"Even if we do criticize/mock Christianity, there is nothing wrong with that. If I see irrational dogma, bigotry, intolerance, etc it is not exempt from criticism/ridicule just because it is someone's religious (or political/cultural/etc) be...lief. And furthermore, as Christianity is the dominant religion in the US, and inserts itself into our lives daily it will of course be more relevant to us, and we will have more to say about it than, say, Jainism."
There you have it. Members of the Clark University "Freethought Society" have such a hatred toward Christianity that they justify mocking the religion. Christian dogma is presented as "irrational," "bigoted" and "intolerant."
Ironically, many who commented in the discussion thread of a previous post, asserted that Clark University is "tolerant" toward religious viewpoints. Yes, I can see that. An individual who posted a comment as "Dr. Halpern" wrote: "As a Clark University alum, I can honestly say that in my 4 years there I did not encounter any anti-Christian sentiments. I would describe the atmosphere at Clark as supportive, intellectually stimulating, and encouraging of healthy, thoughtful debate... As an alum concerned with investing in the future of the institution, I would like to counter BostonCatholic by ENCOURAGING Christian parents to send their children to Clark. It is through inclusiveness that we learn about the world we live in, and everyone's viewpoints are equally important in that learning process."
Oh boy.
Molly Burman wrote, "I am a Catholic student at Clark University. I learn and live in an accepting environment. This acceptance includes people of all faiths, sexualities, and races. One of our mottos is "Categorizing is not something we do here." This means not judging a person based on his or her sexuality OR religion."
Unless of course that religion is Christianity. Then it's "okay" to mock.
Yesiree, healthy, thoughtful debate is alive and well at Clark University. That's why I was called an "ass...." for simply challenging Clark University professor Abbie Goldberg.
With friends like that...
10 comments:
Clark is infected with Christianophobia and recent events prove this conclusively. Botom line at Clark: if you oppose same-sex "marriage" because of your religious convictions, you are immediately stigmatized as "bigoted" and "intolerant." But if you mock and ridicule Christianity, this is justified by the school's administration. Which is why the "Free Thought" Society is tolerated by university officials.
Don't you just love "healthy, thoughtful debate"?
A Catholic proposes in an articulate and thoughtful way the teaching of the Church and cites scientific data and research to back certain conclusions and is called an ass.
It's obvious that the so-called "free thought society" values intelligent discourse.
Apparently their sole argument whenever their ideology is questioned or challenged is "fu.. you."
Boycott Clark should become a rallying cry among Christians if this hatred is going to continue. It is becoming quite obvious that there is institutionalized hatred of Christians at Clark.
Paul Agne writes that there is nothing wrong with mocking Christianity. He should look up the definition of the word. To mock something is to treat it with ridicule or contempt.
All the silly claims by clarkies that the campus is tolerant, inclusive and accepting of all are now seen for what they are - lies.
Clark is a place of bigotry and anti-Christian hate.
Irrational dogma? Maybe Paul Agne would care to explain what he means by that remark. Which dogmas does he find "irrational"?
Agne, like Brian Seitzman is an anti-Catholic bigot.
An individual named Alex [Caro?] left a comment here asserting that, "Paul [Agne] was merely making the point that Christianity is not above criticism...Everything is up for criticism..."
Actually that is incorrect. Mr. Agne wrote that there is nothing wrong with mocking Christianity. Mocking is something far different from constructive criticism. Mocking is contemptuous. Mocking is a form of condemnation.
Dr. Montague Brown explains the difference between criticism and condemnation nicely: "Criticism is the honest appraisal of the value of ideas or actions…Pursued in the right spirit, it is a positive undertaking whose purpose is to gain an accurate understanding for the sake of growing in wisdom and virtue….Condemnation goes beyond evaluation of an idea or action to a declaration of the worthlessness of a human being. It is never fair and is a wholly negative judgment, referring only to weaknesses. Because condemnation is unreasonable, it serves no purpose in our quest for wisdom and virtue." (The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 28,29).
Like you Clarkie13', I would like to know which Catholic dogmas Mr. Agne finds to be "irrational." There are many Catholics who are scientists, philosophers, theologians and who are experts in virtually every field of study. These people do not see Catholic dogma as irrational.
Let's see if Mr. Agne is able to explain in detail what he means.
The hypocrisy of this student group does not reflect very well on Clark either. Alex says that "everything is up for criticism," and yet, when you were critical of Abbie Goldberg's flawed research, you were immediately the subject of ad hominem attacks - personal attacks of a most vicious nature - from members of the "Freethought Society."
The message here is clear. Hate-filled attacks on Christianity are permissible. Mocking Christianity is "acceptable." But constructive criticism of the radical homosexual agenda is "evil" and "intolerance."
Parents....don't send your kids to Clark.
Cardinal Paul Poupard has said that, "..faith and reason cannot contradict each other since both seek to understand the truth about nature, human nature, and God, the author of all created reality."
In an address, entitled, "Hope and Anguish: the Church's Involvement with Science," which was presented during a one-day conference on "Science, Faith and Culture," jointly organized by the pontifical council and by Blackfriars Hall of Oxford University in England, Cardinal Poupard said that, "Today, cultural trends marked by relativism, indifference, irrationalism and ignorance continue to impede the human search for truth."
It would seem that this irrationalism has found a home at the Clark Freethought Society.
I have received numerous comments from the same individual but using different names attempting to defend the Clark "Freethought Society." Two of these were written using the name Alex. Three from the same IP were anonymous. The last anonymous comment said simply: "You homophobes are the real faggots."
I'll let you all reflect very carefully on the wording of the last comment.
First the anonymous writer labels those of us who are morally opposed to homosexuality as "homophobes." Then the writer employs an ugly word which is often used to describe homosexual persons.
Homosexual persons are still persons created in the Imago Dei - the Image and likeness of God. They deserve respect and compassion. Unlike the sick mind which left that comment, Catholics who post here oppose homosexual ACTS and same-sex "marriage" while maintaining respect for the homosexual person.
Who is the real "homophobe"?
What this disturbed individual doesn't realize is that this Blog has Sitemeter. Every comment which was left attempting to defend the CFS and which was critical of Catholics who post here had the same IP address.
This person should seek professional counseling.
IP address 140.232.210 on the Blog yet again. The same individual from Clark University.
Post a Comment