# Pope Palpatine is a Festering Grab-Ass **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 11, 2007, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355 "2007-07-11T13:27:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/101 "2007-07-12T13:12:28Z")
[QUOTE=Tuckerfan] Thanks. I’ve posted an explaination of what happened [here.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8771631') [/QUOTE] Page cannot be displayed. That’s ok…it’s probably over my head anyway! ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/102 "2007-07-12T13:14:36Z")
[QUOTE=Kalhoun] Page cannot be displayed. That’s ok…it’s probably over my head anyway! [/QUOTE] There was garbage in the link. Here it is [fixed](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8771631). ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/103 "2007-07-12T14:10:12Z")
[QUOTE=Voyager] Now now. We only hate the delusion, not the deluded. 🙂 [/QUOTE] Can one love the sinner but hate the sin? If one is defined as a sinner, then are they not defined by their sin? Therefore if sin is an essential quality of their identity, then by hating the sin are you not hating the sinner? If not hating a person for their essential attributes, what are you then loving, is there some deeper ‘truer’ essence, a soul if you will that is the true habitation of the individual, something beyond temporal characteristics? If not then, a person is simply the sum of their attributes, so by hating their essential attributes, how are you not, by extension hating the person? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/104 "2007-07-12T15:17:51Z")
REVEREND LOVEJOY: Ned, have you thought of joining one of the other major religions? They’re all pretty much the same. ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/105 "2007-07-12T15:27:09Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] IAnd the Unitarian Church originally was founded on denial of the Trinity, meaning rejection of Christ’s divinity, se we have never been a “Christian” church in that sense, either. [/QUOTE] I don’t believe this is is strictly correct. At least in the U.S., Unitarianism arose in an Aryan form, where Jesus was considered _Logos_ (Word of God), who came from God and returned to God, yet was separated from God when made flesh. Unitarians were certainly anti-Trinitarians, but that did not mean they necessarily denied the divinity of Christ, just that they held Him to be separate from, and subordinate to, God. Of course, this gets us into the philosophical/theological grounds of how we define “divine.” But in any case, Unitarians worshiped _through_ Christ (his teaching and the Scriptures) even if they didn’t worship Christ directly, and at the time of the American Great Awakening (early 19th century) they were certainly considered Christians. It is unlikely the church would have been widely tolerated if it had _not_ been Christian. Today, the precepts held by the historical Unitarian church (in the 19th century), are more accurately mirrored by the [American Unitarian Conference](http://www.americanunitarian.org/AUCChristian.htm) than by the [Unitarian Universalists](http://www.uua.org/visitors/index.shtml'). AFAIK, most UUs do not consider themselves to be Christians, but Unitarian Universalism is not the same as historical Unitarianism. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/106 "2007-07-12T15:51:12Z")
[QUOTE=Jodi] I don’t believe this is is strictly correct. At least in the U.S., Unitarianism arose in an Aryan form, [/QUOTE] Nitpick: [Arian](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism). I wouldn’t bring it up, except that one little letter being off was rather jarring in context. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/107 "2007-07-12T16:16:40Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] Can one love the sinner but hate the sin? If one is defined as a sinner, then are they not defined by their sin? Therefore if sin is an essential quality of their identity, then by hating the sin are you not hating the sinner? If not hating a person for their essential attributes, what are you then loving, is there some deeper ‘truer’ essence, a soul if you will that is the true habitation of the individual, something beyond temporal characteristics? If not then, a person is simply the sum of their attributes, so by hating their essential attributes, how are you not, by extension hating the person? [/QUOTE] **mswas** I enjoyed working my way through this. Very interesting. OTOH, possibly the more militant atheists do not consider the delusion to be “essential,” in which case this argument would seem to fail. Regards testy ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/108 "2007-07-12T19:26:23Z")
[QUOTE=Jodi] I don’t believe this is is strictly correct. At least in the U.S., Unitarianism arose in an Aryan form, where Jesus was considered _Logos_ (Word of God), who came from God and returned to God, yet was separated from God when made flesh. [/QUOTE] Quick note- that’s “Arian”, not “Aryan”. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/109 "2007-07-12T20:10:43Z")
[QUOTE=Liberal] There was garbage in the link. Here it is [fixed](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8771631). [/QUOTE] Thanks. I was right. It was over my head. I wouldn’t have typed /url if it was going to win me the Publisher’s Clearing House Big Check. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2007, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/110 "2007-07-12T20:49:34Z")
[QUOTE=Tuckerfan] Thanks. I’ve posted an explaination of what happened [here.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8771631) [/QUOTE] Nah, it’s simple- you’re a doodiehead. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![straight\_man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/straight_man/32/3027_2.png) [@straight\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straight_man)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/111 "2007-07-13T00:04:42Z")
