I think your understanding of Hitler's religious views is mistaken:
"According to historian Bradley F. Smith, Hitler's father Alois, though nominally a Catholic, was somewhat religiously sceptical, while his mother was a practicing Catholic. According to historian Michael Rissmann, young Hitler was influenced in school by Pan-Germanism and began to reject the Catholic Church, receiving Confirmation only unwillingly. A boyhood friend reports that after Hitler had left home, he never again attended a Catholic Mass or received the Church's Sacraments."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitl ... ious_views
I have read from other sources that show that at least if he was NOT a Catholic, he certainly acted like he was one much of the time, and I am sure he did so because he would have got less support if he did not, therefore it was a means to an end. In a similar way, many of the founding fathers of the USA were either Athiest, Agnostic, or Diestic, but they had to look like they were some form of Christian to fit in and be accepted by the masses. Again Obama has done something similar, I have it on good merit that he seems non-religious in his book released before he became President, and then suddenly afterwards and in his next book, a change of tune simply because he would have all sorts of religious nutcases pointing out that he is a Communist, Nazi, Athiest scumbag.
Either way it is totally irrelevant to any subect matter surrounding that evil bastard, and I have no interest in discussing it.
Regarding Stalin, if he considered himself to be "somewhere between a king and a living God" then I don't think one can call that Christian or part of any other major organized religion (unless you consider Marxism and dialectal materialism to be a religious belief).
He did not, but the people of Russia did, and centuries of treatment of this only leads to the kind of behavour that you saw from him and his cohort. What would you do if you were in his shoes with millions of people treating you like a Living God, you would probably end up being corrupted by power and greed and doing evil things because those millions of devoted worshipers gave you that power (sound like religion to you.?)
But I don't get the fuss. I'm pretty sure the UK has welcomed far worse rulers than the Pope in the past.
Possibly, but not in recent years. As a general rule of thumb, we live in a time where many countries people have more freedom than ever before, along with being fairer and more just. The moral Zeitgeist moves on, and it is only natural that it is being lead by non-religious people.
Also, if you one points out the violent history of the Catholic Church, one has to also point out the violent history of the British Empire. And every over country for that matter.
No you dont, you may as well start pointing out every bad thing every single human being has ever done, and also it is simply changing the subject. Remember that in a secular society, anyone can belong to any faith they want, religions cross borders, regions, and continents.
Also, if I understand it correctly, the Northern Ireland conflict is actually less about religion and more your standard fight of an occupied territory against the occupation.
To some degree I will agree with you, the "occupied teritory" is very often a street, the religious nutjobs who live there simply wont even sell their house when they move on to someone of the "other" religion. There is only one thing that both sides ever agree on, and that is staying seperate, they live seperate lives not to dissimilar from Apartheid, but without any form of government control, they do it themselves, pushed on by their respective religious leaders.
Religion, as usual, was only brought in to harden the views and soften the thinking.
Whether that "was" tru or not, it is NOW religion that is the force behind the seperation.
Yes, the Church is perpetuating antiquated, anti-modern, anti-progressive world views, but it's not like they are doing it on purpose.
Of course they are doing it on purpose, their livelihoods depend on it.
The Pope believes that sh*t. He's been brainwashed too. Unless you believe once one enters the inner ranks of the Vatican they are being led into a dark chamber where it is revealed that everything is a hoax.
I am quite sure their weak minds have taken the full force of the brainwashing, and although I would love to believe that they are all actually non-believers, I dont.
Atheists aren't better people
Speak for yourself.
Atheists do and have done horrible things too.
Of course, they are Human, however it is rare for an Athiest to something evil because of their belief of no-god, after all, where is the motivation to do harm to another group of people, there is no scripture telling you that it is your right as an Athiest to persecute the Jews, Christians or Muslims, unlike their scriptures that does not just say go ahead, but "you must" it is your duty.
But Atheism isn't a cult (yet). There are no believes, practices, rituals involved in it (yet). There is no methodic bias against anything based on the teachings of a loser who claims to either be a Deity himself or that a Deity revealed itself to him in his shed one night. Atheists can't claim a superior power for a superior truth and they don't believe they are the Chosen.
Read this, there is a very very very long way to go,
I am not saying it cant possibly happen, but if it does, it essentially becomes a religion, and therefore is not then athiesm, thus Athiesm simply cant exist in "Cult" form regardless of what Bible Bashers say.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult
If an Atheist wants to hate gays he has to hate them of his own volition, he can't hide behind interpretations of an old book.
Well said. Anyone who is non-religious can believe whatever they want, they can be racist, sexist or homophobic, but unlike many religions they have the choice, many religions such as Catholicism simply say that you must be.
Don't get mad
Having read the next sentence, I find it difficult not to.
did you know that Vatican flights are considered Italian flights (aka WE use our taxes to pay them), that they run a lot of private schools and DON'T pay any taxes (wth, why should I pay 6k Eur a year for a Catholic private school, if they don't pay any taxes?), that Police must protect the Pope everywhere in the country, that they have a huge weight on political and ethical debates such as stem cells or abort?
Hopefully a time will come when the Italian people lose their religion, and all of those rules and costs that you incur get banished into history, by simply passing a bill through Parliment.
Don't get mad, there's somebody whom the Vatican actually costs more than those 12m Â£
I feel sorry for you.
Just a sidenote: In this moment, TV is saying that he has been warmly welcomed in every UK city and there weren't any protests.
Probably not televised, there have been protests, and I saw a wonderful interview on the BBC yesterday with Professor AC Grayling (an Athiest, Secularist, Humanist Professor of Philosophy) who briefly have some excelent reasons why the Pope should not be here at our expense.
The breaking news related to the Pope's visit to Great Britain:
The five were arrested on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.
They are 26, 27, 36, 40 and 50 years old and most are understood to be Algerian. Following the arrests, police began searches as the depot and at homes in north and east London. Officers have not found any hazardous items.
Well that was pleasing to read, they have been arrested in a Planned Raid, none of them are British, and in all likelihood none of them will be Athiests, probably Muslim (99% of the population is Sunni-Muslim the "State" religion) at which point this was almost certainly religiously motivated thus proving my point that religions are not very nice.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... os/ag.html