He’d have just used some saltine from his cupboard instead. And if his point were “anti-bullshit”, that’d have worked as well, since to the secular, a saltine is the same as a host. The fact that he didn’t just use a saltine is itself proof that the host does have significance to him. Now, it’s probably not the same significance that it has to Catholics, but it is clearly significant.
Let’s say that Myers was imprecise with his language or got it wrong. The question is, who gives a shit? Is anyone forcing you to read his blog? Is anyone a victim here?
His entire point was that the wafer does NOT have significance - or more accurately, does not have power and is not sacred - and he was proving it. It was an “Emperor has no clothes” kind of statement. It would have been pointless without a real wafer.
More importantly, though, is that it didn’t injure any Catholics, didn’t harrass them, didn’t discriminate against them or steal from them. Any and all butthurt felt by them is purely voluntary and recreational.
By the way, the OP’s actual question, which has tried to get back to once again,m is not whether Myers insulted Catholics, but whether some Catholics (and it probably isn’t very many. Most, I would hazard a guess, couldn’t give a shit less about it. The one I’m married to doesn’t ) are hypcritical in whining about it.
Were someone to describe France as a “Muslim country” or Iraq as a “Shia nation” we would certainly say that they were guilty of more than simply being “imprecise with his language”.
Incidentally, you never answered the question. When you agreed with Myers statement that German was “a Catholic nation” was that because you hadn’t read what Myers actually wrote or because you didn’t realize what pre-WWII Germany’s religious composition actually was?
However, thanks for admitting that you made a mistake.
My view is everything is sacred and everything should be questioned.
My own view is look what was done to Jesus, that was the desecration of the host, over and done with. In Jesus’ words 'It is finished". Jesus is raised in glory it is not possible to desecrate the host any more.
What he is doing is questioning and in the process of learning. In that yes he is offending people, and will learn what that means in time. God just uses the host (the bread, which is Jesus, to teach him), so it is not desecration but a holy learning experience.