[QUOTE=Anaamika] Not all the others. Several of the Eastern religions, including Hinduism, say “All ways are the right way”. I rather wish Judaism, Islam, and Christianity/Catholicism had this in their doctrines. I mean, it hasn’t _stopped_ religious wars in India but it has kept a lot of minds open. [/QUOTE] **Anaamika** , you should pay better attention to your homeland if you wish to make such a disconnected statement. I really can’t let this one pass, even two pages late (I was at work! Sorry!). From the [State Department](http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2003/24470.htm) : > [@](#): > > During the period covered by this report, the states of Tamil Nadu and Gujarat passed anticonversion laws. Under both laws, those “forcing” or “alluring” people to convert are subject to criminal action. Since that which constitutes forced conversions or allurement is not specified, human rights groups, Christian religious leaders, and Dalits have expressed concern that authorities will use these laws selectively in the future to shut down educational, medical, and other social services provided by Christian groups to Dalits and “tribals” (members of indigenous groups historically outside the caste system). Anticonversion laws have been in effect in Madhya Pradesh and Orissa since the 1960s, and laws against forcible conversions exist also in Andhra Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh. > > The Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Forcible Conversion Act of October 2002 was declared by governor ordinance, which does not require approval by the state legislature. According to the act, those who attempt to convert individuals or groups from one religion to another using “false promises” and “allurements” are subject to prosecution, and all persons who “[take] part directly or indirectly in [a conversion] ceremony” must report the ceremony to the District Magistrate. Mandated punishments are greater for women, scheduled castes, and “tribals.” As of the end of the period covered by this report, a petition questioning the constitutional validity of the act was under review by the state’s high court. > > In March the state assembly of Gujarat passed the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act. The act requires those involved with a conversion to seek the permission, both before and after the conversion ceremony, of the district collector, who is the sole arbiter of the validity of each conversion. This act also requires the police to investigate cases of forced or induced religious conversions. As with the Tamil Nadu anticonversion law, punishments are greater for women, scheduled castes, and “tribals.” In April one Christian and one Buddhist organization filed a case in Ahmedabad High Court against the act; the court dismissed the petition as premature, since the rules and regulations for the act had not yet been gazetted. The rules had not been published by the end of the reporting period. A contingent of Dalits asked permission of the Vadodara Collector to convert to Buddhism under the new act; the collector had not given permission by the end of the reporting period. (I don’t get the impression that India’s history in regard to other religions and their missionaries is any better.) My general thought: how does a lack of clarity in one’s own beliefs aid discourse with people who hold different beliefs? When the Pope says that protestants like me aren’t a part of the true church, he is only stating his (valid, but IMHO incorrect) beliefs, a standard Catholic doctrine. While I disagree with him, I do know that any attempt at reconciliation between my church and his requires the acknowledgment that there is currently a gulf between them. And all of this ignores the undeniable fact that Benedict isn’t talking to me; he’s talking to the people who he is to lead. And let’s face it: the Roman Catholic Church desperately needs to start clarifying what it believes with its practitioners. Also, I didn’t see a direct quote of the pope saying that other Christians don’t achieve salvation, the _Arizona Republic_’s assertion put aside. In fact, it’s the only source that I have read that gives such an account. …and now I see that **tomndebb** has addressed this point. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/112 "2007-07-13T00:18:54Z")
[QUOTE=Testy] **mswas** I enjoyed working my way through this. Very interesting. OTOH, possibly the more militant atheists do not consider the delusion to be “essential,” in which case this argument would seem to fail. Regards testy [/QUOTE] How would you define an essential characteristic then? In what temporal capacity would you define a person. If they are deluded now then are they not ‘delusional’? Rather should we define them by what we think that they were, or a possibility of what they might become? If the present characteristic is not essential, by what criteria is it inessential? Because theoretically in the abstract they can become undeluded? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/113 "2007-07-13T02:38:04Z")
[QUOTE=Tuckerfan] :rolleyes: rightbackatcha. I am most certainly _not_ the originator of the phrase “Pope Palpatine” and it is, shockingly enough, a _common designation_ for him on this board. Lotsa ex-Catholics seem to take a perverse delight in using the term. ( **Guin** being an example of one who springs to mind.) [/QUOTE] “Well, \*all the other kids \*call him that” :rolleyes: It’s childish. It’s fine to discuss the Pope’s political shortcomings and disagree with the Pontiff’s policies. But calling him names just puts you on the level of a 12 yo. Or is it 8? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/114 "2007-07-13T02:40:04Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] “Well, \*all the other kids \*call him that” :rolleyes: It’s childish. It’s fine to discuss the Pope’s political shortcomings and disagree with the Pontiff’s policies. But calling him names just puts you on the level of a 12 yo. Or is it 8? 😃 [/QUOTE] I always thought it was quite funny that Joey Ratz looks so much like Palpatine. I know, I know, I should have more respect, I mean he has a Mitre for God’s sake! ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/115 "2007-07-13T03:24:52Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] “Well, \*all the other kids \*call him that” :rolleyes: It’s childish. It’s fine to discuss **the Pope’s** political shortcomings and disagree with **the Pontiff’s** policies. But calling him names… [/QUOTE] Emphasis added. Oh, the irony. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 9:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/116 "2007-07-13T09:16:42Z")
