Pope Francis is wrong. Religion deserves ridicule.

[cleanhippie]

Religion is an idea, and, as an idea, it should be eligible for criticism, discussion, and yes, mockery. The only reason so many believers demand special exceptions be made for religious ideas—exceptions to be backed up with violence, no less—is because they know full well that their ideas don’t hold up well under scrutiny. Not only do they not have any evidence for their claims for the supernatural, but the logical arguments all break in the other direction. Even here we have the pope calling for a general stifling, with violence, of criticisms of all religions. But he, being the pope, just by existing is declaring that some religions are false religions. So why on earth should the rest of us be restrained from pointing out the same of his religion and other religions? It makes no sense at all.

Now, there’s definitely an argument to be had that this mockery should be careful not to punch down or use the excuse of blasphemy to advance what are actually racist ideas. That’s why I personally prefer mocking Christianity to Islam, because Muslims are an oppressed minority in my country but Christians, particularly fundamentalist Christians, are a dominant and ofttimes domineering class. But that equation is different for different people and different audiences—a white America woman mocking Muslims and a Iranian woman doing it are very different critters indeed.

But the larger point stands: Because of the gulf between the preciousness with which people treat religious beliefs and their actual merits, I would argue that we need more mockery and more blasphemy. A lot of people out there are nursing doubts and want to extract themselves from the yoke of false belief. Seeing that you can not only reject religion but make fun of it without God striking you down with a lightening bolt is liberating for a lot of people. Religions amass power by bullying people in just the way that Pope Francis is doing, complete with threats of censorship and violence. We should stand up to these bullies. Making fun of them is an excellent way to do that.

In conclusion, fuck you, Pope Francis.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/01/pope-francis-is-wrong-religion-deserves-ridicule/

[BillZBubb]

1. You are taking what the Pope said out of context.

He clearly meant if you insult someone's religious beliefs, don't be surprised if there is a violent reaction. He knows it is a hot button item. History proves that. What he was asking for is that people carefully consider the ramifications of certain religious attacks and use self restraint. He isn't calling for censorship.

[whathehell]

2. Thank you.

Francis is correct.

[cleanhippie]

3. Words are NEVER an excuse for violence.

[BillZBubb]

5. You keep repeating this nonsense. He never excused violence.

The Pope said people will react violently, not that it was justified. History is full of examples. To think otherwise is foolish.

[cleanhippie]

7. "Words are NEVER an excuse for violence" is nonsense and flawed logic?

[gcomeau]

15. Umm, he did.

He didn't just say "people" will react violently. He used an example in which HE HIMSELF would be reacting violently as part of an exoneration not to insult certain beliefs or institutions or else "you can expect a punch".

I'm sorry, but when the freaking Pope gets up and publicly declares he would react violently to certain criticisms or provocations that's sending a message to all those people he's a rather important guidance-providing authority figure to that that's ok.


"If that's what the POPE would do then hey, it has to be alright? Or at least justifiable... right?"


He may have condemned outright killing in God's name, but in the process yes he damn well did provide moral cover to those resorting to violence.

[backscatter712]

12. Ah, he joined the "but" brigade.

As in "I'm opposed to violence, but..."

Fuck that shit. Francis is out of line.

[AtheistCrusader]

13. No, he called it normal.

In no way did he discourage it. He had an opportunity to do so, and instead, he called it normal.

If he'd said unacceptable, but expected, or unacceptable but typical, I'd cut him a lot of slack. But he called it normal twice.

[on point]

4. Mocking ideas, absolutely; but perhaps sympathy and no mocking individuals

Is this the boundary under discussion?

Religion, as nonsensical hold over from primitive ignorance, deserves all the mockery it can get

[Fred Sanders]

6. Mock the ideas, not the person with the insane ideas. The OP wants the opposite.

[trotsky]

8. Wrong. The OP specifically says the ideas.

Religion is an idea, and, as an idea, it should be eligible for criticism, discussion, and yes, mockery.

[Fred Sanders]

10. The closing argument line in the OP linked to gives it away.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. Really? Individuals should never be mocked?

Why is that?

[edhopper]

14. There is this story about a guy

I think in Roman times, that said some things that offended the local religious folk.
I think they killed him or something.
I guess Pope Frank would say that is normal.
He should have watched what he said.

[rug]

16. I'm tired of reading people who make a living off of internet bravado.

In conclusion, fuck you, Amanda Marcotte.

[cleanhippie]

17. Well, that'll show her for sure!

[rug]

18. Precisely.

As effective as this:

In conclusion, fuck you, Pope Francis.