I suppose the answer, **mswas** , is that sin by definition is not a part of a person’s essential nature - rather, it is an intrusion, an imperfection that keeps him from being the earthly child of God that he was meant to be. I would never (were I in my right mind) say “Love me, love my wife-beating; it is part of my essential nature”; rather, I would wish to be rid of my dreadful propensity for domestic violence, that I might be more truly what I ought to be. (I do not in fact beat my wife, but you see what I’m saying.) ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/117 "2007-07-13T12:48:50Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] “Well, \*all the other kids \*call him that” :rolleyes: It’s childish. It’s fine to discuss the Pope’s political shortcomings and disagree with the Pontiff’s policies. But calling him names just puts you on the level of a 12 yo. Or is it 8? 😃 [/QUOTE] Well, you know, were this GD, I _might_ refer to his Unholiness by his correct name/title (I’d certainly be more inclined to use it in GQ than I am here), but this is, wait for it, _The BBQ Pit!_ Insults are a dime a metric kiloassload. If “Joey the Rat” is too thin skinned to deal with it, well, then, that makes him a pussy. As is anyone who get’s their panties bunched up over it. Quite frankly, insulting name slinging is one of the _hallmarks_ of the Pit. By way of example, allow me to direct your attention to [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=51270), which is one of the finest to ever grace the magnetic storage media of the SDMB. You’ll notice that **Cervaise** does _not_ refrain from calling the subject of his OP such charming names as “cunt,” “sniggering, self-centered shithead,” “mentally retarded,” “mentally ill,” and “Grade-A flaming fruit-bat’s asshole” in just the first half of his OP. If name calling bothers you so much, I suggest you _not_ continue on reading his thread. Now, admittedly, this thread really isn’t worthy enough to share the same space as **Cervaise** ’s, but I figured that since things involving ol’ Palpy tend to get a bit heated, that I’d just slap this up someplace where if it _did_ get heated, there _wouldn’t_ be someone whinging about it being in the wrong forum. Quite frankly, I have neither the time, nor the inclination to get bogged down in what is ultimately a pointless discussion of the finer points of the Prick of St. Peter’s latest policy. For you see, I’m fairly certain that not only does the Bastard of Rome **not** lurk/post here _no one he knows does, either!_ So, in terms actually being able to accomplish something in regards to getting the church to change policy, any comments made here are, to put it bluntly, as effective as someone handing Shrub a set of instructions to enable him to differentiate his ass from a hole in the ground: Not at all. Thus, such a discussion would, in fact, be nothing more than masterbation. Personally, I prefer to masterbate to things such as photographs of naked females, but to each his own, I suppose. One would think that someone who’d adopted a username which has connotations of a certain Michican doctor recently released from prison would consider name calling and other insults to be par for the course in a forum designated for hurling invectives against people. Obviously, however, that is not the case. Perhaps you should consider a change of venue since you have difficulty with this one. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/118 "2007-07-13T15:15:51Z")
[QUOTE=Malacandra] I suppose the answer, **mswas** , is that sin by definition is not a part of a person’s essential nature - rather, it is an intrusion, an imperfection that keeps him from being the earthly child of God that he was meant to be. I would never (were I in my right mind) say “Love me, love my wife-beating; it is part of my essential nature”; rather, I would wish to be rid of my dreadful propensity for domestic violence, that I might be more truly what I ought to be. (I do not in fact beat my wife, but you see what I’m saying.) [/QUOTE] The trouble is, if one defines as a sin that which is in fact part of a person’s essential nature – homosexuality, for example – then you get doctrinal support for bigotry. In which case, all the protestations of hating only the sin mean bupkis to the putative sinner. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/119 "2007-07-13T15:18:36Z")
[QUOTE=EddyTeddyFreddy] The trouble is, if one defines as a sin that which is in fact part of a person’s essential nature – homosexuality, for example – then you get doctrinal support for bigotry. In which case, all the protestations of hating only the sin mean bupkis to the putative sinner. [/QUOTE] The trouble is, if one defines as a sin that which is in fact part of a person’s essential nature – kleptomania, for example – then you get doctrinal support for bigotry. In which case, all the protestations of hating only the sin mean bupkis to the putative sinner. I _thought_ we’d get around to gay issues sooner or later. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2007, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355/120 "2007-07-13T17:12:15Z")
[QUOTE=Malacandra] I suppose the answer, **mswas** , is that sin by definition is not a part of a person’s essential nature - rather, it is an intrusion, an imperfection that keeps him from being the earthly child of God that he was meant to be. I would never (were I in my right mind) say “Love me, love my wife-beating; it is part of my essential nature”; rather, I would wish to be rid of my dreadful propensity for domestic violence, that I might be more truly what I ought to be. (I do not in fact beat my wife, but you see what I’m saying.) [/QUOTE] I was posing that directly to Voyager’s post. Outside of an atheistic context it doesn’t make any sense. From a Christian perspective the obvious answer is ‘the soul’ is their essential character, and sin is an affliction. The point was to ask whether from an atheistic perspective a person can have an essential nature apart from their immediate circumstances. Can a person who is deluded at the moment be considered as though they are not deluded as a norm. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-palpatine-is-a-festering-grab-ass/411355.md?page=7)